Cost Hinders Cleaner Coal Power in U.S.

Cost Hinders Cleaner Coal Power in U.S.

May 23 - International Herald Tribune

Almost a decade ago, Tampa Electric opened an innovative power plant in Florida that turned coal, the most abundant but the dirtiest U.S. fossil fuel, into a relatively clean gas, which it burns to generate electricity. Not only did the plant emit significantly less pollution than a conventional coal-fired power plant, but it was also 10 percent more efficient.

Since that plant opened, however, not a single similar plant has been built in the United States. Abundant supplies of natural gas a bit cleaner and, until recently, a lot cheaper stood in the way. But even now, with gas prices following oil prices into the stratosphere and power companies turning back to coal, most new plants about 9 out of 10 on the drawing boards will not use the cleaner method, called integrated gasification combined-cycle technology.

The reason is simple. A plant with the low-pollution, high- efficiency technology demonstrated by Tampa Electric is about 20 percent more expensive to build than a conventional plant burning pulverized coal. This complicates financing, especially in deregulated markets. Elsewhere, utilities must persuade regulators to set aside their customary standard of requiring the companies to use the lowest-cost alternatives. The technology's main long-term advantage the ability to control greenhouse gas emissions is not winning over many utilities because the United States does not yet regulate those gases.

That could be a problem for future national policy, critics say, because the plants being planned today will have a lifetime of a half-century or more. "It's a very frightening specter that we are going to essentially lock down our carbon emissions for the next 50 years before we have another chance to think about it again," said Jason Grumet, the executive director of the U.S. National Commission on Energy Policy.

The commission, an independent, bipartisan advisory body, has recommended that the U.S. government spend an additional $4 billion over 10 years to speed the power industry's acceptance of the technology. In a recent report, the commission concluded that "the future of coal and the success of greenhouse gas mitigation policies may well hinge to a large extent on whether this technology can be successfully commercialized and deployed over the next 20 years."

More succinctly, Grumet said that the integrated gasification combined cycle technology was "as close to a silver bullet as you're ever going to see." The operating savings of such plants start with more efficient combustion: They make use of at least 15 percent more of the energy released by burning coal than conventional plants do, so less fuel is needed. The plants also need about 40 percent less water than conventional coal plants, a significant consideration in arid Western states.

But for some people, including Rogers and other utility leaders who anticipate stricter pollution limits, the primary virtue of integrated gasification combined-cycle plants is their ability to chemically strip pollutants from gasified coal more efficiently and cost-effectively, before it is burned, rather than trying to filter it out of exhaust.

For far more extensive news on the energy/power visit: http://www.energycentral.com .