Blago's symbolic parting gift to Big Coal

Illinois leg. and gov. hoodwinked by ‘clean coal’; will Obama be as susceptible? 4

Impeachment notwithstanding, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich (D) signed a bill this week that will send another $18 million down the “clean coal” rabbit hole in Illinois.

The delusional symbolism couldn’t be more obvious.  In fact, the Chicago Tribune captured the carbon truth of the story:

But coal is relatively inexpensive, at least for now, and the coal industry remains politically influential in a number of states. The Taylorville project represents a chance to help revive Illinois’ beleaguered coal industry ...

Though coal companies and utilities have held up sequestration as the holy grail of “clean coal” for years, there still hasn’t been a full-scale test of the technology. And even if carbon capture and storage works, most energy experts say, it will take decades to employ it at the scale necessary to significantly affect emissions.

Indeed, though Illinois’ proposed coal plant would emit less carbon dioxide than conventional power plants, it still would increase the overall amount of greenhouse gases the state produces.

As the Tribune reported last week, the Illinois congressional delegation has already been wrangling to include the FutureGen boondoggle in President-elect Barack Obama’s stimulus package.

But as Joseph Romm has brilliantly explained (a million times), FutureGen’s carbon capture and storage chimera is still wrought with four major problems: prohibitive cost, timing, scale, and permanence and transparency.

In fact, as Focus Midwest noted last month, the road to dealing with climate destabilization ultimately runs through Illinois and its coal-fired plants.

In the meantime, another report appeared last week about the epidemiological mystery in the tragic rise of black lung cases among coal miners today.

I wonder how long it will take until the Illinois politicians apply the same amount of lobbying power to make sure a massive stimulus package includes FutureWind and FutureSolar clean-job projects for the heartland?

Jeff Biggers is the American Book Award-winning author of The United States of Appalachia, and In the Sierra Madre. His next book, Reckoning at Eagle Creek: The Secret Legacy of Coal in the Heartland, is forthcoming in January 2010 (The Nation/Basic Books). His website is: www.jeffbiggers.com

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. DaveChgo1 Posted 6:05 am
    15 Jan 2009

    $18 Mil not down rabbit holeI realize that this is a slim minority position around here, but fossil fuels are not going to disappear anytime soon and without a strategy to dramatically reduce their emissions, we'll never achieve the carbon reduction levels necessary to seriously limit climate change.  The IL legislation was supported by a number of environmental organizations and the IL attorney general precisely because it has the toughest carbon requirements for a coal-fueled facility in the country.  
    The first project (Taylorville) will have an emissions profile comparable to a natural gas-fueled plant.  Subsequent plants under the legislation will be significantly better.
    Would those who say no new fossil fuel plants advocate shutting down every natural gas power plant as well as every coal power plant?  If they do, then have fun living in the stone age as we'll have about 20% of current levels.
    As to the $18 million, that will be refunded to the state when the plant goes to financial close.  
    BTW, I am involved with this project as well as environmental and other organizations that take a more middle-of-the-road position on coal gasification.  And no, I'm not affiliated with the industry shills at ACCCE.
  2. ids's avatar

    ids Posted 10:49 am
    15 Jan 2009

    Let me guessNot long ago the Illinois Sierra Club was holding up the Illinois wind farms, is the Sierra Club still for the birds, do they still believe putting a new windmill next to a new coal plant in Illinois, as their Pope said, is a smart energy solution.  The fact that Illinois is the only state in the region to levy a sales taxes on wind farm equipment part of their scheme, too?
    My guess is DaveChgo1 is in the SC.

  3. ids's avatar

    ids Posted 11:02 am
    15 Jan 2009

    BTWThe unanimous $18m boondoggle is probably minimal in savings to coal developers compared to the unanimous support the Illinois leg's gave to corp's using CCS by giving them indemnity from "unanticipated" resulting harm.
    Even better from the Pope on the Springfield deal to put another new 250mw coal burning plant in Ill, this one along with 120mw of supposedly new wind capacity

    a first in the effort to curb global warming.
  4. ids's avatar

    ids Posted 11:14 am
    15 Jan 2009

    and not to comparetoxic sludgeslides and mountaintop removals to mere cave-ins in the heartland, subsidence happens too, the recent court case is another little chink in the heart of coal country.

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement