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?
Soil carbon—a blind spot in the debate on carbon
Comments
View as Threaded
DaveChgo1 Posted 6:05 am
15 Jan 2009
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.
Permalink
ids Posted 10:49 am
15 Jan 2009
My guess is DaveChgo1 is in the SC.
Permalink
ids Posted 11:02 am
15 Jan 2009
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.
Permalink
ids Posted 11:14 am
15 Jan 2009
Permalink