Let's all gather round and give Jeff Goodell a rousing huzzah for using his megaphone to spread the righteous message that (say it with me!) coal is the enemy of the human race.
Specifically, Goodell, writing in Rolling Stone, covers the electric-power industry's mad rush to build as many coal plants as possible before emissions caps render them uneconomic.
See how it's done:
According to the American Heritage Dictionary, a suicidal act is one that is "dangerous to oneself or to one's interests; self-destructive or ruinous." By this standard, the coal boom that is currently sweeping America is the atmospheric equivalent of a swan dive off a very tall building. At precisely the moment that scientists have reached a consensus that we need to drastically cut climate-warming pollution, the electric-power industry is racing to build more than 150 new coal plants across the United States. Coal is by far the dirtiest fossil fuel: If the new plants are built, they will dump hundreds of millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year for decades to come -- virtually guaranteeing that the U.S. will join China in leading civilization's plunge into a superheated future.
Like most stories about energy, corruption and greed, this one is centered in Texas. TXU, an electric-power company based in Dallas, has announced plans to build eleven new coal plants in Texas by 2011 -- a move that a trade publication calls "one of the most ambitious generation capacity expansions in recent power industry history." Texas already dumps more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than any other state in the nation. TXU's new fleet of coal plants would more than double the company's current pollution, spewing 78 million tons of planet-heating pollution each year -- the equivalent of 11 million SUVs.
Screw TXU, and screw coal.
For those who haven't seen it, I did a fairly extensive interview with Goodell a while back.
Comments
View as Flat
Sam Wells Posted 1:53 pm
16 Jan 2007
What say ye?
This is something that The Grist should follow because the TX Governor has "fast-tracked" the coal permits, but switching to a different fuel or process would involve completely new permit applications. PLus, Texas Legislature just started it's biennial session.
I tried and tried to say the Syn-Gas and CO2 evaluation was wrong, but apparently telling the enviros what to do is sometimes like barking up a tree, even if things are at best questionable. Dang, and here I thought I was a progressive liberal. Combined cycle gas with 2007 BACT and LAER, anyone? /Sammie
Onward through the fog
Permalink
bookerly Posted 7:05 pm
16 Jan 2007
But when you're starving, you'll sup with the devil and hope your spoon is long enough.
patrick
Permalink
JMG Posted 1:07 am
17 Jan 2007
1) A desire to secure as many carbon allowances as possible by building as much CO2-producing capacity as possible before that ship sails.
2) A belief that regulators and legislatures will respond to carbon caps and limits with stranded cost relief for the utilities.
In other words, I think utilities are confident that they can build big coal burners on a no-risk, no-lose basis. Sink a billion or two into coal burners, get a great bump on your rate base, and if anything hampers the operation of the plants, sell the carbon allowances you grabbed by building all that capacity--and then demand that regulators provide stranded cost recovery because they approved construction.
I suggest that the best thing that concerned environmentalists can do today is to pressure their legislatures and state regulators to adopt a clear and unambiguous policy, to wit:
=> Utilities building coal plants do so at their own risk, and
=> There will never be any stranded cost protection or relief provided if (WHEN) they are not allowed to operate or their operation is constrained by carbon caps.
Permalink
wacki Posted 4:43 pm
18 Jan 2007
I love the anti-texas sentiment. Lets see Texas is:
The second largest population in the US
A major center for oil production, importation, and refining
A major source of livestock (see the FDA's long shadow)
Gee, I wonder why it is #1 for CO2. There are reporters that try to solve problems. And there are reporters that try to make people "hate the other guy".
Permalink
jeffgoodell Posted 11:25 pm
20 Jan 2007
JMG, you nailed it. That is exactly what's going on.
Wacki, I've got nothing against Texas. But the fact is, the state's CO2 emissions are high because Texans are fossil fuel hogs -- and you can't explain it away because of size of state, population, and industry. Check out the DOE chart below -- Texas is number one in coal consumption, number five in per capita energy cosumption, etc. Contrast with CA, another big state, but with half the per capita consumption.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/sep_sum/plain_html/ran...
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:06 am
21 Jan 2007
Mass production of very large wind machines is a top priority for this energy re-evolution.
The position of governor in Texas is strictly ceremonial, it has almost no authority. Yet obama is seem as lacking experrience? The village idiot in chief got zero experience at governance as head cowboy.
Another irony. Bush has solar panels and a geothermal heating system at the "ranch".
Texas, it's like a whole other country. Or countries. It executes minority prisoners willy-nilly and yet its capitol Austin is a bastion of progressive energy and music.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink