Comments nancylaplaca has made

Thx!! Request cite for 16.9 cents/kWh for IGCC/CCS

Hello Joseph:

Many thanks for your great work, your commitment and your expertise.  I read Hell and High Water and continue to follow your blog.

In your email push of May 9, 2008, you cited 16.9 cents/kWh for IGCC with CCS; and 15.2 cents/kWh for nuclear.  I looked through the CPUC May 6th presentation you included a link for, but couldn't find those numbers.  

I'm a pro bono intervenor at the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, working to reduce coal emissions, stop gasified coal, etc.  The citation would be very helpful.

Thanks again -- there's so much amazing information, and the people who are working together -- without pay, long hours -- to bring about the changes we need.  Unfortunately, Congress is a 'lagging indicator' -- in the words of political pundit Mark SHields -- so the people must lead.

And we must move away from fossil fuels.

Please email me directly: nancy@energyjustice.net or nancylaplaca@yahoo.com

Nancy LaPlaca www.energyjustice.net/coal/igcc

Gee, Tom, sorry you missed ecology class!

Wow - how sad. One of the highest-paid journalists in the world and this is all he can add to the discussion?

Generally, if you're not at the table, you're on the menu, as Tom says.  However, the activists in this country who stopped 60 coal plants -- especially gasified coal, which Big Green is still pushing -- wree not at the table.  Those plants were stopped because ordinary Americans are waking up and Smelling the Planet, and realizing that global warming is serious, and we'd better do something about it.

The two biggest source of GHGs, obviously, are transportation and coal-fired power. Like James Hansen says, we must stop using coal for electricity.  We can't build more new plants, and we need to start thinking about how to shut down existing plants in an organized manner.

So for all the hand-wringing by politicos and Big Green, the utilities are still bellying up to the bar with big coal plants in their back pockets. We could run this country a couple times over with wind and concentrating solar, and get serious about distributed generation, but that wouldn't make Dominion or Xcel or NRG or Exelon rich.

Or we could invest in -- public transportation! Never mind that we'll leave most everyone high and dry, pumping out 20 pounds of CO2 (and a host of other toxics) for every gallon.  And each gallon will cost dearly.  When we add up how much money we've wasted on the U.S. road system, traffic accidents, deaths, cancer, pollution, brain damage to the poorest children in our communities -- it will be as staggering as this useless war.

Then there's natural gas. With utilities unable to build more new coal, they're turning to drilled gas (I don't want to call it "natural" gas). Drilled gas has gone up in price 15.8%/year for the past decade, and we are probably at the beginning of a long and steep upward climb, just like oil.  If drilled gas was the equivalent price of oil, it would cost $18/MMBtu. My utility, Xcel Energy, estimates that drilled gas will cost -- get this -- $6.50 in 2013!  That's ridiculous.  We'll be lucky if it's less than $15 -- and it may be much, much higher.

And although oil declines -- generally -- at a steady 2-6%/year, gas declines rapidly -- it's called the 'gas cliff.' Well depletion in the U.S. is 28%/year; which means that each well is depleted in 3-5 years.

The U.S. peaked in dry gas production in 2001 (see the Energy INformation AGency's website on 'natural' gas, and click on the production charts); we import 20% of our gas from Canada, and  Canada estimates that in 5-7 years it will not be able to export any gas.

So what are we going to do?

I wish I had faith in our government, in our leaders, in our main-street papers like the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times. But we can't even face the reality of finite and therefore depleting resources, or acidified oceans, or what happens after the Amazon collapses.

I was at a party a few weeks ago of yuppie middle-aged women like myself and someone made the comment that global warming is no different than, say, reproductive rights or civil rights was in the 1960's (never mind that racism is simply more subtle these days).  Hello?  Species extinction, massive ecosystem collapse, rising seas and abandoned cities are the equivalent of women's rights?  I've known a few male chauvinists, but that's nothing compared with mass starvation and hundreds of millions of refugees worldwide.

And we did it.  With our SUVs and our big houses and our inability to look at ourselves. Cumulative emissions land smack-dab on the good old U.S.A.

I can't help but look around and think about the fun years I had, hiking and camping around the southwest. It's hard to believe that the very foundation of our existence -- our stable world -- is at risk.  And I can hardly believe sometimes that it's happened on my watch, in my lifetime.

So after lamenting that Tom didn't get to take ecology in school, he's had to "catch up."  

Too bad we can't take Tom's bloated salary and give it to real journalists.

Nancy LaPlaca www.energyjustice.net/coal/igcc

Clean Coal is an Oxymoron - and expensive too!

Let's look at energy in terms of "life cycle assessment" or ERoIE (Energy Returned on Energy Invested; how much energy does it take to produce energy?

Gasified coal is very, very expensive and risky - and carbon sequestration is unproven.  Although carbon sequestration is possible on a small scale, the amount of CO2 we'd need to pump underground is staggering.

As of early October 2007, 9 IGCC plants were cancelled or put on hold- see Emerging Energy Research, Oct. 5, 2007, TECO, Nuon Cancellations Underscore IGCC's Woes.  Since the report was issued, at least 2 more IGCC's have been cancelled: Colorado and Orlando.  TECO's cancellation is notable it has been running an IGCC plant for the past ten years; while Orlando is notable because it received $235 million in federal funds, which it must now return.  

There are only TWO IGCC (Ingrated Gasification Combined Cycle) plants that produce electricity in the U.S. (for a total of four in the world) - see;
*    no IGCC plant currently captures CO2;
*    the costs and parasitic load (how much energy it takes to run the capture and storage processes) are enormous.  
*        - IGCC capital cost: $3,400/kW
*        - parasitic load to capture CO2: 15-20% (higher levels of CO2 = higher parasitic load; it's easier to capture the first 30% than the last 30%)
*        - cost of compression: $17/ton  
*    The percentage of CO2 that is being captured and stored right now is a pittance.  The total CO2 emissions from coal plants is ~2.5 billion tons/year in the U.S., with an average plant emitting ~5 million tons.  EACH location in the world is capturing and storing about 1 million tons/year -- about 1/5 of the emissions from a single coal plant.  That's not a solution, it's a niche market.

CO2 compression alone costs $17/ton, so a plant emitting 3 million tons/year of CO2 would cost $51 million/year JUST to compress the CO2! And that's assuming it will "stay" underground for a long time.  The parasitic load from the compression, transportation etc. is estimated to be 20-25% - and that could be low.  See Ramgen's excellent description from the Western Governor's Ass'n meeting Oct. 23-24, 2007 in Denver: http://www..westgov.org/wga/initiatives/cdeac/index.htm

A July 2006 EPA study estimated the added costs of IGCC with carbon capture:
-plant output reduced 14%

• total capital cost increase - 47%
  
• cost of electricity increase 38%
  

Finally, the risk is enormous. In the 1960s, the US Army Corps injected 165 million gallons of liquid toxic waste from Rocky Mtn Arsenal beneath the Denver basin, triggering 1,500 seismic events between 1962-67 -- three over Richter magnitude 5; induced seismic activity is a real danger when injecting large amounts of a pressurized -- and corrosive -- substance like CO2.  High Country News recently reported on it:  http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id=17188# ...

CO2 is heavier than air and displaces air, which is why a cloud of CO2 released from a volcanic lake in Lake Nyos, Cameroon in the mid-1980's instantly killed the village's 1700 inhabitants and animals.

A fact sheet on IGCC can be found at: www.energyjustice.net/coal/igcc.  

Renewable energy is cost-compeititive. Xcel Energy's 2007 Colorado Resource Plan estimated these capital costs:

• wind - $1,645/kW (with Production Tax Credit);
  
• wind- $2,000/kW (no PTC);
  
• concentrating solar with 6 hrs thermal storage- $2572;
  
• IGCC with 50% capture - $3912/kW;
  
• pulverized coal, dry cooled with 50% capture-   $3688/kW.

http://www.xcelenergy.com/XLWEB/CDA/0,3080,1-1-1_41994_45 ... -(go to Vol. 1, p.1-55)

Nancy LaPlaca www.energyjustice.net/coal/igcc

Gasified coal gets its butt kicked

As industry hyped "clean" coal, and many environmental groups like the Clean Air Task Force, NRDC, Western Resource Advocates, the Great Plains Instit for Sustainable Development, all pushed hard for it -- gasified coal died.

The Joyce Foundation handed out cash to many of the above mentioned groups, so it was the one-offs -- with the notable exception of the Sierra Club's Pat Gallagher, Bruce Nilles et al -- who killed these plants.

Since this is the 4th attempt by government (read "industry") to push gasified and liquified coal -- see excellent article in The New Review "It's a Syn" for the history of synfuels
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8280 -- it's not that surprising that gasified coal died.  The three previous attempts did not have the complication of adding carbon sequestration, which is enormously expensive and risky.  So far, at least eleven IGCC plants have been cancelled (see Oct. 5, 2007 Emerging Energy Research "TECO, Nuon Cancellations Underscore IGCC's Woes."

The failures of CO2 sequestration should be a big story in 2008.  The Energy Act just passed by Congress gives ~$240 million/year for carbon sequestration projects.  On The top green stories of 2007 posted 1 year, 11 months ago 14 Responses

Well-said, David Roberts

The U.S. Congress is like high school, come to think of it...besides being lagging indicators (as commented by Mark Shields from PBS).

Nancy LaPlaca www.energyjustice.net/coal/igcc

IGCC = I Generate Climate Change

And expensively, too. August 27, 2007 Businessweek had an article re: CCS that quoted Norway's Statoil as spending ~$45 million/year to sequester 1 million tons CO2; this means an avg coal plant emitting 4-6 million tons CO2 would spend ~$200-250 million years JUST to capture and store the CO2. And don't forget the 20-25% parasitic load loss from capturing the CO2 (it's a verrrry stable molecule); or the risk of CO2 leakage per the 1700 people and 1100  head of cattle instantly suffocated in Lake Nyos Cameroon in 1986 when a volcanic lake emitted a large cloud of CO2, which displaced the air causing the entire village and all animals to suffocate; and even if it doesn't hurt anyone, what's the point if it leaks? I am still dumbfounded by the environmentalists still pushing gasified coal: Western Resource Advocates (check out thier publication Coal At the Crossroads, it's a like a long infomercial for coal); or NRDC's David Hawkins -- even though Joyce Fdtn gave NRDC ~$430,000, that's not a large amount of dough for them.  Also the Clean Air Task Force and the IL Lung Ass'n are pushing gasified coal-- hellooo?  The gasified coal-pushers gave these enviro's a FREE TRIP to Europe - hope it was fun!  I'd imagine that touring a gasified coal plant with all that art and culture around would be downright depressing, especially if you have to drink thier Kool-Aid...

Nancy LaPlaca www.energyjustice.net/coal/igcc