Opinion

[Print]  [Email]        

Coal Lies From A Progressive Fable Factory


By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor | 1/5/09 7:02 AM

 
You’ve no doubt seen the TV spot where the guy in the hard hat steps through an industrial-looking door  into the desert and begins mocking “clean coal,” which he says doesn’t exist.
 
This clever advocacy campaign is courtesy of the imaginatively misnamed Reality Coalition of the Alliance for Climate Protection, League of Conservation Voters, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Sierra Club.
 
Despite the millions of private donors, lucrative investments and big endowments received by members of the Reality Coalition, your tax dollars helped finance some of its richest members.
 
The NRDC, for instance, got a $400,333 federal grant in 2006 under the Clean Air Act, according to FedSpending.org, even though the organization’s 2006 annual budget exceeded $70 million. You can review NRDC tax returns at Guidestar.org.
 
But back to clean coal. Is there really no such thing, as claimed by the Reality Coalition? Well, consider the following facts (courtesy of Paul Driessen of www.Eco-Imperialism.com).and judge for yourself:
 
* Particulate emissions (i.e. “soot”) from coal-burning power plants have been reduced to 90 percent below 1970 levels despite a tripling of coal use.
 
* Most of what’s left in that soot is ammonium sulfate and ammonium nitrate, neither of which is regarded as dangerous to public health, even at much higher levels of concentration.
 
* Coal is used to generate half of all electricity used in this country, and in 22 states it accounts for 60-98% of the electricity used. Ever calculated the economic cost – lost jobs, production, productivity - of banning coal in states like Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Utah, West Virginia or Wyoming that absolutely depend upon the black rock?
 
* Ever think about the human cost to Americans of banning coal? Here’s a partial list of medical products made possible by the electricity generated from coal-burning power plants: X-rays, CT scans, colonoscopies, cardiac surgeries, refrigerated vaccinations against deadly diseases and kidney dialysis.
 
* The human cost of not having electricity in Third World countries is staggering, as Driessen notes in a recent Townhall.com column: “Four million infants, children and parents die every year from lung infections – caused by smoke, soot and other pollutants from open fires that heat their homes and cook their meager food, because they don’t have electricity. Two million more perish from intestinal diseases, caused by unsafe water and spoiled food, because they lack refrigeration, sanitation and water treatment.”
 
My point here is this: Global warming extremists continually make absolute claims in their propaganda like the Reality Coalition’s clean coal spot, but the truth is often found in the facts they ignore or try to suppress.
 
The facts cited by Driessen concern conventional coal. New technologies are on the horizon such as gasification and carbon-capture that promise to make coal burning even more environmentally friendly.
 
So strictly speaking, the “clean coal” technologies aren’t here yet. But then neither are the alternative energy supplies the environmentalists regularly cite as ready replacements for coal and other carbon-based fuels. And there are serious trade-offs with the alternatives that environmentalists don’t like to talk about.
 
Take wind. As Driessen notes, Texas presently generates 36 percent of its electricity using coal, and only two percent from wind. Even in T. Boone Pickens’ most optimistic scenario, it will be years before there will be enough wind turbines twirling on the West Texas plains to supply a third of Texans’ power needs.
 
And even when there are miles and miles of nothing but working turbines out there, they won’t be generating much power during those relentlessly hot Texas summers when the breeze hardly ever stirs and thermometers push beyond 100 degrees.
 
Bottom line: It will be decades before alternative energy will replace carbon-based fuels. And that is no fable.
 
Maybe the NRDC will use some of its $70 million budget to buy hand fans we can use to keep cool in the summer and firewood to warm us in the winter while we wait for their alternative energy power plants to become reality, somewhere around 2030.
 
Mark Tapscott is editorial page editor of The Washington Examiner and proprietor of Tapscott’s Copy Desk.

7 Comments    



 

Post a comment:


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Display Name:

Comment:






Reader Comments:


POSTED Jan 5, 2009

Agreed. But let's also give alternative energy a fighting chance: "You're partly right. We need clean coal. The nuclear industry is promoting the idea that clean coal is a myth in order to get some federal loan guarantees (subsidies). Better fuel efficiency standards, conservation standards, alternative energy sources, and clean coal are all part of the solution to getting off dependence on oil. But oil and nukes have sucked up more than their share of tax breaks and subsidies over the years. Let's give at least give sustainable energy sources a fighting chance."


POSTED Jan 5, 2009

Arch Peabody: "Well said, indeed. The war on coal is the central front in the greenists' effort to idle American industry. China and India are building coke ovens and unscrubbed power plants while we shut down our own clean operations. If we all share this planet, how does it benefit anyone to close a coal-fired plant in Ohio that's 98 percent clean so one in China can open that's not clean at all."


POSTED Jan 5, 2009

Toni: "Remember, these are the people who gave the EPA the 'brilliant' idea that they should fine livestock owners in the USA $175 for each animal due to Green House Gases the cows, pigs, whatever, emit. The EPA has not put the rule into effect yet, but is actually thinking about it. Sooner or later, they will want to do the same to humans. Pay as-you-breathe will be the next big green scam. (sounds paranoid, but it is on the horizon)"


POSTED Jan 5, 2009

Victim of Coal: "Evidently none of you have heard of the 1 billion gallon toxic ash that now contaminates eastern TN. Spill occurred Dec 22 ,2008. Not your fault, "liberal media" are the only ones giving this story any air time. You know, the same media who said there were no WMD's, Iraq had nothing to do with 911, your president ok'd torture, someone at the white house leaked the identity of an undercover CIA opperative, Bush is spying on Americans. These were all "liberal propoganda" even after Bush/Cheney admit to it all , it's still "liberal propoganda" Clean Coal is a slogan that should tell you exactly how your republican party feels about the average citizen, expendable for the good of profit. By the way, to those of you who say "socialist" as an attempt at slander, Jesus Christ was the greatest socialist of all."


POSTED Jan 6, 2009

Stretch: "Alternate enery is a myth! You would need about 965 sq mi of prime Iowa farmland to produce enough "green" to power an electric plant comparable to a nuclear or coal-fired one."


POSTED Jan 7, 2009

balance: "It's all about balance. If you burn something, some impurities will end up in the atmosphere. That doesn't mean we stop burning coal. We do the best we can to "scrub" the impurities. And just because China or India doesn't do it doesn't mean we shouldn't. What it means is we are smarter than they are and more responsible. Being responsible doesn't mean we give up on alternatives. They are not a myth. I don't care if you have only one solar panel, that panel reduces the carbon footprint. We need to incorporate all forms of energy production, including, but not limited to coal, oil, natural gas, wind, solar, and geothermal. Someone made the comment that it will take decades. Maybe so but lets do it. In those decades lets invest more in R&D on fusion too. Like it or not, we have a finite amount of fossil fuels and we need to invest in our future."


POSTED Jan 16, 2009

Kate S: "It amazes me that the myth of clean coal is not adequately discussed in the television news media, however, it does give me hope to see people commenting on just that, even if it is online. We all know that the internet has the ability to affect massive amounts of change, and I hope the issue of clean coal is one of them. If you haven’t yet discovered it, there’s a coalition of many groups dedicated to fighting the misinformation about clean coal. www.powerpastcoal.com has launched a ‘100 Days of Action to Power Past Coal’ campaign, and it’s goal is to provide, through it’s website, the ability for community activists to add their local events and gather information about clean coal."



To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines


Sports

Michelle Kwan will skate in Seoul ice show, skating before audience for 1st time in 3 years

Michelle Kwan will skate before an audience for the first time in three years when she joins world champion Kim Yu-Na in Ice All-Stars 2009 in Seoul, South Korea, in August. Full story

Politics

MOUNTAIN OF DEBT: Legacy of debt from Founding Fathers not celebrated on Independence Day

The Founding Fathers left one legacy not celebrated on Independence Day but which affects us all. It's the national debt. Full story

Entertainment

Judge temporarily bans release of sex tape starring 'Real Housewives of New Jersey' woman

One of the stars of Bravo's television series "Real Housewives of New Jersey" went to court Wednesday to avoid getting a little more exposure than she wanted. Full story