Clean Coal? Myth or Reality

 In this week's discussion I learned more information about coal, and what "clean coal" is. Apparently clean coal is a term used to refer to various technologies, and approaches aimed at reducing the environmental impact of coal-based energy production. After reading the New York Times article about “clean coal” in 2017, and doing some research of my own, I do think there is a possibility of “clean”coal. Although there are various terms/meanings for this reference, sometimes politics just use this word to confuse people into thinking it is a good thing. Now I am not trying to say that “clean coal” is a bad thing. However, after I really thought about this term, I came to realize that the reason this term is said, is due to the amount of carbon dioxide in our air that is polluting the environment, and causing climate change. Meaning that “While experts say that carbon capture could prove useful for tackling climate change emissions” quoted from the article (New York Times 3). This quote shows how even the government knows that climate change is an issue. Now coal contributes to climate change, because of the carbon dioxide released from it. Carbon dioxide pollutes the air causing effects to the greenhouse, global warming, health concerns, etc. In the New York Times article it is mentioned various times how “clean coal” is a technology that is costly and complex. While it may be true that carbon capture could prove useful for tackling climate change emissions, the government isn't doing much about it. One of the reasons for this was mentioned in the article, and it was due to budget and not having enough money to build carbon capture technology. Now what carbon capture does is, it captures carbon dioxide emissions produced from, industrial facilities, power plants, etc from entering the atmosphere. Although there aren't that many carbon captures in the world it is due to the fact that they are expensive to make and maintain. There are actually more coal companies than carbon captures, this means that there is more coal mining being done, and more carbon dioxide being released. Now speaking of coal companies they can actually take steps to reduce the pollutants generated by burning coal in traditional plants. After learning about all this information and more there is a such thing as clean coal. While there are many cons like money issues for the technology of carbon capture. The only reason why clean coal isn't effective, is because companies don't want to waste money on it. I also think that the term “clean coal” can be bias, because critics note that clean coal is a misleading term for any of the techniques or technology mentioned. It can be misleading, because even a coal power plant that emits fewer pollutants is still a far dirtier way to produce electricity than a natural gas, nuclear, wind, or solar plant. What I mean by this is sometime when someone refers to clean coal it doesn't necessarily mean they are talking about carbon capture. As previously mentioned carbon capture is expensive, but there are still other ways that carbon emissions can be decreased. Another way people can refer to clean coal is by washing coal that comes out of mines to reduce its ash content. In conclusion I think clean coal is a thing, but it has its pros and cons. While it may have more cons I do believe that if companies tried harder to create more carbon capture machines it could help combat climate change. Climate change is only getting worse, and finding solutions can help when it come to global warming, wildfires, etc. In other words clean coal is not a myth.


MLA Citation

  • Abelson, Philip H. “Clean Coal Technology.” Science, vol. 250, no. 4986, 1990, pp. 1317–1317. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2878358. Accessed 15 Oct. 2023.

  • The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/23/climate/what-clean-coal-is-and-isnt.html

  • Dowdey, Sarah. “What Is Clean Coal Technology?” HowStuffWorks Science, HowStuffWorks, 16 Sept. 2023, science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/clean-coal.htm. 



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activity 4.1 - US Environmental History and Major Regulations

Image
  In this week's module I learned about the history of environmental change throughout the US. I think it's important to know our history, especially now that climate change is becoming a more serious issue. I spend a lot of time on social media like Tik Tok, and I see a lot of the things that are going on in the world in terms of news, politics, the environment, etc. When learning about history we as a society should learn what has happened throughout the years to where we are now. I see things on the internet like Antarctica is melting, many wildfires, extreme heat, no potable water, etc. While I was reading the articles for class I learned that back before the internet even existed, people really didn't have to worry about pollution, or waste. The reason due to this, is because back then it wasn't as populated as it is now, and technology didn't exist. In the article it states “When one stand of trees was consumed for housing or fuel, another was nearby; when one
Read more

Activity 4.2 Environmental Policy Frameworks

  The Ohio Antidegradation Case The Drake Chemical Case The Quincy Library Group Case Gain/Loss Frame Views of Nature Frames Economic Framework Basically in 1972 the Clean Water Act required states to define their water quality standards. The Ohio case was a gain/loss frame, because both groups where fighting in court what they wanted the policy to be, yet due to potential loss/gain from both sides they just stopped, and left the case as it is. This was a chemical production company back in the 1940s and early 1980s. The company would dump chemicals into the lagoon and got told by the Department of Environmental regulation that they had to stop doing that. Since the facility didn't want to accept the environmental policy they filed for bankruptcy, and abandoned the facility by stating that “complying with the new regulations  would be prohibitively costly”. This framework is a view of nature, because these individuals working that facility were not perceiving the effects of human i
Read more

Activity 3.3.3 - My Plastic Use

Image
 Short Essay:  In this module I learned more in depth what microplastics are, and their effects to the environment. To begin microplastics come from plastic, and we've been using plastic since the 1950s, so around 65 years. Plastic takes 20-500 years to decompose, but over time that plastic will brake down into smaller pieces to what scientists now call “microplastics”. Microplastics, which are plastic particles, or fibers smaller than 5 millimeters in size, are one of the many are one of the many reasons for the widespread use of microplastics in our society. Due to their miniscule size, microplastics are not able to be removed by wastewater treatment plants. Wastewater treatment plants is something I learned in the last module, which was very interesting, because I learned how sewage water gets cleaned to get released back into the environment. However, learning about how microplastics don't just disappear with a wastewater treatment plant made me realize that they are so sma
Read more