New Thinking Punctures Coal's Hegemony

What is the story with coal and the new coal technology? Are we being fed the truth? And, perhaps more importantly, is coal where we should be putting the emphasis on the basis of what we now know? We are told that coal recycling offers improved efficiency and less pollutants over the former methods. Coal recycling often termed "recapture," seems to be a generic term describing various technologies and methods used to recycle a percentage of the effluents and dangerous by-products normally emitted in the process of burning coal to produce electricity.. Inasmuch as standards are not available, much of this information must be taken at face value. However, experts suggest, even at the high end of the technology, twenty percent or more of the polluting by-products including carbon dioxide, mercury, etc. may still reenter the environment.

This by itself doesn’t seem to address the problems associated with the burning of fossil fuels. What we do know is that coal gasification is new, the standards have not been firmed up and the science of coal recapture is too unproven to produce ironclad results of its effectiveness in reducing the amount of dangerous by-products and heavy metals returned to the environment in the proposed process. .

..

Why should we be concerned? Well, for one, the Sierra Club has determined that Delaware has one of the worst track records when it comes to water and air quality and pollution, the bulk of it due to the burning of coal in our present facility on the Indian River. In fact, if anything, under the existing system of producing energy, conditions have actually worsened affecting the delicate ecosystem and the long term preservation of habitat for various species that tend to seek out marshland areas as shelter.



Acknowledging the problems associated with the burning of coal, the long term health affects, the impact on the waterways, the health of species, preservation of habitat, and the longer term implications for global warming, current thinking is to bypass the burning of coal for better solutions. And these solutions employ cleaner, more efficient ways of producing energy that do not employ the burning of fossil fuels. This is what dozens of other states are doing to reduce the effects of climate change. And such moves have been endorsed by more than 400 US mayors seeking to reduce emissions from fossil fuels.



For example, just this week, KKK bought the Dallas-based TXU, in the largest private transaction to date worth 47 billion dollars.. It is their intention to steer this prime user of coal burning technology away from carbon based technologies to wind energy, solar and other technologies more in line with future projected needs. One of the most astute companies, Kravitz knows that the future is not in the burning of coal. As pointed out in the Washington Post, this seems to be the growing trend among business leaders. In fact, the recent Davos conference was overflowing with those interested in and committing to clean technologies. Moreover, today's Today’s talk focuses on carbon credits which will penalize companies that are not carbon efficient.



There is a solution for Delaware however and its name is wind power. .

We are not so naïve to think however that wind power is not without its detractors; but the body of evidence to date has demonstrated that most of the arguments against wind power are either unfounded, rumor based or driven by those with an axe to grind.



To begin with wind power requires no burning of fossil fuels.Clean, affordable wind energy is natural, clean and available. Under the arguments made against wind energy, we are told that it is an undependable resource. Well, if that were the case, would there be so much enthusiasm for these new technologies by companies like KKK, General Electric and dozens of states in the US.. The answer is that wind power works!

.

Among the downside claims: Wind power generators will contribute to the death of migrating birds. But wind patterns and computer charting has demonstrated rather conclusively that the detractors are wrong. In fact, very few, if any, birds suffer mortality from the wind generators.



All of the arguments made against wind energy seem to pale in significance to the dangers posed by burning of fossil fuels. According to the estimates made by the University of Delaware’s Department of Oceanography, wind energy can exceed our minimal goals of under 400 megawatts of electricity, and, depending on the numbers of wind generators approved, help us supply excess energy to help meet the northeast coast's electrical energy needs through the grid earning Delaware a gross profit over the longer term.



On the other hand, there is an opportunity to show that Delaware is ahead of the curve by introducing wind power, considering carbon credits, joining forces with other States that are concerned about the impact of burning fossil fuels on the environment and our health, and leading the charge to cleaner energy