Coal pollution mitigation | Wikipedia audio article
Coal. Pollution mitigation. Often, called clean coal is a series, of systems, and technologies, that seek to mitigate the pollution, and other environmental effects. Normally, associated, with the burning though not the mining, or processing, of coal which is widely regarded as, the dirtiest, of the common fuels for industrial, processes, and power generation, approaches. Attempt to mitigate emissions of, carbon dioxide, co2. And, other greenhouse gases and, radioactive. Materials, that arise from the use of coal mainly, for electrical, power generation using. Various technologies. Historical. Efforts to reduce coal, pollution focused. On flue gas desulphurization, starting. In the 1850s, and clean burn technologies. These. Efforts have been very successful in countries, with strong environmental. Regulation, such as the US where emissions of acid rain causing, compounds, and particulates, have been reduced by up to 90% since, 1995. More. Recent developments. Include carbon capture, and storage which, pumps and stores co2, emissions, underground. And integrated, gasification, combined. Cycle, IGCC. Involve, coal gasification, which. Provides a basis for increased, efficiency and lower cost in capturing, co2 emissions. There are seven technologies, deployed, or proposed by the National, Mining Association for. Deployment in the United States. Carbon. Capture and storage. CCS. Flue. Gas desulphurization. Fluidized. Bed combustion. Integrated. Gasification combined. Cycle, IGCC. Low. Nitrogen oxide, burners. Selective. Catalytic, reduction SCR. And. Electrostatic. Precipitators. Of the 22 clean coal demonstration. Projects, funded by the US Department of Energy since 2003. None are in operation, as of February, 2017. Having, been abandoned, or delayed due to capital, budget overruns, are discontinued. Because of excessive, operating, expenses. Topic. Regulations. Since. The 1970s. Various, policy, and regulatory measures. Have driven coal pollution mitigation. In, the US the Clean Air Act was the primary driving force in reducing, particulate, emissions and, acid rain from coal, combustion as. Regulations. Have increased the demand for coal pollution mitigation. Technologies costs. Have fallen and performance, has improved the widespread deployment of, pollution, control equipment to. Reduce sulfur dioxide, NOx, and dust emissions as just one example that brought cleaner air to many countries the. Desire to tackle, rising co2, emissions. To address climate change later. Introduced, carbon, capture, and storage. CCS, within, the United States carbon, capture and storage technologies. Also sometimes, referred to as carbon, capture, and sequestration are, mainly being developed, in response to, regulations. By the Environmental. Protection Agency. Most. Notably, the Clean Air Act and an, anticipation, of legislation. That seeks to mitigate climate change. Loan. Guarantees, and tax incentives, have a long history of use in Australia EU, countries, in the u.s. to encourage, the introduction, of coal pollution mitigation. And other technologies. To reduce environmental impact. Topic. Environmental. Impact, of coal. You. Topic. Greenhouse. Gases. Combustion. Of coal which is mostly carbon produces. Carbon dioxide as. A product, of combustion. According. To the United, Nations Intergovernmental, Panel, on, Climate Change, the burning of coal a fossil, fuel is a significant. Contributor to global warming see the UN IPCC. Fourth assessment, report. For. One tonne of coal burned 2.86. Tons, of carbon dioxide, as created, carbon, sequestration technology. Has yet to be tested on a large scale and may not be safe or successful. Sequestered. Co2, may, eventually leak up through the ground may lead to unexpected, geological instability. Or may cause contamination, of aquifers, used for, drinking water supplies, as 25 point five percent of the world's electrical, generation in 2004. Was from coal-fired generation. See world energy, consumption, reaching, the carbon dioxide reduction targets of the Kyoto Protocol, will require modifications. To how coal is used. Topic. Combustion.
Byproducts. Byproducts. Of coal combustion, are compounds, which are released into the atmosphere as. A result of burning coal coal. Includes, contaminants. Such as sulfur, compounds, and non combustible minerals, when, coal is burned the minerals become ash ie particulate. Matter or PM and the sulfur form sulfur, dioxide, so2 since, air is mostly nitrogen, combustion. Of coal often, leads to production of nitrogen oxides. Sulfur. Dioxide. And nitrogen oxides. Are primary, causes, of acid rain for. Many years before greenhouse, gases, were widely understood to be a threat it was thought that these byproducts. Were the only drawback, to using coal, these. Byproducts. Are still a problem but they have been greatly diminished in, most advanced, countries, due to clean air regulations. It. Is possible, to remove most of the sulfur dioxide so2. Nitrogen. Oxides, NOx, and particulate, matter PM, emissions. From the coal burning process, for. Example various, techniques are used in a coal preparation plant, to reduce the amount of non combustible matter, ie ash in the coal prior to burning during. Combustion, fluidized. Bed combustion, is used to reduce sulfur, dioxide, emissions. After. Burning particulate. Matter ie ash and dust can be reduced using an electrostatic, precipitator. And sulfur dioxide emissions, can, be further reduced with flue gas desulphurization. Trace. Amounts of radionuclides. Are more difficult to remove coal-fired. Power plants, are the largest aggregate, source of the toxic heavy metal mercury 50. Tons per year come, from coal power plants, out of 150, tons emitted, nationally, in the USA, and 5,000, tons globally. However. According, to the United, States Geological Survey, the trace amounts of mercury in coal byproducts. Do not pose a threat to public health a study. In 2013 found. That mercury found in the fish in the Pacific, Ocean could possibly, be linked to coal-fired, plants, in Asia. You. Topic. Potential. Financial, impact. You. Whether, carbon-capture, in. Technology. Is adopted worldwide, will depend, less on science, than on economics. Cleaning. Coal is very expensive. Topic. Cost, of converting, a single, coal-fired. Power, plant. Conversion. Of a conventional, coal-fired. Power plant, is done by injecting the co2 into, ammonium carbonate, after, which it is then transported, and deposited underground. Preferably, in soil beneath the sea this. Injection process however, is by far the most expensive, besides. The cost of the equipment and the ammonium carbonate, the coal-fired power, plant, also needs to use 30% of its generated, heat to do the injection, parasitic, load a test. Setup has been done in the American, Electric Power Mountaineer. Coal burning power plant. One. Solution, to reduce this thermal loss parasitic. Load as to burn the pulverized, load with pure oxygen instead of air. Topic. Cost, implications. For new coal-fired power. Plants. Newly, built coal-fired, powerplants can be made to immediately, use gasification. Of the coal prior, to combustion, this. Makes it much easier to separate off the co2 from, the exhaust fumes making, the process cheaper. This. Gasification. Process, is done in new coal burning power plants such, as the coal burning power plant at Tianjin, called, greengen. Topic. Costs. For us wide conversion. The, projected, nationwide, costs, for the implementing, of carbon capture and storage CCS. In coal-fired, power, plants, in the USA, presumably, using a conventional tactic. See above can be found in the Wall Street Journal, article, Credit. Suisse Group says. 15 billion dollars needs. To be invested, in CCS, over, the next 10 years for it to play an important, role in climate, change the. International, Energy Agency says. 20 billion dollars is needed the, Pew Center on global, climate change, says, the number as as high as 30 billion dollars, those. Figures, dwarfed the actual, investments, to date in, the, US the Bush administration. Spent about 2.5. Billion dollars on a range of mitigation, technologies a, large. Amount but far less than the amount previously. Suggested. CCS. Proponents. Say both the government, and the private sector need to step up their investments. Topic. Potential. Financial, benefits. The, coal industry in the US has the potential to make billions of dollars if, clean coal technologies.
Are Pursued it. Is estimated that from 2000, to 2020, the industry, could make up to 15 billion dollars in, reduced fuel costs, twenty five billion dollars in avoided, environmental. Costs, and thirty two billion dollars, from exporting, the equipment, and licensing, for use in other countries. Topic. Political. Support. You. Topic. Australia. In, Australia, carbon, capture and storage was, often referred to by then Prime Minister Kevin, Rudd as, a possible, way to reduce, greenhouse gas, emissions the previous, Prime Minister, John Howard had. Stated that nuclear, power was, a better alternative as, CCS, technology. May not prove to be economically, feasible. Topic. Canada. In, 2014. SaskPower, a provincial, owned electric, utility, finished renovations, on boundary, dams boiler, number three making it the world's first post combustion, carbon, capture, storage facility. The. Renovation, project ended, up costing a little over 1.2, billion dollars and, can scrub out co2 and, other toxin, from up to 90 percent of the flue gas that it emits. Topic. China. Since. 2006. China keeps releasing more, co2 than any other country. Researchers. In China are, focusing, on increasing efficiency. Of burning coal so they can get more power out of less coal it. Is estimated that new high-efficiency power. Plants, could reduce co2 emission. By 7%, because, they won't have to burn as much coal to get the same amount of power. Topic. Japan. Following. The catastrophic, failure of the Fukushima, I nuclear power. Plant, in Japan that, resulted, from the 2011 Tohoku earthquake, and, tsunami and the subsequent, widespread, public opposition against nuclear power high, energy, lower emission, hele. Coal power plants, were increasingly, favored, by the Shinzo, Abe a led government to recoup lost energy capacity, from the partial shutdown of nuclear, power plants, in Japan and, to replace aging coal, and oil fired, power plants, while meeting 2030, emission, targets of the Paris agreement.
45. Hele. Power plants, have been planned purportedly, to employ integrated. Gasification fuel. Cell cycle, a further development of integrated, gasification combined. Cycle Japan. Had adopted prior pilot, projects, on IGCC. Coal power plants, in the early 1990s. And late 2000s. Topic. United. States. In the United States, clean, coal was. Mentioned, by former President George W Bush on, several occasions, including his 2007. State, of the Union address. Bush's. Position was that carbon, capture, and storage technologies. Should be encouraged, as one means to reduce the country's dependence on, foreign oil. During. The u.s. presidential, campaign, for 2008. Both candidates, John McCain and Barack Obama expressed. Interest, in the development of CCS, technologies. As part of an overall comprehensive, energy, plan the. Development of pollution, mitigation, technologies could, also create export, business for the United, States or any other country working, on it the. American, Reinvestment and, Recovery Act, signed in 2009. By President, Obama allocated. 3.4. Billion dollars for advanced, carbon capture, and storage technologies. Including, demonstration. Projects. Former. Secretary, of State Hillary, Clinton has said that we, should strive to have new electricity, generation, come, from other sources such, as clean, coal and renewables, and former, energy secretary. Dr., Steven, Chu has, said that it is absolutely worthwhile, to, invest in, carbon, capture and storage. Noting. That even if the US and Europe turned their backs on coal developing. Nations like India and China would, likely not. During. The first 2012, United States presidential. Election debate. Mitt Romney expressed. His support for clean coal and claimed that current federal policies, were hampering the coal industry. Topic. Criticism. Of the approach. Environmentalists. Such as Dan Becker director, of the Sierra Club's global, warming and energy program believes. That the term clean, coal is, misleading, there, is no such thing as clean coal and, there never will be it's. An oxymoron, the. Sierra Club's coal campaign, has launched a site refuting, the clean coal statements, and advertising. Of the coal industry. Complaints. Focus on the environmental. Impacts, of coal extraction high. Costs, to sequester carbon an uncertainty, of how to manage and result pollutants, and radionuclides. In. Reference, to sequestration of, carbon concerns. Exist about whether geologic, storage, of co2 in, reservoirs, aquifers. Etc. Is indefinite, permanent. The. Paleontologists. And influential, environmental. Activist Tim Flannery made, the assertion that the concept, of clean coal might not be viable for all geographical. Locations. Critics. Also believe that the continuing, construction of coal powered plants, whether or not they use carbon, sequestration techniques. Encourages. Unsustainable. Mining practices for, coal which can strip away mountains, hillsides. And natural, areas they. Also point, out that there can be a large amount of energy required and, pollution, emitted in transporting. The coal to the power plants. The. Reality, coalition, a US nonprofit, climate organization. Composed, of the Alliance, for climate protection the, Sierra Club the National, Wildlife Federation the. Natural, Resources Defense, Council and, the League of Conservation Voters, ran, a series of television commercials, in 2008. And 2009. The. Commercials, were highly critical of attempts, to mitigate coals, pollution, stating, that without capturing, co2 emissions. And storing it safely that it cannot be called clean. Coal. Greenpeace. Is a major opponent of the concept, because they view emissions, and wastes, as not being avoided, but instead transferred. From one waste stream to another, according. To Greenpeace USA's. Executive, director, Phil Radford speaking. In 2012, even the industry figures it will take 10 or 20 years to arrive and we need solutions sooner, than that. We, need to scale up renewable, energy, clean coal is a distraction, from that. Topic. Clean, coal. The, term clean coal in modern society, often refers, to the carbon capture, and storage process.
The. Term has been used by advertisers. Lobbyists. And politicians such. As Donald, Trump. Topic. Prior, terminology. The, industry, term, clean, coal is, increasingly. Used in reference to carbon, capture, and storage and, advanced, theoretical, process that would eliminate or, significantly. Reduce carbon dioxide emissions, from, coal based plants, and permanently, sequester, them more. Generally, the term has been found in modern usage to describe technologies. Designed to enhance both the efficiency. And the environmental, acceptability, of coal extraction, preparation. And use. US, Senate bill nine-one-one, in April 1987. Defined. Clean coal technology. As follows. The. Term clean coal technology. Means any technology. Deployed. At a new or existing facility. Which will achieve significant. Reductions, in air emissions of sulfur dioxide or. Oxides, of nitrogen, associated. With the utilization of, coal in the generation, of electricity. Before, being adopted in this fashion historically. Clean. Coal was. Used to refer to clean burning coal with low levels of impurities, though this term faded, after rates of domestic coal usage dropped, the. Term appeared, in a speech to Mine Workers in, 1918. In context. Indicating, coal that was free, of dirt and impurities, in. The early 20th century prior. To World War two clean, coal also called smokeless. Coal, generally. Referred to anthracite. And high-grade, bituminous, coal used, for cooking and home heating. Topic. See also. You. Topic. Notes. You. Topic. Further, reading. Biello. David, January, 2016. The carbon capture, fallacy. Scientific. American. 314. 158. 265. Bib, code 2015. Sharm, 314. A 58, B joy. 10.10. 3:8 Scientific. American oh one one six five eight, pmid. Twenty-six. Million eight hundred eighty, seven thousand, one hundred ninety seven, smiley. Face. Topic. External, links international energy, agency clean. Coal center National, Energy Technology Laboratory. Compendium. Homepage, the future of : interdisciplinary. MIT, study, Institute, for clean and secure energy.