By Cliff Montgomery – July 22nd, 2010
Employing so-called ‘Clean Coal’ technology at U.S. power plants may create a host of legal and economicproblems, according to an instructive Government Accountability Office (GAO) study released in June.
The essence of the technology is Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), in which emissions of carbon dioxide(CO2 ) are captured and stored in geologic formations.
But coal power experts are worried about “the large costs to install and operate current CCS technologies,” aswell as “the lack of a national carbon policy to reduce CO2 emissions or a legal framework to govern liabilityfor the permanent storage of large amounts of CO2.”
The GAO pointed to federal and academic studies which conclude that CCS deployment may causeelectricity rates to skyrocket between 30% and 80%. This may be due to the fact that CCS technology woulduse much more electricity (as it takes a huge amount of power to capture and sequester CO2) and more water.
CCS “will increase mountaintop removal and other surface mining techniques,” as “the energy required bysuch processes will consume approximately 20-25% of a plant’s output,” according to SourceWatch, a websitepublished by the Center for Media and Democracy.
SourceWatch “profiles the activities of front groups, PR spinners, industry-friendly experts, industry-fundedorganizations, and think tanks trying to manipulate public opinion on behalf of corporations or government.”
The American Spark quotes the GAO report summary below:
“Coal power plants generate about half of the United States’ electricity and are expected to remain a keyenergy source.
“[But] Coal power plants also account for about one-third of the nation’s emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2 ),the primary greenhouse gas that experts believe contributes to climate change.
“Current regulatory efforts and proposed legislation that seek to reduce CO2 emissions could affect coalpower plants.
“Two key technologies show potential for reducing CO2 emissions: (1) Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), which involves capturing and storing CO2 in geologic formations, and (2) plant efficiency improvements that allow plants to use less coal.
“The Department of Energy (DOE) plays a key role in accelerating the commercial availability of thesetechnologies, and devoted more than $600 million to them in fiscal year 2009.
“Congress [therefore] asked GAO to examine: (1) the maturity of these technologies (2) their potential for commercial use, and any challenges to their use, and (3) possible implications of deploying these technologies.”
What GAO Found
“Stakeholders told GAO that while components of CCS have been used commercially in other industries, theirapplication remains at a small scale in coal power plants, with only one fully integrated CCS project operating ata coal plant. Efficiency technologies, on the other hand, are in wider commercial use.
“Commercial deployment of CCS is possible within 10 to 15 years while many efficiency technologies havebeen used and are available for use now.
“Use of both technologies is, however, contingent on overcoming a variety of economic, technical, and legalchallenges.
“In particular, with respect to CCS, stakeholders highlighted the large costs to install and operate current CCStechnologies, the fact that large scale demonstration of CCS is needed in coal plants, and the lack of anational carbon policy to reduce CO2 emissions or a legal framework to govern liability for the permanentstorage of large amounts of CO2.
“With respect to efficiency improvements, stakeholders highlighted the high cost to build or upgrade such coalplants, the fact that some upgrades require highly technical materials, and plant operators’ concerns thatchanges to the existing fleet of coal power plants could trigger additional regulatory requirements.
“CCS technologies offer more potential to reduce CO2 emissions than efficiency improvements alone, andboth could raise electricity costs and have other effects. According to reports and stakeholders, the successfuldeployment of CCS technologies is critical to meeting the ambitious emissions reductions that are currentlybeing considered in the United States while retaining coal as a fuel source.
“Most stakeholders told GAO that CCS would increase electricity costs, and some reports estimate thatcurrent CCS technologies would increase electricity costs by about 30 to 80 percent at plants using thesetechnologies.
“DOE has also reported that CCS could increase water consumption at power plants.
“Efficiency improvements offer more potential for near term reductions in CO2 emissions, but they cannotreduce CO2 emissions from a coal plant to the same extent as CCS.
What GAO Recommends
“GAO recommends that DOE develop a standard set of benchmarks to gauge and report to Congress on thematurity of key technologies. In commenting on a draft of this report, DOE concurred with ourrecommendation.”
