Is there such thing as "CLEAN COAL?"?

Question

Coal-fired power plant is a big issue here in the Iloilo, Philippines. The government and other agencies who are pushing for its construction are selling the idea that there's is a "clean coal." I'm just wondering how clean is clean in coal?

Answer 1

There is a whole host of technologies that fall into this category.
One form (the cleanest) would be coal seam (or bed) methane. Which extracts gases leaving the coal in the ground.

http://www.tri-starpetroleum.com.au/02_what_is_csm/what_csm.htm


Other forms generally involve capturing the CO2 and other pollutants before, during or after, combustion. The pollutants are usually liquefied then need to be disposed of. Most existing power stations can be fitted with these technologies

The best way of doing this is to pump it into existing oil wells to chase out the last traces of oil. There are other places where the underground rock structure is suitable to absorb large quantities of this waste. (Basically a large geological filter.)

"Clean coal" probably better described as "Cleaner coal" as pollution is still a by-product. However it is helpful as the pollution is not released into the atmosphere

http://www.cleancoal.nl/
http://www.australiancoal.com.au/cleantechAus.htm

Answer 2

That depends on two things and both imply spending money. If the coal is low sulfur (or is crushed and put through a pretreatment to minimize sulfur content) it is more expensive but is much lower in pollution. If the plant has electrostatic precipitators the operating costs are significantly higher but the particulate emission can be very low.

In the US the plants usually have to be made with the "best available" technology to avoid pollution. I don't know what your rules are but it is always a fight between cheap energy and clean air.

NOx is not a factor since it can be minimized for any fuel type by controlling combustion temperature (again at the expense of higher capital and operating costs)..

Answer 3

There are different grades of coal hard anthracite coal for example is much cleaner than bituminous coal wich is much cleaner than lignite. The sulfur content in coal, which contributes to acid rain when it forms sulfuric acid varies also. "Scubbrers" on power plants can have a tremendous effect on the amount of particulates (think smog) that a power plant produces. So if you start with low sulfure hard pure low anthracite coal, clean it, burn completley at proper temperatures, take as many pollutants out of the smoke with various technologies before its put into the atomshpere and coal can be cleaner than is has been historically. None of this has any effect on carbon dioxide levels, it's a mandatory byproduct of burning coal. I have heard about (from coal companies) about how they have technology to capture the carbon dioxide realesed from burnign coal and then pumping it back into to ground instead of letting it be realesed into the air. Iv'e heard this refered to as 'clean coal technology' It all sounds a bit pie in the sky to me, but deffinately worth looking into. Keep in mind that the pollutants from burnig coal don't ever really dissaper it's just where they eventually end up and how much damage they do there.

Answer 4

There is cleanER coal, but even perfectly clean coal would still make more CO2 than oil, and oil makes more than natural gas. From a global warming point of view, coal is the worst fossil fuel, oil is medium bad and natural gas is the cleanest, producing the least CO2 per unit of energy generated. Too bad there is much more coal in the ground than natural gas.

Answer 5

There are new processes to burn coal cleanly in power plants, yes. The coal itself is not clean, but the processes do not damage the environment.

Answer 6

Yes.
If every liberal will shove a piece of coal up their *** we will have a healthier cleaner planet.

FREE MARKETS will be our salvation!