“The Precarious Future of Coal“, comes down on the side of the angels [my opinion]. This MIT Technology Review piece summarizes the study - I’ll be digging for the full report:
Energy experts from MIT have released a long-awaited report on the future of coal. The report recommends that much more be done to develop technology for decreasing the impact of burning coal on global warming. The report also challenges some conventional thinking about the best way forward. It criticizes current efforts by the Department of Energy (DOE) and calls for an approximately $5 billion, 10-year program to demonstrate technology for capturing and storing carbon dioxide released by coal-fired power plants.
The report, based on a study by 13 MIT faculty members, comes at a time when growing concerns about global warming are making it increasingly likely that governments worldwide will impose a price on carbon-dioxide emissions to force a cut in the release of this important greenhouse gas. Nevertheless, coal, the leading source of carbon-dioxide emissions from electricity generation, will continue to be a major source of electricity, say the authors of the report. That’s because even with a high price on carbon, coal is abundant and probably necessary to meet fast-growing demand for energy worldwide.
Reducing the impact of continued coal use on global warming will require a massive effort to collect carbon dioxide from power plants and bury it underground, the experts say. The volume of compressed carbon dioxide that will need to be captured and transported is similar in scale to the amount of oil consumed in the United States, the report says.
Doing so is “not simply a matter of bolting on a box to capture carbon dioxide,” says John Deutch, a professor of chemistry at MIT. Indeed, retrofitting existing plants will require wholesale restructuring, even for advanced coal plants, he says. And although there are a few carbon-sequestration projects going on around the world, none of these has been put together with the sort of careful monitoring required to assure the public and energy investors that long-term, extremely high-volume carbon-dioxide storage is possible.
One of most important conclusions of the study is that proving commercial scale sequestration [CSS] is a higher priority than proving IGCC or other advanced coal generation technologies. My crude short take — if you don’t know how to store it, it doesn’t matter how efficiently you can capture the carbon. Further, developing voter confidence in CSS is essential to gaining support both for carbon taxes and for rapid deployment of clean coal power — especially in China, India and Brazil.
The report challenged the idea, argued by some energy experts, that a new type of coal plant–one that converts coal into a gas before burning it–will make it easier and cheaper to capture carbon dioxide, compared with collecting it from the smokestacks of conventional power plants. [that refers to IGCC, ed.] The MIT experts say that several factors make the picture more complicated. Such coal gasification doesn’t work well with low-grade coal, for example, and both the new and the conventional plants will require major changes to capture carbon dioxide, according to the MIT report.
As a result, the MIT researchers recommend that governments not support the new gasification plants over conventional plants. Instead, they say that governments should focus on large-scale demonstration programs that would, for the first time, capture carbon dioxide from coal plants, transport it, and store it at a large scale. The project would need to handle a million tons of carbon dioxide. Such demonstrations would make it possible to compare different technologies, increase policymaker and public confidence that capture and sequestration technology can work, and pave the way for quick adoption of the best technologies in response to a price on carbon dioxide.
UPDATE: I found the site for the Interdisciplinary MIT Study “The Future of Coal“. This will likely prove to be a key resource for energy policy as was the previous Interdisciplinary MIT Study “The Future of Nuclear Power“.
0 Responses to “MIT coal report calls for carbon sequestration tests”