There is a lot of enthusiasm these days about so-called "clean coal technology." Just today, I read an article in the Evansville Courier & Press about a request by Vectren and Duke Energy (two large utilities around here) for a permit to build an IGCC plant. IGCC, or integrated gas combined cycle, technology does have a lot of promise for converting coal into energy with much less air pollution than conventional coal technology. In this process, coal is converted into a gas which then produces steam. Steam then turns a turbine to generate electricity. This technology cannot be called completely clean, however, as it will obviously encourage more coal mining (which is inherently destructive--just ask people in West Virginia where mountains are being blasted away) and will create a by-product to be disposed of afterwards. I don't know a whole lot about the waste product; I'm not sure how well it is disposed of or how safely it can be used to convert to other products. I had heard it could be used for road material or some sort of drywall-type product but again, I'm not sure how that will work. The other major issue is that although there is discussion about capturing carbon dioxide with IGCC technology and removing it so it doesn't get emitted into the air, this is apparently quite expensive to do. The proposed plant mentioned in the article (to be located in Edwardsport, Indiana), could be changed to remove the carbon dioxide, but this is not part of the current plan. Accordingly, even this cleaner coal technology will not stop global warming and in fact, may tend to hasten it.

Although an older plant will be retired in place of this new plant, it is my understanding that the older plant was not used that much anyway. IGCC is surely an improvement to the older dinosaur plants (many of which have avoided using modern pollution controls) and takes into account that where there is coal, people will want to use it for cheap electricity. However, given that destructive mining will continue, waste products from the coal will need to be disposed of, carbon dioxide will continue to be emitted into the atmosphere (aggravating global warming) and coal supplies will run out in a few hundred years, this technology seems like an expensive bandage rather than a permanent solution. If we have to use it until wind power, solar power or some other form of truly clean power can take its place, so be it. Yet, let's only add such a plant if a frequently used, dirty, older plant is retired in its place.