There was an Associated Press article in today's Evansville Courier & Press entitled, "New coal plants raise big questions." However, the debate presented was not whether we should burn coal or move towards alternative energy but rather, whether we should use cheap conventional coal plants or the so-called "clean coal" plants that are more expensive and possibly, less reliable. Indiana has numerous coal-fired power plants, but Texas appears to have it even worse. In Texas, 16 new coal-fired power plants are proposed, 11 of them by TXU Corp. (Texas' biggest utility) in a five year plan. In Illinois, at least 10 new plants are also proposed. TXU claims that this move will actually help the environment to some extent, by eliminating some of the older plants. According to the article, critics of TXU say it's in a hurry to build these new plants before carbon dioxide restrictions come in the way of this plan. A Dallas attorney plans to sue TXU for Clean Air Act violations and this matter could end up in federal court.

As I was saying to a friend over the weekend, shouldn't we be beyond coal burning by now, at least enough that we don't need to actually increase the number of coal-burning power plants to this extent? We are on the cutting edge of technology and yet, to obtain the power to make all of the technological breakthroughs, we essentially have to burn dirty rocks we dig up from deep in the ground. At the very least, by now we should have figured out how to use coal in a true zero-emissions way, where we sequester all of the carbon dioxide. Yet, the reality is that utilities, such as TXU, have been able to burn coal in the same manner for decades with little governmental intervention to stop them. It sounds good that TXU will replace the archaic coal plants with the newer ones that bound to be somewhat cleaner and more efficient. Yet, where is the guarantee that this will even happen? Is there some moratorium in Texas that no new coal plants can be built until the oldest ones are taken off-line? This article didn't mention any. It sounds to me like that line is simply good PR. Perhaps a single old plant will be done away with after a series of new ones are built. Time will tell. Aren't we really digging ourselves into a bigger hole (both literally and figuratively) by becoming increasingly reliant on a fossil fuel that will be used up in a few hundred years?