Stop Coal, Stop Global Warming

By Joshua S Hill

 

Is it that easy? Does my headline belie the true problem that we are facing? Is there more to the equation than just ridding ourselves of coal as a power source?

Well, according to Ed Mazria, the founder of Architecture 2030, the answer is no.

"The only fossil fuel that can fuel global warming is coal. If you stop coal, you stop global warming. End of story," he said.

Architecture 2030’s goal is to reduce the amount of energy required for buildings being built. According to their official website, "buildings are the major source of demand for energy and materials that produce by-product greenhouse gases."

His entire premise is based around a concept that "credible scientists" have provided: within 10 years we must be well on our way to GHG emission reductions to avoid suffering from "catastrophic climate change."

So when Mazria spoke at the West Coast Green conference taking place in San Francisco this past week, he was adamant about one step that we have to take to stave off this crisis: cut coal out of our plans for the future. He and his organization ask why it is that there are 151 coal-fired plants in the US alone in the planning or construction phase when we should be "well on our way" to GHG reductions.

"The silver bullet is no more coal," he said.

Unfortunately, the copious deposits of coal littering our planet undermine his plans. Governments are not going to just stop using coal because Mr. Mazria says so, especially in the time frame being given to us! It is this sort of radical decision-making that puts off so many (like my father, who would like to be "green" if it weren’t for all the big ideas with no possible means of implementation being thrown around).

I wrote a little while ago about plans to implement a new way of mining for coal that would somewhat negate the effects that strip-mining causes. At the same time that Mr. Mazria’s story hit the wires, so did news that GreatPoint Energy had received $100 million in a third round of funding for a cleaner use of coal.

The Massachusetts-based company has new technology that allows them to convert the normally "dirty" fossil fuel into a much cleaner natural gas, removing 60 percent of the carbon – along with sulfur and mercury – from the product.

The added bonus is that GreatPoint believes it can make "Bluegas™" for approximately $3.50 per million BTUs (British thermal units), compared to the $7 per million BTUs for the current market price.

However, "clean coal" is still a problematic phrase; some say it’s oxymoronic. The compounds removed from the coal, especially the carbon, still have no home, with very few options open for safe dispersal.

So, what can we take from Ed Mazria’s doomsday-ing and this new method of energy production? Only that a cleaner Earth will require the implementation of many steps. We will have to move away from being so dependent on coal, make our buildings more energy efficient and self-sufficient, and keep our fingers crossed.