I see no reason why we should not continue to use wind energy. Of course, geo-thermal is more reliable and doesn't kill off endangered bird species like golden eagles, but I don't think that's a logical reason to stop using windmills. Birds die from running into cars and trucks, and we certainly can't outlaw those, now can we? However, coal has two big advantages over wind power: while power harnessed from wind must be channeled into turbines and from thence wired to the things it must energize, coal can be both stored and transported to anywhere in the world. Wind energy from Belgium couldn't be shipped to Brazil, for example. Coal on the other hand, well, you see my point.
One would think that while everyone is trying to become less dependent on oil, and spend money in the process, coal would be celebrated as an alternative energy source. (Much like natural gas.)
Besides-- coal isn't just used for energy. Byproducts of coal are used to make concrete, construction materials, bricks, insulation, wallboard, ceramic tiles, roofing materials, and as a mineral filler for plastics, paint, rubber matting, carpet backing, and asphalt. Can wind do those things too? No. It'd be nifty if it could, but it can't.
Let me tell you some nitpicky facts about coal. Sources listed below.
"Although coal may not be as visible today as it was around 1900, it is even more prevalent as a source of fuel. Coal production has increased by more than 70 percent since 1970."*
"About 56 percent of the electricity used in this country is coal-generated electricity."*
"Certain industries consume large amounts of coal. For example, concrete and paper companies burn coal, and the steel industry uses coke and coal by-products to make steel for bridges, buildings, and automobiles."*
Coal will likely continue to be an important source of electricity generation because it is more abundant and cost-effective than oil and natural gas. Compare these*** energy costs per million British thermal units (Btus):
Coal—$1.20
Natural gas—$4.30
Oil—$4.45
Wait wait wait-- more cost effective? Meaning it's CHEAPER? Well, I guess the scientists that wizzed this chart up think so too.
One last thing just to keep environmentalists happy; the "EPA's Coalbed Methane Outreach Program seeks to work with coal companies to reduce methane gas emissions associated with coal mining. Since 1990, methane recovered and used productively at coal mines has increased from 13.8 Billion cubic feet to 37.2 Billion cubic feet.*" Oh goody! More useful stuff we get from coal.
If you're still wondering where I stand on this issue, let me clear it up by saying "long live coal!" and that we should be thanking our lucky stars that people still think a resource as precious as coal is "cheap," because the last thing we want is for it to start getting taxed more heavily. Ahem.
***Price comparisons.
*More about coal.
Author's note: I mentioned at the top that I haven't seen worse propaganda, but I've just remembered that I have! Only trust me, you don't even want to get me started on Rachel Carson.
2 comments:
Though I thoroughly appreciated reading your information about Coal and its benefits (which I agree with), I do think you should read a little more into what surface coal mining is all about. Those commercials are just about surface coal mining, not the underground coal mining we are all used to hearing about. Surface coal mining is horrible, and literally can destroy the entire surface of the earth in miles and miles of beautiful west virginia. It is devastating to look at and really sad. It looks like giant and enormous scars on our otherwise beautiful earth. And technically they are calling it "cheap" coal, because surface coal mining is SERIOUSLY a ton cheaper than regular coal mining. Though I do think all the things you mentioned about coal and its merits are true, I don't agree with surface coal mining. It is entirely too devastating and unnecessary.
Good point, Budds. And hey-- you've actually been there.
Let's save West Virginia! There's PLENTY of coal here in Utah that's really easy to get at-- too bad Clinton made the Grand Escalante Staircase into a national monument and we can't get to it. I've been to the Staircase-- it's sooooo far out in the middle of nowhere that tourists hardly visit.
Why is it a national monument if no one visits and we could be using it to mine for coal? Hmm.
Post a Comment