Fact: Clean energy costs more

Mobile

Archives | RSS

Thursday, August 20, 2009

News / Biz Fact: Clean energy costs more

Posted By Rhiannon Fionn-Bowman on Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 3:51 PM

Thousands of coal industry muckety mucks are in Charlotte this week attending the Coal-Gen industry conference. In addition to worrying about cap and trade legislation in Washington, the group is trying to figure out how to continue offering cheap electricity while reducing carbon emissions and turning a profit.

But before we all start crying about the cost of clean energy, let's not forget the cost of dirty energy: Our health, clean air, our mountains, the lives of miners, our rivers, streams and lakes ... in other words, life itself.

I don't know about you, but I'd gladly pay a little extra to the power company each month -- and even chip in more to help the poor cover their energy bills, to avoid all of these coal power side effects.

Its 108 million tons a year of carbon emissions rank Duke third-highest among U.S. utilities. The company's contributions to global warming, use of coal mined by blasting Appalachian mountaintops and construction of a new coal-fired boiler at its Cliffside plant prompted hundreds of protesters to march on Duke's headquarters in genteel Charlotte in April.

But Duke is also building a new-generation coal plant, in Edwardsport, Ind., that might be able to capture and store up to half its carbon emissions. Success for plants like Edwardsport, experts say, is key to securing the coal industry's future.

Duke executive Jim Turner, president of its regulated business segment, assured his audience that the company won't turn away from coal, in which it has invested $5 billion for non-carbon pollution controls.

“But there is a balance here,” he said, “because the cleaner we try to get, the more it costs.”

The costs of installing carbon-capturing technology could equal the amount U.S. utilities have spent for controlling all air pollutants combined, said Ron Barnes of Charlotte-headquartered Shaw Power Group, which designs and builds power plants.

The advanced design at Edwardsport will cost $2.3 billion for 630 megawatts, compared to the $1.8 billion (not including financing costs) for 825 megawatts at Cliffside.