According to eYale360:

You have also to hand it to the folks at R&R Partners. They’re the clever advertising agency that made its name luring legions of suckers to Las Vegas with an ad campaign built on the slogan “What happens here, stays here.”

However R&R has now topped itself. Now with its ad campaign pairing two of the least compatible words. Yes I mean in the English language. “Clean Coal.”

“Clean” is not a word that normally leaps to mind. Especially for a commodity some spoilsports associate with unsafe mines. As well as mountaintop removal and acid rain. Yet let’s not forget black lung, lung cancer, asthma and mercury contamination. Oh let’s finalize it with global warming. And yet the phrase is now routinely used. Especially as it turns up in political discourse. It’s almost as if it were a reality.

The ads created by R&R tout coal as “an American resource.” In one Vegas-inflected version, Kool and the Gang sing “Ya-HOO!”  That’s as an electric wire gets plugged into a lump of coal. Then the narrator intones: “It’s the fuel that powers our way of life.” (“Celebrate good times, come on!”) 🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️

In addition and in a second ad predicts a future. One in which coal will generate power at lower emissions. For I say Ha!!

So that’s also from their opinion including the capture and storage of CO2. For It’s a big challenge. Yet they made a commitment. I mean a commitment to clean.

Clean coal isn’t clean, cleancoal, In the ACCCE’s $35 million advertising campaign, America “plugs” in to a chunk of coal. Source: ACCCE
In the ACCCE’s $35 million advertising campaign, America “plugs” in to a chunk of coal. Source: ACCCE

Well, they’ve made a commitment to advertising, anyway. The campaign has been paid for by Americans for Balanced Energy Choices.  I mean Yes folks. It’s One which bills itself as the voice of “over 150,000 community leaders from all across the country.”

So among those leaders, according to ABEC’s website, are an environmental consultant. Also an interior designer, and a “complimentary healer.”

Then other, arguably louder, voices in the group joined in. For that’s including the world’s biggest mining company (BHP Billiton). Because the biggest U.S. coal mining company (Peabody Energy) and the biggest publicly owned U.S. electric utility (Duke Energy). Followed up by the biggest U.S. railroad (Union Pacific).

Then ABEC, whose domain name is licensed to the Center for Energy and Economic Development. They are also a coal-industry group. One that merged with CEED. All moreover to form the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE).

They’re also bankrolling the “Clean Coal” campaign. Consequently to the tune of $35 million this year alone. That’s a little less than the tobacco industry spent on a successful fight against antismoking legislation in 1998. Also, almost triple what health insurers paid for the “Harry and Louise” ads that helped kill health care reform in the early 1990s.

In addition to the ads, the “Clean Coal” campaign has so far also sponsored two presidential election debates (where, critics noted, no questions about global warming got asked).

Coal is also struggling to overcome fierce resistance at the state and local level. That’s in Kansas, Florida, Idaho, and California. For they have already effectively declared a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants.

As a result and nationwide, 59 new coal-fired power plant projects died. That’s just last year (of 151 proposed). All mostly because local authorities. Because all refused to grant permits or because big banks withheld financing. Both groups are alarmed. Especially about the lack of practical remedies to deal with coal’s massive CO2 emissions.

The coal industry is clearly alarmed, too. Because of its lack of continued ability to do business as usual. In addition to the “Clean Coal” ad campaign, the industry’s main lobbying group, the National Mining Association. It increased its budget by 20 percent to $19.7 million at one point.

All according to the Center for Responsive Politics, individual coal companies will spend an additional $7 million on lobbying. Coal industry PACs and employees also routinely donate $2-3 million per election cycle. Especially in contests for federal office. Altogether, that adds up to a substantial commitment to advertising and lobbying.

And the commitment to clean?

The scale of the problem suggests that it needs to be big. Coal-fired power plants generate about 50 percent of the electricity in the United States. In 2006, they also produced 2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide.

That’s 36 percent of total U.S. emissions.

For a remedy, the industry was banking on a proposed pilot plant called FutureGen. All which would have used coal gasification technology. All to separate out the carbon dioxide. Thereby allowing it to be pumped into underground storage.

But the federal government canceled that project. Most interestingly because of runaway costs. At last count, FutureGen was budgeted at $1.8 billion; with about $400 million of that coming from corporate partners over ten years. That is, the “commitment to clean” would have cost roughly as much per year as the industry is now spending on lobbying and “Clean Coal” advertising.

Clean coal isn't clean

By: Megan Clark

Air quality control is the big issue among the world’s coal industries at the moment.

The world’s environment protection authorities have also spoken. Air pollution limits will have to be adhered to across the industry, by collieries, coal fired industries and at all stages of plant operations that employ coal. Otherwise, coal industries face the risk of contributing more to environmental pollution. Because I mean more than they bargained for.

There is strong competition in the energy market. Especially for cleaner alternative fuels like methane. Oy.

But the technologies are still too expensive to replace coal. The only solution for coal industries is to only employ clean coal technology.

Yet in reality it should be including energy storage, wind, geothermal and solar now!

According to a report by the International Energy Agency in 2012, coal’s share in worldwide use of energy fuels has continued to rise. The IEA estimates that by 2017, as much as 4.32 billion tonnes of oil equivalent will be used worldwide.

But this optimistic report doesn’t take into account the fight put up by residents and activists in rallies across the world.

All complaining about the poor quality of air and water in their locality because of coal industry emissions. Environment authorities across the world are waking up to the air pollution that are created by coal mining and related industries.

How Coal Industries Affect Quality of Air, Health and the Environment

  1. Coal dust is a problem wherever there are coal mines or wherever coal is transported through residential areas and cities. That and other particulate matter released during the different processes involving coal can cause a number of health problems, some of them fatal, if in excess.

Very small particulate matter carried by the air can enter our lungs and affect our health, sometimes leading to hospitalization.

If the people breathing in this air already have lung problems, they are going to bear the brunt of it. Other health problems include black lung disease (or coal-worker’s pneumoconiosis) among miners and treatment plant workers, congestive heart failure, asthma attacks, chronic bronchitis and reduce life expectancy. Young children are also very susceptible to chronic lung problems.

It has been found that coal trains passing through a city’s outskirts can raise particulate air pollution by as much as 120% in many cases. Also, in general, coal trains were found to cause much more pollution than passenger trains and freight trains.

  1. Coal-fired power stations that use wet cooling towers release fog and drift that also carry this particulate matter. These are breathed in by nearby workers and residents and lead to additional lung problems.
  2. Coal mines also release gases like methane, which is a potential greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change.
  3. Burning coal in plants releases the greenhouse gas CO2, sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen and other toxic substances like sulphur nitrate and hydrogen cyanide. Haze created by these gases and particulate matter result in poor visibility.

Given such harmful effects of coal, coal industries are responsible for the protection of people who live nearby. Future coal industries should adapt to air quality standards. The good news is that global EPAs (Environment Protection Authority) have carried out numerous studies on the matter. They have come up with several solutions for coal industries who want to look forward to a safe and sustainable future for their operations. And other innovators in the field have come up with clean coal technologies that are going to be a big part of the future of coal industries.

How Future Coal Industries Are Going to Deal with Pollution with Clean Coal Technologies

Existing technologies

Industries monitor particulate matter emissions according to techniques laid down in the USEPA AP42. When it comes to controlling these air emissions, hi-tech and cost-effective methods of washing and veneering are applied when preparing coal for transport and burning. This controls particulate emissions and unwanted minerals that are wind-borne or polluting when burnt. Low-nitrogen oxide burners create less of these oxides. Particulates are removed by electrostatic precipitators. Transport is carried out in covered wagons to contain particles.

Coal industries ideally should be located away from cities. As well as residential communities and farmlands that are at a risk from air quality contamination. Most importantly groundwater pollution from coal fly ash and coal sludge.

Ambitious technologies they want to see in the future

The coal industries of the future will be able to catch and store carbon dioxide emissions at power plants.

Although it’s not as efficient as solar and energy storage.  Let’s be clear!

All in economically viable and effective ways.

They will be able to separate CO2 from flue gases. Combined with a solvent at coal-fired plants so they can reuse it. I’ve heard other methods like oxy-fuel combustion and pre-combustion capture. They expect so I’ve heard that they will be able to completely separate CO2 from the fuel. All at different stages in affordable ways. Storage methods being explored include injecting the emissions into the earth. Also another option is deep into oceanic waters. There are costs and benefits of both that still need much research. Especially before they are viable across the industry.

In conclusion, a large number of conscionable industries in the field have air quality monitors. All installed at loading stations and railheads.

Some plants are already utilizing what they call existing clean coal technologies.

Yet research and innovation is on to improve the technologies they say. It’s expected to make them available to every plant across the world. Finally and because the future of sustainable coal industries and the environment depends on it.

Comments are closed.