Show companies
and organizations related to Coal Stove
Within
mile(s) of
zip/postal code -OR-
Regionally
Globally
Home Qualities
Heating
Fuel Burners
Stove Types
Coal Stove
Coal Stove
A coal stove can burn various types of coal. Clean coal is a term used to describe methods and technologies intended to reduce the environmental impact of using coal as an energy source. These efforts can include chemically washing minerals and impurities from the coal, using gasification, treating the flue gases with steam to remove sulfur dioxide, and applying other technologies to capture the carbon dioxide from the flue gas. The coal industry uses the term clean coal to describe technologies designed to enhance both the efficiency and the environmental acceptability of coal extraction, preparation, and use, with no specific quantitative limits on any emissions, particularly carbon dioxide.
The burning of coal, a fossil fuel, has been shown to be one of the principal causes of anthropogenic climate change and global warming, according to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Coal industry groups claim that the concept of clean coal can be a solution to climate change and global warming, while environmental groups maintain that it is greenwash—a public relations tactic that misrepresents coal as having the potential to be an environmentally acceptable option. Greenpeace is a major opponent of the concept because emissions and wastes are not avoided, but rather are transferred from one waste stream to another. The 2007 Australian of the Year, paleontologist and environmental activist Tim Flannery, made the assertion that "coal can’t be clean."
It is has been estimated that it will be 2020 to 2025 before commercial-scale clean coal power stations (coal-burning power stations with carbon capture and sequestration) are commercially viable and widely adopted. This time frame is of concern to environmentalists because they believe there is an urgent need to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and climate change as soon as possible. Even when CO2 emissions can be caught, there is considerable debate over the necessary carbon capture and storage that must follow.
The byproducts of coal combustion are very hazardous to the environment if not properly contained. The environmental impact of these byproducts is seen to be the technology’s largest challenge, both from a practical and a public relations perspective.
While it is possible to remove most of the sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate (PM) emissions from the coal-burning process, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and radionuclides will be more difficult to address. Technologies do exist to capture and store CO2, but they have not been made available on a large-scale commercial basis due to the high economic costs. For this reason renewable energy sources may be a more cost-effective and environmentally friendly alternative.
Support
In the United States, clean coal has been mentioned by President George W. Bush on several occasions, including in his 2007 State of the Union Address. Bush’s position is that clean coal technologies should be encouraged as one means of reducing the country’s dependence on foreign oil. Senator Hillary Clinton has also said that "we should strive to have new electricity generation come from other sources, such as clean coal and renewables."
In Australia, clean coal is often referred to by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as a possible way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The previous Prime Minister, John Howard, has stated that nuclear power is a better alternative, as clean coal technology may not prove to be economically favorable.
A clean coal carbon dioxide sequestering plant called Futuregen was planned to be built in Mattoon, Illinois, to go online by 2013 as a demonstration and to add to US energy production. However, after the Illinois site was announced, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman reversed the decision and the US government withdrew funding. The project is now in doubt although there is still support for it by industry backers and members of Congress.
Criticism
Prominent environmentalists, including Dan Becker, director of the Sierra Club’s Global Warming and Energy Program, believe that the term "clean coal" is misleading. Complaints focus on the environmental impacts of coal extraction, the high costs to sequester carbon, and the uncertainty of how to manage end-result pollutants and radionuclides. There are other forms of clean and renewable energy, such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric, that are supported by many of the environmentalist groups and campaigns.
Critics of the planned power plants assert that there is no such thing as "clean coal" and that the plants will still release large amounts of pollutants compared to renewable energy sources such as wind power and solar power. They also point out that the continuing construction of coal-powered plants (whether or not they use carbon sequestration techniques) encourages unsustainable mining practices for coal, which can strip away mountains, hillsides, and natural areas. They also point out that there can be a large amount of energy required and pollution emitted in transporting the coal to the power plants. Some people contend that sequestration technology has yet to be used or proven on such a large scale and that it may not be successful. They further contend that this technology could lead to unexpected geological instability and could contaminate groundwater supplies. It is also possible that sequestered CO2 may eventually "leak" up through the ground. There are also concerns that plans to possibly pump some of the sequestered CO2 into certain oil and gas reserves to help make the fuels easier to pump out of the ground will lead to increased concentrations of CO2 in potential fuel supplies; this CO2 would have to be burned off during the refining process, thus adding to global warming.
