Coal-Powered Ethanol Plants Aren't Good for the Environment

You can put this story in the "No, Duh" category.

An Ames company has released a study that shows coal-powered ethanol plants release 92% more carbon dioxide than plants powered by natural gas. This is days before the Des Moines City hears plans about a coal-powered ethanol plant being built in Des Moines. From the Des Moines Register...

The carbon dioxide report was released this week by Frontline BioEnergy. Frontline works with and promotes technological advancements to convert plants into a mixture of gases that could be used to replace some natural gas burned in ethanol plants. Frontline is not associated with the two companies competing to build in Des Moines.

Frontline's analysis of a plant that would produce 50 million gallons of ethanol a year show a coal-powered facility would release as much as 207,000 tons of carbon dioxide a year while a natural gas-powered plant would emit 108,000 tons.

Des Moines' proposed plants would produce at least 100 million gallons of ethanol a year. That means that the coal-powered plant would release as much as 414,000 tons of carbon dioxide a year, according to the report.

State and U.S. environmental laws do not limit carbon dioxide emissions, although more than 150 other chemicals or compounds are regulated.

Technology exists to sequester carbon dioxide emissions but it's costly and not required by law, say Iowa Department of Natural Resources officials. If that technology were used, the price to use coal would be about the same as natural gas, according to estimates from Frontline officials.

Coal is one of the dirtiest forms of energy out there. I didn't need read a study to know that. If you look at the history books, it can be argued that the burning of coal is what caused the development of the suburbs. People didn't want to be around the smoke from burning coal and those that were wealthy enough, hopped on the street car and moved outside of the city. The idea of clean coal is just ridiculous.