Two Dirty Power Plants Shut Down!
A Stalled FutureGen
The Department of Energy very recently pulled support for FutureGen, a $1.8 billion prototypical "clean coal" power plant. Although the DOE has not publicly stated its future plans for the project, it has stated that inflating costs were a primary reason for putting the project on hold.
The Future Gen Alliance, composed of power and coal companies, announced it would construct the plant in Mattoon Illinois, despite DOE concerns over costs and environmental impacts on the surrounding area. In an effort to encourage the DOE to move forward with the project, the Alliance offered to reduce DOE's share of the financial burden from over $1.3 billion down to $800 million. What a bargain! Yet despite this tempting offer, DOE is still not ready to take the plunge.
Many coal proponents tout the environmental benefits of "clean coal" as the best way to address global warming. Yet the science and technology behind carbon capture and storage is not yet well developed, and as demonstrated by the temporary collapse of FutureGen, is very costly. Instead of storing our carbon dioxide underground, we should harness the power of renewable and efficient energy to dramatically reduce our carbon emissions. Promoting truly clean energy is the fastest, cheapest, safest, and smartest way to curb global warming.
Take action and tell your members of congress to truly tackle climate change by funding clean energy technologies in the upcoming economic stimulus package!
One Less Nuke
MidAmerican Energy recently withdrew plans to construct a nuclear reactor in Payette County, Idaho due to high costs. You may remember from back in the fall that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission expected to receive a wave of 21 applications to build 32 new reactors due to promising reactor loan guarantee proposals in the recently-passed energy bill.
Thankfully for tax payers and the country as a whole, the expansive loan guarantee language did not make into the final energy bill, although report language in the appropriations omnibus did recommend an expenditure of $18.5 billion for reactors. However, without the proposed unlimited guaranteed federal funding at their fingertips, MidAmerican Energy has determined that exorbitant construction and operation costs make this an untenable project.
Yes indeed, another victory for the environment: nuclear reactors produce hazardous waste that has no promising outlook for permanent storage. With billions of dollars in subsidies already coming from the federal government, nuclear energy is STILL too expensive to cost-effectively and reliably meet America’s energy needs.
So what's the answer? You guessed it. Efficiency and renewables…efficiency and renewables. We can meet our energy needs and slash global warming pollution by using efficient technologies to reduce our demand and use clean sources of energy to meet the rest of our needs.
Find out more at ases.org/climatechange: the Sierra Club's official roadmap to curbing global warming.
The Hotline, the Sierra Club's global warming e-newsletter, keeps you up to date on the fight to stop global warming. Every two weeks, you will receive an email with the information and tools to put real global warming solutions to work. |