coal_da - fellows

8/14/2019 Coal_da - Fellows

1/77

KENTUCKY FELLOWS COAL DISADS

2008-2009 X-GULLIE

COAL DASTHE TRUTH

COAL DASTHE TRUTH..........................................................................................................1

CITES PAGE...........................................................................................................................3

STRATEGY SHEET/ABBREVIATIONS GUIDE...............................................................................5

STRATEGY SHEET/ABBREVIATIONS GUIDE...............................................................................7CLEAN COAL DA 1NC.............................................................................................................8

CLEAN COAL DA 1NC...........................................................................................................10

OVERVIEW (NORMAL)..........................................................................................................11

OVERVIEW (IF THEY DROP CONSUMPTION)...........................................................................12

IMPACT ANALYSIS CARDS TO ADD IN TO THE OVERVIEW IF YOU WANT...................................13

COAL DAIMPACT TERMINAL UNIQUENESS: COAL SUSTAINABLE/A2 FINITE.............................14

CLEAN COAL DAUNIQUENESS: CLEAN COAL COMING NOW...................................................15

CLEAN COAL DAUNIQUENESS: CLEAN COAL COMING NOW...................................................17

CLEAN COAL DAUNIQUENESS: A2 FUTUREGEN....................................................................18

CLEAN COAL DALINK: GLOBAL WARMING..........................................................................19

CLEAN COAL DALINK: RENEWABLES...................................................................................20

CLEAN COAL DALINK: RPS.................................................................................................21

CLEAN COAL DABRINK......................................................................................................22

CLEAN COAL DAINTERNAL LINK: ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS KEY....................................23

CLEAN COAL DAINTERNAL LINK: R&D KEY..........................................................................25

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: AFFORDABLE ENERGY 2NC............................................................26

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: AFFORDABLE ENERGY (A2 ALTERNATIVES CHEAPER)......................27

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: AFFORDABLE ENERGY (SUSTAINABLE)...........................................28

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: CHINA ENERGY COOPERATION 2NC................................................29

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: CHINA ENERGY COOPERATION.......................................................30

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: CHINA MODELLING (ECON) 2NC.....................................................31

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: CHINA MODELLING (POLLUTION) 2NC............................................32

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: CHIAN MODELLING (POLLUTION) 2NC............................................33

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: CHINA MODELLING (POLLUTION)...................................................34

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: COAL INDUSTRY (ENVIORNMENTAL PERCEPTION)...........................35

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: COAL INDUSTRY (ENVIORNMENTAL PERCEPTION CARBON TAX

SPEIFIC).............................................................................................................................36

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: COAL INDUSTRY (MARKET COMPETITION)......................................37

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: COAL INDUSTRY (PUBLIC RELATIONS)............................................38

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: ECONOMIC/ENERGY COMPETITIVENESS 2NC...................................40

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: ECONOMIC/ENERGY COMPETITIVENESS..........................................42

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: INDUSTRIES (COAL/AUTO/OIL/UTILITIES/RAILROADS)......................43

Zavell I hid your man card here 1


2/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: POLLUTION..................................................................................44

CLEAN COAL DASOLVES THE CASE (ELECTRICITY AFFS).......................................................45

CLEAN COAL DASOLVSE THE CASE (HYDROGEN FUEL CELLS AFFS).......................................46

CLEAN COAL DASOLVSE THE CASE (HYDROGEN FUEL CELLS AFFS).......................................48

CLEAN COAL DASOLVES THE CASE (NATURAL GAS AFFS) ....................................................49CLEAN COAL DASOLVES THE CASE (OIL ADVANTAGES)........................................................50

CLEAN COAL DASOLVES THE CASE (WARMING ADVANTAGES)..............................................51

COAL CONSUMPTION DAUNIQUENESS: COAL DEMAND HIGH................................................52

COAL CONSUMPTION DALINK: A2 LINK NON-UNIQUE (ALTERNATIVE ENERGY NOW) ..............53

COAL CONSUMPTION DALINK: RENEWABLES......................................................................54

COAL CONSUMPTION DALINK: NUCLEAR POWER.................................................................55

COAL CONSUMPTION DALINK: RPS....................................................................................56

COAL CONSUMPTION DALINK: WIND POWER......................................................................57

COAL CONSUMPTION DAIMPACT: CLEAN COAL....................................................................58

COAL CONSUMPTION DAIMPACT: ECONOMY.......................................................................59

COAL CONSUMPTION DAIMPACT: ECONOMY.......................................................................60

COAL CONSUMPTION DAIMPACT: ECONOMY (A2 OFFENSE-COAL INEVITABLE).......................61

CHINA COAL DAUNIQUENESS: COAL DEMAND HIGH.............................................................62

CHINA COAL DAIMPACT: CHINA COAL INDUSTRY 2NC..........................................................63

CHINA COAL DAIMPACT: CHINA COAL INDUSTRY (SAFETY IMPACT).......................................64

CLEAN COAL DA AFF ANSWERSUNIQUENESS: CLEAN COAL/HYDROGEN FUEL CELL FAR OFF...65

CLEAN COAL DA AFF ANSWERSUNIQUENESS: NO CLEAN COAL NOW...................................66

CLEAN COAL DA AFF ANSWERSLINK: CARBON TAX LINK TURN.............................................67

CLEAN COAL DA AFF ANSWERSLINK: NO TRADE-OFF..........................................................68

CLEAN COAL DA AFF ANSWERSIMPACT: ALT ENERGY SOLVES BETTER..................................69

CLEAN COAL DA AFF ANSWERSIMPACT: RENEWABLES GOOD...............................................70

CLEAN COAL DA AFF ANSWERSIMPACT: A2 CHINA COOPERATION........................................71

CLEAN COAL DA AFF ANSWERSIMPACT: A2 SOLVES WARMING/CO2 EMITIONS.......................72

COAL CONSUMPTION DA AFF ANSWERSLINK: RPS NO LINK................................................74

COAL CONSUMPTION DA AFF ANSWERSIMPACT TERMINAL UNIQUENESS: COAL WILL PEAK...75

CHINA COAL DA AFF ANSWERSIMPACT: WONT USE CLEAN COAL.........................................76

CHINA COAL DA AFF ANSWERSIMPACT: CHINA COAL INDUSTRY GOOD.................................77

People don't like coal because it's blackIf it were white, all our problems would be solvedFormer Public Relations Manager who was promoted to be the Vice Presidentof one of the largest coal companies in the United States. AKA HUGE SCHMUCK

And you will never find it 2


3/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CITES PAGE

SOME OF THE CITES FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL COMITTEES WHERE TO LONG TO PUT ONEVERY PAGE THEY WERE NEEDEDSO I PUT THEM HERE

Bingaman et al2007 (JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman, DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii PETE V.DOMENICI, New Mexico, BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho, RON WYDEN, OregonLISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota RICHARD BURR, North Carolina, MARY L. LANDRIEU,Louisiana JIM DeMINT, South Carolina, MARIA CANTWELL, Washington BOB CORKER, Tennessee, KENSALAZAR, Colorado JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama,BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon, BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JIM BUNNING,Kentucky, JON TESTER, Montana MEL MARTINEZ, Florida, Robert M. Simon, Staff Director, Sam E. Fowler,Chief Counsel, Frank Macchiarola, Republican Staff Director, and Judith K. Pensabene, Republican ChiefCounsel Comprise the COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES in a Hearing before theCommittee on Energy and Natural Resources for the 110th Congress, United States Senate, in the FirstSession, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY, 8/1/07, U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE)

Byrd and Dorgan et al2007 (ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, Chairman, DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii,PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, TOM HARKIN, Iowa, BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland, HERB KOHL, Wisconsin,PATTY MURRAY, Washington, BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California, RICHARD J.DURBIN, Illinois, TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota, MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, JACK REED, Rhode Island,FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey, BEN NELSON, Nebraska, THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi, TED STEVENS,Alaska, ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania, PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri,MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky, RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire, ROBERT F.BENNETT, Utah, LARRY CRAIG, Idaho, KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas, SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas, WAYNEALLARD, Colorado, LEMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee, CHARLES KIEFFER, Staff Director, BRUCE EVANS,Minority Staff Directo comprise the COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, and BYRON L. DORGAN, NorthDakota, Chairman, ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, PATTY MURRAY, Washington, DIANNE FEINSTEIN,California, TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota, MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, JACK

REED, Rhode Island, FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey, PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, THAD COCHRAN,Mississippi, MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky, ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah, LARRY CRAIG, Idaho, CHRISTOPHERS. BOND, Missouri, KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas, WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado, Professional Staff, DOUGCLAPP, ROGER COCKRELL, FRANZ WUERFMANNSDOBLER, SCOTT OMALIA (Minority), BRAD FULLER(Minority), ROBERT RICH, Administrative Support, comprise the SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND WATERDEVELOPMENT, in a HEARING BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, for the110th Congress, United States Senate, in the First Session, CLEAN COAL, OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT,NEW ENERGY OPPORTUNITIES THROUGH CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE, 8/13/07, U.S. GOVERNMENTPRINTING OFFICE, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110%5Fsenate%5Fhearings&docid=f:38423.pdf)

Katzer et al2007 (DR. JAMES KATZER is the Executive Director, PROFESSOR STEPHEN ANSOLABEHERE,Department of Political Science, MIT, PROFESSOR JANOS BEER, Department of Chemical Engineering, MIT,PROFESSOR JOHN DEUTCH CO-CHAIR, Institute Professor. Department of Chemistry, MIT, DR. A. DENNYELLERMAN, Alfred P. Sloan School of Management, MIT, DR. S. JULIO FRIEDMANN, Visiting Scientist,Laboratory for Energy and the Environment, MIT, Carbon Management Program, Energy & EnvironmentDirectorate, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, HOWARD HERZOG, Laboratory for Energy and theEnvironment, MIT, PROFESSOR HENRY D. JACOBY, Alfred P. Sloan School of Management, MIT, PROFESSORPAUL L. JOSKOW, Elizabeth and James Killian Professor of Economics and Management, Department ofEconomics and Alfred P. Sloan School of Management, MIT, Director, Center for Energy and Environmental

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38423.pdfhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38423.pdfhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38423.pdfhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38423.pdf


4/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

Policy Research, PROFESSOR GREGORY MCRAE, Department of Chemical Engineering, MIT, PROFESSORRICHARD LESTER, Director, Industrial Performance Center, Department of Nuclear Engineering, MIT,PROFESSOR ERNEST J. MONIZ CO-CHAIR, Cecil and Ida Green Professor of Physics and EngineeringSystems, Department of Physics, MIT, Director, Laboratory for Energy and the Environment, PROFESSOREDWARD STEINFELD, Department of Political Science, MIT, The Future of Coal: An Interdisciplinary MITStudy, 07)



5/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

STRATEGY SHEET/ABBREVIATIONS GUIDE

This Disad is potentially devastating, but if you have to much pride to read strategy sheetsyou will make yourself look a jerk trying to pull off some chep shots. Here are a few strategytricks with this disad, I gave those tricks funny names because otherwise this would even boreme to a point where I wouldnt even be able to write this at 3:30 in the morning. I haventchecked yet, but I am pretty sure that this disad will be eventually put out at every majorcamp, DHeidts lab alone will probably put a 9000 page file out on this like everything else, soI recommend the mixing and incorporating of files after the summer so you are as prepared onthis disad as you can be, this is especially true with the China Coal DA because I started itaround 2 hours ago, so theres not a lot of stuff on it in this file, but you can defiantly findmore stuffFirstMonster In the ShadowThis disad is actually two disads hidden in one that is meant to screw the 2ac over by makingthem think they answered the disad, when they are actually conceding half the offense, whichmeans they will probably loose the round. The two disads are:

1. Clean Coal GoodA. UniquenessWe are developing clean coal nowcoal companies want to do itfor public relations and profits, McCain and Obama like it, the DOE likes, yadayada special intrest groups, whatever.

B. Linki. NecessityThe aff makes an alternative to coal, which undercuts theneed to clean coal because we have alternatives that are emit the samesmall amount of greenhouse gassesii. ProfitabilityThis is probably the biggest inhibitor to the development ofclean coal now, by moving towards alternatives the aff decreases thedependence on coal. This makes it no longer profitable to develop the coalalso these profits are key to further conduct R&D

C. Internal ImpactsHow we solve the case/we make coal a lot betteri. WarmingClean Coal takes carbon dioxide out of the coal and allows it toburn without emitting greenhouse gasses into the air. It solves all their coalbad arguments that are not predicated off of mining.ii. ElectricityCoal is literally the best thing we have in the US to produce

electricity; our evidence indicates that only by cleaning coal can we makethe use of coal sustainable in the long run so we can use it for electricityiii. Hydrogen Fuel CellsClean Coal technologies are very similar tohydrogen fuel cell technologies so in the process of making Clean Coaltechnologies we would also develop hydrogen fuel cells, this is donethrough a project called Futuregen. Now tell me if that isnt just freakingawesome. And there is definitely evidence that indicates that hydrogen fuelcells solve oil dependence and stuff.vi. Natural GasNatural Gas is the alternative to coal because its so dangcheap, clean coal is the only way to stop the inevitable reintroduction ofnatural gasses into the marketv. OilClean Coal technologies help make an alternative to oil by convertingcoal into liquid forms that are similar to oil. HMMM SOLVES THE AFF, I

THINK SOOOO.D. External Impacts

i. Affordable EnergyCoal is very freaking cheap, and its only sustainablein the world in which we can make it clean. The unsustainability ofenergy/electricity causes price spikes in energy kills the economy, and wah,wah, wah, lalala Bearden.ii. China Energy CooperationChina wants to cooperate to clean their coal,I didnt quite find an impact to this, but if you really wanna run this go cutit yourself.



6/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

iii. China ModelingChina would model our clean coalthis is key toinitiating clean coal in China which is key to solve pollution in China so thedragon doesnt cry, and sustain their economy.iv. Coal IndustryThis is your bread and butter. Clean Coal is key for theCoal Industry to maintain strong public relations and environmentalcredibility, which is key for them to maintain competitiveness in the market

and profits. This kills the national economy, you should actually readthrough these cards because they are amazing.v. CompetitivenessClean Coal would provide a market that the US couldlead innovation which makes us competitive in the market.

2. Coal IndustryA. UniquenessThe coal industry is maintaining mad profitability nowB. LinkAlternative Energy X would push coal out of the market do to competitionC. ImpactLack of coal profits the Coal Industry dies



7/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

STRATEGY SHEET/ABBREVIATIONS GUIDE

3. China Coal IndustryThis arg is not in the 1ncA. UniquenessChina is importing tons of oil and mining only a little themselvesB. LinkThe plan would effectively destroy the U.S. Coal Market killing the abilityfor them to sustain Chinas energy dependence, which causes China to have toproduce their own coalC. ImpactChinas Coal Industry is pure freaking evilI mean no joke

SecondWelcome to the pit of doom!!!!!!!!!!!! (doom)!!!!!!!!!! (doom)!!!!!!!!! (doom)!!!!One of the stronger things about this disad is that you dont need to defend a lot and the fewthings that you do have to defendthe aff cant straight turn

A. Link TurnIf they link turn, they take the affs solvency out because the link is off ofdecreasing the consumption of coal

B. Impact turnThe disad doesnt actually have to defend a specific type of clean coal,which means that when they read clean coal badyou can say that you dont use thetechnology that their evidence talks about (i.e. IGCC) or that you cause R&D for a newtechnology thats better ect.

ARD&D = Analysis, Research, Development, andDemonstrationASU = Air Separation UnitBACT = Best Available Control TechnologyBAU = Business As UsualCAIR = Clean Air Interstate RuleCAMR = Clean Air Mercury RuleCCS = Carbon Capture and StorageCCT = Clean Coal TechnologyCFB = Circulating Fluid BedCGE = Computable General EquilibriumCOE = Cost of Electricity, /kWe-hCSLF = Carbon Sequestration Leadership ForumEOR = Enhanced Oil Recovery

EPPA = Emissions Prediction and Policy AnalysisModel (MIT)EPRI = Electric Power Research InstituteESP = Electrostatic Precipitator or PrecipitationFGD = Flue Gas DesulfurizationF-T = Fischer-TropschGHG = Greenhouse GasHHV = Higher Heating Value, kJ/kgHRSG = Heat Recovery Steam GeneratorICE = Injectivity, Capacity and EffectivenessIECM = Integrated Environmental Control Model(Carnegie Mellon University)IGCC = Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle

IPCC = Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChangeLAER = Lowest Achievable Emissions RateLLV = Lower Heating Value, kJ/kgLNG = Liquified Natural Gas

LPG = Liquified Petroleum GasMDEA = Methyl-Diethanol AmineMEA = Mono Ethanol AmineMMV = Measurement, Monitoring, andVerificationNAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality StandardsNG = Natural GasNGCC = Natural Gas Combined CycleNPV = Net Present ValueO&M = Operating and Maintenance Costs,/kWe-hPC = Pulverized CoalPDF = Probability-Density FunctionPDU = Process Demonstration Unit

PM = Particulate MatterPRB = Powder River BasinRD&D = Research, Development, andDemonstrationSC = SupercriticalSCPC = Supercritical Pulverized CoalSCR = Selective Catalytic ReductionSFC = Synthetic Fuel CorporationSIP = State Implementation PlanSNCR = Selective Non-Catalytic ReductionSNG = Synthetic Natural GasSUBC = SubcriticalTCR = Total Capital Required, $/kWe

TPC = Total Plant Cost, $/kWeUIC = Underground Injection ControlUSC = Ultra-SupercriticalUSGS = US Geological Survey



8/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DA 1NC

THE TRANSITION TO CLEAN COAL IS UNDERWAYCOAL INDUSTRIES AND PRESIDENTIALCANDITIDATES ARE PUSHING ITBUT NOT COMPLETE. HIGH PRICES OF THE TRANSITION ANDTHE INCREASING ABILITY TO RELY ON ALTERNATIVE ENRGIES, FROM INITIATIVE LIKE THE PLAN,WILL PREVENT THE TRANSITION. A TRANSITION TO CLEAN COAL IS KEY TO PREVENT ACID RAIN,DECREASE CO2 EMITIONS, AND SAVE THE COAL INDUSTRYCBS2008 (Clean Coal - Pipe Dream Or Next Big Thing?: Coal Industry Launches Ad Campaign To SupportEnergy Alternative, But Some Say Technology Hasn't Caught Up Yet, 6/20/08,http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/20/eveningnews/main4199506.shtml?source=RSSattr=SciTech_4199506)(CBS) Much has been made about the skyrocketing price of oil lately, with some saying that drilling in environmentally sensitive areas is a possible solution.

But, as CBS News correspondent Wyatt Andrews reports, utilities are testing technology to make one of America's most abundant fuelsource - coal - a cleaner alternative.Coal is, by far, the dirtiest way America makes its electric power, but a new ad campaign funded by theindustry promises a future where clean coal is a viable option.And it's not just the industry. Both presidential candidates , Barack Obama and John McCain, are pushing clean coal.But exactly what is the technology?

The cleanest coal plant in North America is operated by Tampa Electric, in the middle of rural Florida.They call it cleanbecause they don't burn coal exactly - they mix it with water and oxygen and convert it into a gas.According to company president John Ramil, gasifying coal allows the company to remove pollutants like sulphur, nitrogen andsoot, which virtually eliminates acid rain."And you can do it much cleaner than with the conventional coal technology," says Ramil.

That's the good news. But here's the problem."There is no such thing as clean coal," says James Hansen, NASA's expert on global warming, who says all coal plants, even TECO's, still emit millions of tons of carbon dioxide - the most threatening greenhousegas."There is no coal plant that captures the carbon dioxide and that's the major long-term pollutant," says Hansen.

But if carbon dioxide pollution is the problem with clean coal, many scientists believe there is a solution.They believe it's possible to recover most of the carbon dioxide and store it underground .The idea is called "capture and sequester," and a global race is on to learn how it should be done. One Norwegian firm is storing tons of carbon dioxide in rock cavesbeneath the North Sea. America's efforts to sequester carbon have stalled. The Department of Energy planned to funda plant, but pulled all funding when the price grew too high."They took seven years just to decide where they were going to make a pilot plant - and then they decided to cancel it," says Hansen.

And now, the failure to solve the carbon dioxide problem is a threat to coal itself. In the last five years, atleast 63 coal-fired power plants have been scrapped or defeated by public opposition.Florida Governor Charlie Crist helped pull the plug on the two clean coal plants because he says without a carbon

solution, clean coal is not an option."Until that time comes, we want to develop more solar, more nuclear, more wind," says Crist.Which is why the industry needs an ad campaign. Until the federal government funds the research on carbon dioxide, America'sreliance on coal is in long-term trouble.

PRODUCING CLEAN COAL IS KEY TO EFFECTIVE PR AND GROWTH OF THE COAL INDUSTRYWHICH IS KEY TO THE NATIONAL ECONOMYNational Coal Council1993 (2/93, THE ROLE OF U.S. COAL IN ENERGY, ECONOMYAND THE ENVIRONMENT SPECIAL REPORT, http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:uu96-hfv3JAJ:nationalcoalcouncil.org/Documents/THE%2520ROLE%2520OF%2520U.S.%2520COAL%2520IN%2520ENERGY,%2520ECONOMY.PDF)

The future of the U.S. coal industry is inextricably bound to public policies concerning energy, the economyand the environment. The purpose of this paper is to: Discuss the status of the U.S. coal i ndustry; and

Review the implications of coals role in U.S. energy, economic, and environmental policies.The potential of clean coal technology provides an enormous future opportunity for the United States.Energy efficiency can be improved and the environment protected while coal use expands to generateelectricity, promote growth, and improve the nations balance of payments. Coal, the nations largestsource of domestic energy, contributes both directly and indirectly to the U.S. economy.Direct Economic Contribution.The $21 billion in current value of annual coal production yields an impact of $81 billion onthe economy. While many U.S. industries have declined over the past two decades, the U.S. coal industry has increased its export position. The abundant coal resourcesof the U.S. provide opportunities to improve the nations balance of trade in the 1990s, strengthen basicinfrastructure, and employ advanced technologies in the U.S. and overseas.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/20/eveningnews/main4199506.shtml?source=RSSattr=SciTech_4199506http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/20/eveningnews/main4199506.shtml?source=RSSattr=SciTech_4199506http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:uu96-hfv3JAJ:nationalcoalcouncil.org/Documents/THE%2520ROLE%2520OF%2520U.S.%2520COAL%2520IN%2520ENERGY,%2520ECONOMY.PDFhttp://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:uu96-hfv3JAJ:nationalcoalcouncil.org/Documents/THE%2520ROLE%2520OF%2520U.S.%2520COAL%2520IN%2520ENERGY,%2520ECONOMY.PDFhttp://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:uu96-hfv3JAJ:nationalcoalcouncil.org/Documents/THE%2520ROLE%2520OF%2520U.S.%2520COAL%2520IN%2520ENERGY,%2520ECONOMY.PDFhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/20/eveningnews/main4199506.shtml?source=RSSattr=SciTech_4199506http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/20/eveningnews/main4199506.shtml?source=RSSattr=SciTech_4199506http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:uu96-hfv3JAJ:nationalcoalcouncil.org/Documents/THE%2520ROLE%2520OF%2520U.S.%2520COAL%2520IN%2520ENERGY,%2520ECONOMY.PDFhttp://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:uu96-hfv3JAJ:nationalcoalcouncil.org/Documents/THE%2520ROLE%2520OF%2520U.S.%2520COAL%2520IN%2520ENERGY,%2520ECONOMY.PDFhttp://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:uu96-hfv3JAJ:nationalcoalcouncil.org/Documents/THE%2520ROLE%2520OF%2520U.S.%2520COAL%2520IN%2520ENERGY,%2520ECONOMY.PDF


9/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

Indirect Economic Contribution.The U.S. economy and the standard of living it supports depend on coal, primarily in theform of electricity. Electric power is the largest and fastest growing end-use sector in energy. Coal is theprincipal fuel used to generate electricity. Availability of low-cost coal has enhanced the electrification ofthe U.S. economy.FINDINGS

The economic well-being of the United States depends substantially on coal, primarily in the form of electricity.Coal hasbeen the nations largest domestic source of energy for nearly a decade. Electric power, the largest and fastest

growing end-use sector in energy, is the primary market for coal. Accounting for 56% of total generation, low-cost coal contributed to theelectrification of the economy over the past twenty years. If coal had not been available to meet the growth in electric demand, consumers would have incurred over $190 billion in additional fuel costs since 1971.

Coal contributes over $80 billion annually to the economy and stimulates over one million jobs. Coal alsocontributes to the economy in terms of tax revenue, exports, and infrastructure and technologydevelopment. Further development of coal production, combustion, and emissions technologies can ensurethat coal continues to contribute to energy security, economic growth, and environmental protection.



10/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DA 1NC

U.S. ECONOMIC COLLAPSE ENSURES GLOBAL COLLAPSEBolton2006 (Peter J. Bolton is a Science Consultant, Global Economic Collapse - A New Global DarkAge, 8/1/06, http://verbewarp.blogspot.com/2006/07/global-economic-collapse-new-global.html)

The economy of the United States of America (USA) is about to collapse; and will do so within the next few months unless dire and drastic corrective steps are taken by the USA White House Administration and or

the Federal Reserve. As a direct result ofthis US economic collapse, Europes economy will shortly thereafter follow suit

with a resultant global aftermath that will cause the whole world to enter into an extended period ofsevere deflation and depression a new global dark age is now appearing on the event horizon. The indicators are now that these necessary dire and drastic correctivesteps will not be initiated; some ineffective measures will indubitably be introduced but merely to appease popular sentiment; but too late and with little corrective effect. Mr. BenBenanke of the Federal Reserve is outweighed by his legacy of the impending Greenspan spawned economic meltdown by a most obvious lack of expertise,lack of experience, lack of nerve (courage) and by policy directions emanating from his ideological orientedpolitical superiors in the White House, IMF, World Bank and elsewhere.There can now be no doubt at all, that thoseinstitutions responsible for the stewardship of the worlds economy are not dictating nor controlling US andglobal economic events and the darkness of this new age will depend on what is done now, prior to thispending event.

EXTINCTIONBearden2000 (Lieutenant Corporal T.E. Bearden is the Director at the Association of DistinguishedAmerican Scientists, a Fellow Emeritus at the Alpha Foundations Institute for Advanced Study, the Director

of the Association of Distinguished Scientists, and was a Lieutenant Corporal in the US Army, TheUnnecessary Energy Crisis, 6/24/00,http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/Unnecessary%20Energy%20Crisis.doc )History bears out that desperate nations take desperate actions. Prior to the final economic collapse, the stress onnations will have increased the intensity and number of their conflicts, to the point where the arsenals ofweapons of mass destruction (WMD) now possessed by some 25 nations, are almost certain to be released. As an example, suppose a starving NorthKorea launches nuclear weapons upon Japan and South Korea, including U.S. forces there, in a spasmodic suicidal response. Or suppose adesperate China whose long range nuclear missiles can reach the United States attacks Taiwan. In addition to immediate responses, the mutual treatiesinvolved in such scenarios will quickly draw other nations into the conflict, escalating it significantly. Strategicnuclear studies have shown for decades that, under such extreme stress conditions, once a few nukes are launched, adversaries and potentialadversaries are then compelled to launch on perception of preparations by one's adversary. The real legacy of the MADconcept is this side of the MAD coin that is almost never discussed. Without effective defense, the only chance a nation has to survive at all,is to launch immediate full-bore pre-emptive strikes and try to take out its perceived foes as rapidly and

massively as possible. As the studies showed, rapid escalation to full WMD exchange occurs, with a great percent of the WMD arsenals being unleashed .The resulting greatArmageddon will destroy civilization as we know it, and perhaps most of the biosphere, at least for manydecades.

http://verbewarp.blogspot.com/2006/07/global-economic-collapse-new-global.htmlhttp://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/Unnecessary%20Energy%20Crisis.dochttp://verbewarp.blogspot.com/2006/07/global-economic-collapse-new-global.htmlhttp://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/Unnecessary%20Energy%20Crisis.doc


11/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

OVERVIEW (NORMAL)

CLEAN COAL IS ON THE BRINK NOWONLY CONTINUED FOCUS CAN ENSURE A TRANSITIONTHIS IS KEY TO THE PROTECTION OF THE U.S. COAL INDUSTRY AND INDEPENDENTLY THE PLANUNDERCUTS THE PROFITS OF THE COAL INDUSTRY BY DECREASING DEPENDENCE THISCOLLAPSES THE US ECONOMY, THIS KILLS THE GLOBAL ECONOMYTHATS CBS 8, NATIONALCOAL COUNCIL 93, BOLTON 06THIS O/W AND TURNS THE CASEOUR BEARDEN EVIDENCE MAKES SEVERAL CLAIMS

A. MAGNITUDE1. HORIZONTAL ESCALATIONMUTUAL TREATIES WOULD BE DESTROYED BY THEPRE-EMPTIVE NATURE OF THE CONFLICTS, THIS DRAWS IN GLOBAL POWERS,2. VERTICAL ESCALATION DESPERATE NATIONS TAKE DESPERATE ACTIONSENSURING NUCLEAR ESCALATION ENSUREING COLLAPSE OF THE BIOSPHERE ANDEXTINCTION

B. TIMEFRAMEIMPACTS OCCUR AS SOON AS SOLVENCY DOES DUE TO THE ZERO SUMNATURE OF PROFITABILITY

C. PROBABILITYPERCEPTION AND HAIRTRIGGER NATURE OF OUR IMPACT MAKESNATIONS ENGAGE THE WAR EVEN BEFORE THE ECONOMY COLLAPSES SO THEY CANPROTSECT THEIRSELVESD. TURNS CASE

E. SOLVES CASE--



12/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

OVERVIEW (IF THEY DROP CONSUMPTION)

THEY CONCEDE OUR SECOND INTERNAL LINKTHE COAL INDUSTRY IS STRONG NOWDECREASED DEMAND BY THE PLAN WOULD COLLAPSE THE INDUSTRY KILLING THE DOMESTICECONOMY THIS MEANS WE HAVE 100% RISK OF OUR IMPACTTHATS CBS 8, NATIONAL COALCOUNCIL 93, BOLTON 06THIS O/W AND TURNS THE CASEOUR BEARDEN EVIDENCE MAKES SEVERAL CLAIMS

A. MAGNITUDE1. HORIZONTAL ESCALATIONMUTUAL TREATIES WOULD BE DESTROYED BY THEPRE-EMPTIVE NATURE OF THE CONFLICTS, THIS DRAWS IN GLOBAL POWERS2. VERTICAL ESCALATION DESPERATE NATIONS TAKE DESPERATE ACTIONSENSURING NUCLEAR ESCALATION ENSUREING COLLAPSE OF THE BIOSPHERE ANDEXTINCTION

B. TIMEFRAMEIMPACTS OCCUR AS SOON AS SOLVENCY DOES DUE TO THE ZERO SUMNATURE OF PROFITABILITY

C. PROBABILITYPERCEPTION AND HAIRTRIGGER NATURE OF OUR IMPACT MAKESNATIONS ENGAGE THE WAR EVEN BEFORE THE ECONOMY COLLAPSES SO THEY CANPROTECT THEIRSELVESD. TURNS CASEE. SOLVES CASE--



13/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

IMPACT ANALYSIS CARDS TO ADD IN TO THE OVERVIEW IF YOUWANT

AND THE IMPACT OF ECONOMIC COLLAPSE IS SEEN LONG BEFORE IT FULLY OCCURSBearden2000 (Lieutenant Corporal T.E. Bearden is the Director at the Association of DistinguishedAmerican Scientists, a Fellow Emeritus at the Alpha Foundations Institute for Advanced Study, the Director

of the Association of Distinguished Scientists, and was a Lieutenant Corporal in the US Army, Zero-PointEnergy, 12/29/00, http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/042500%20-%20modified.htm )So about a year or two ahead of the "full economic collapse", we will be in a period of such increasedconflicts between nations, and with those conflicts increasing in intensity and sophistication. According to DefenseSecretary Cohen, some 25 nations now have weapons of mass destruction (WMD) such as nuclear missiles, nuclear bombers and submarines, and/or chemical weapons, biological weapons, etc. and more nationsare acquiring them. The Secretary also alluded to electromagnetic weapons of great power, being used to engineer the weather, initiate earthquakes, etc.almost certainly referring to the longitudinal EM waveinterferometry weapons now possessed by seven or eight nations. Here is his exact statement:

ECON COLLAPSE HAS A 99% CHANCE OF CAUSING AN ARMAGEDDONBearden2000 (Lieutenant Corporal T.E. Bearden is the Director at the Association of DistinguishedAmerican Scientists, a Fellow Emeritus at the Alpha Foundations Institute for Advanced Study, the Directorof the Association of Distinguished Scientists, and was a Lieutenant Corporal in the US Army, Zero-PointEnergy, 12/29/00, http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/042500%20-%20modified.htm )

Just prior to the terrible collapse of the World economy,with the crumbling well underway and rising, it is inevitable that some ofthe weapons of mass destruction will be used by one or more nations on others. An interesting result thenas all the old strategic studies used to showis that everyone will fire everything as fast as possible against their perceivedenemies. The reason is simple: When the mass destruction weapons are unleashed at all, the only chance a nation has to survive is todesperately try to destroy its perceived enemies before they destroy it. So there will erupt a spasmodicunleashing of the long range missiles, nuclear arsenals, and biological warfare arsenals of the nations asthey feel the economic collapse, poverty, death, misery, etc. a bit earlier. The ensuing holocaust is certainto immediately draw in the major nations also, and literally a hell on earth will result. In short, we will get the greatArmageddon we have been fearing since the advent of the nuclear genie. Right now, my personal estimate is that we haveabout a 99% chance of that scenario or some modified version of it, resulting.

http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/042500%20-%20modified.htmhttp://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/042500%20-%20modified.htmhttp://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/042500%20-%20modified.htmhttp://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/042500%20-%20modified.htm


14/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

COAL DAIMPACT TERMINAL UNIQUENESS: COAL SUSTAINABLE/A2FINITE

COAL PRODUCTION IS KEY TO AMERICAN ECONOMIC PRODUCTIVITY AND WE HAVE ENOUGHCOAL TO MAINTAIN THE PRODUCTION FOR ANOTHER 250 YEARS DESPITE GROWING DEMANDBauer2007 (CARL O. BAUER, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ENERGY,TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, DEPARTMENT

OF ENERGY in a Hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for the 110th Congress,United States Senate, in the First Session, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY, 8/1/07, U.S. GOVERNMENTPRINTING OFFICE, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais)

Thank you Mr. Chairman. I appreciate this opportunity to provide testimony on the Department of Energys advanced clean coal technologies and theprogram for carbon capture and storage.

The economic prosperity of the United States over the past century has been built upon an abundance offossil fuels in North America. The United States fossil fuel resources represent a tremendous nationalasset. Making full use of this domestic asset in a responsible manner enables the country to fulfill itsenergy requirements, minimize detrimental environmental impacts, and positively contribute to nationalsecurity.Given current technologies, coal prices, and rates of consumption, the United States has approximately a250-year supply of coal available. Coal-fired power plants supply about half of our electricity and are expected to continue to do so through mid-century. Becauseelectricity production increases at a rate of about 2 percent per year, the rate of coal use will increase

proportionally. However, the continued use of this secure domestic resource will be dependent on thedevelopment of cost-effective technology options to meet both economic and environmental goals,including the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

THE SOONEST TIME OF COAL PEAK IS ANOTHER 100 YEARSMinqi2007 (Li Minqi is a Staff Writer for the Journal of Contemporary Asia Peak oil, the rise of China andIndia, and the global energy crisis 11/1/07, http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-the-rise-of.html)Among the fossil fuels, coal is relatively abundant. The world's total identified coal resource is said to be 35trillion tonnes (Cui, 2006: 16). Much of it, however, may never be recovered due to declining net energy returns (the net energy output that can be produced for each unit of energy input) andenvironmental constraints (Heinberg, 2003: 129-32). The world's economically recoverable coal is estimated to be about 750 billion tonnes of coal equivalent. At the current rate ofproduction, it is sufficient to last more than 200 years (Boyle et al., 2003: 167). Trainer (2006a) used a high estimate of the world's potentially recoverable coal,at two trillion tonnes of coal equivalent. At the current rate of production, this would be sufficient to last more than 600 years.[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

However, with economic growth, coal could be depleted much faster. If coal consumption grows at 2% ayear, then the world's total recoverable coal would be completely depleted before the end of this century(based on the lower estimate)or by the mid-twenty-second century (based on the higher estimate).

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-the-rise-of.htmlhttp://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-the-rise-of.htmlhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-the-rise-of.htmlhttp://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-the-rise-of.html


15/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DAUNIQUENESS: CLEAN COAL COMING NOW

NEW COAL PLANTS WONT EMIT CO2Goodell2008 (Jeff Goodell is the Author of Big Coal: The Dirty Secret Behind America's Energy Future,How Clean Coal Cooks Your Brain, 6/16/08,http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008131.html )Big Coal insists they have solution for CO2. It's called carbon capture and storage. In most scenarios,capturing and storing CO2 from coal involves building a new kind of power plant that uses heat andpressure to gasify the coal, instead of burning it. In these new plants, the CO2 can be removed,compressed into an oil-like fluid, then injected underground in abandoned gas and oil wells or deep salineaquifers.

THE US IS LEADING ON DEVELOPING CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGYTHEY WILL DEVELOP IT NOW,AND IT WILL SOLVEBingaman2007 (JEFF BINGAMAN is a Senator from New Mexico in a Hearing before the Committee onEnergy and Natural Resources for the 110th Congress, United States Senate, in the First Session, CLEANCOAL TECHNOLOGY, 8/1/07, U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais)

The United States, largely through the good works of the National Laboratories, has been a leader in the development of clean coaltechnology. Over the last few decades technologies have been produced and policies have beenimplemented, to significantly reduce emissions of pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxidesand mercury. The next challenge is to deal with the issue of carbon dioxide emissions from coal generation

Today, those emissions are roughly double the emissions produced from burning natural gas.

WE CONTROL THE DIRECTION OF UNIQUENESSTHE DOE HAS BEEN PURSUITING CLEAN COALSINCE THE 80STHEY HAVE BEEN EMPIRICALLY SUCESSFULBauer2007 (CARL O. BAUER, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ENERGY,TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, DEPARTMENTOF ENERGY in a Hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for the 110th Congress,United States Senate, in the First Session, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY, 8/1/07, U.S. GOVERNMENTPRINTING OFFICE, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais)In 1985, the Congress authorized DOE to initiate the clean coal technology demonstration programto provideadditional impetus to move technologies from the laboratories to the marketplace.This program evolved into the power plant improvement initiativeand then to the clean coal power initiative at present. The purpose of this cost-shared program was to

develop and demonstrate at commercial scale, innovative technologies that would help industry to meetthe strict environmental requirements, and yet not impinge on the economy of the United States.More than 20 technologies from the program have achieved commercial success in technologies that arerelated to low-NOX burners, selective catalytic reduction, flue gas desulphurization, fluid-bed combustion,and now mercury. The National Research Council estimated that these technologies have yielded sales totaling more than $27 billion.

CARBON CATCHING WILL BE INITIATEDPUTTING CLEAN COAL IS ON THE BRINK OFDEVELOPMENTBauer2007 (CARL O. BAUER, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ENERGY,TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, DEPARTMENTOF ENERGY in a Hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for the 110th Congress,United States Senate, in the First Session, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY, 8/1/07, U.S. GOVERNMENTPRINTING OFFICE, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais)

Announcements ofthe third solicitation under

CCPI is planned in this year. The focus is on carbon capture and storagetechnologies. Fossil Energies core R&D program provides for the development of new cloth andenvironmentally effective approaches to use coal at predemonstration scale. These include advancedresearch, advanced turbines and hydrogen turbines, carbon sequestration and capture, fuel cellsgasification, hydrogen and fuels production, and innovation for existing plants. Details on these programs are in my written testimony.

Today, nearly three out of every four coal- burning power plants in this country, is equipped with technologiesthat can trace their roots back to the clean coal technology program.For example, the current generation of low-NOX burners alone, is a major clean coal story. Nearly $1.5 billion of these burnershavebeen sold and installed. Selective catalytic reduction now costs half what it did in the 1980's and systems are on order or under construction for 30 percent of the coal-fired power plants. Flue gasscrubbers are a third of their cost compared to the 1970's and are more reliable, less costly, and more efficient. Fluidized- bed technology development in the core

http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008131.htmlhttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008131.htmlhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008131.htmlhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais


16/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

coal R&D program was first demonstrated in that program and has recorded global sales of over $10billion. In Tampa, Florida and West Terra Haute, Indiana, the first pioneering full-size coal gasification powerplants, IGCCs, have opened a new pathway for the next generation of clean fuel flexible power plants.More recently within the coal R&D program, the carbon sequestration regional partnerships have broughtan enormous amount of capability and experience together to work on the challenge of both infrastructuredevelopment and storing huge volumes of CO2 underground permanently. Together with DOE, the partnerships secure the activeparticipation of more than 500 entities representing more than 350 industrial companies, engineering firms, State agencies, non-governmental organizations, and other supporting organizations.

The partnerships are conducting field tests to validate the efficacy of carbon capture and storagetechnologiesand a variety of geologic and terrestrial storage sites throughout the United States and Canada. Extensive data information gathered duringthe initial stages of the project, of the seven partnerships, identified the most promising opportunities for carbonsequestration in their regions and are performing 25 geologic field sites and 11 terrestrial field tests.In conclusion, DOEs clean coal R&D program has a successful track record and a promising future that willultimately lead to pollution-free coal plants.



17/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DAUNIQUENESS: CLEAN COAL COMING NOW

GLASIFICATION AND CARBON CAPTURE TECHNOLOGY IS ON THE BRINK OF CREATING CLEANCOAL NOWCONTINUTED DEVELOPMENT IS KEYDorgan2007 (BYRON L. DORGAN is a Senator from North Dakota in a HEARING BEFORE ASUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, for the 110th Congress, United States Senate, inthe First Session, CLEAN COAL, OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT, NEW ENERGY OPPORTUNITIES THROUGHCARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE, 8/13/07, U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110%5Fsenate%5Fhearings&docid=f:38423.pdf)Gasification is a pre-combustion pathway to convert coalor other carbon-containing feedstocks into synthesis gas, a mixture composedprimarily of carbon monoxide and hydrogen;the synthesis gas, in turn, can be used as a fuel to generate electricity or steam, or as abasic raw material to produce hydrogen, high-value chemicals, and liquid transportation fuels. DOE isdeveloping advanced gasification technologies to meet the most stringent environmental regulations inany State and facilitate the efficient capture of CO2 for subsequent sequestrationa pathway to near-zero atmospheric emissions coal-based energy. Gasification plants are complex systems that rely on alarge number of interconnected processes and technologies. Advances in the current state-of-the-art, aswell as development of novel approaches, could help reveal the technical pathways enabling gasificationto meet the demands of future markets while contributing to energy security.

PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES ARE PUSHING CLEAN COAL FOR POLITICAL BENIFITSMieszkowski2004 (Katharine Mieszkowski is a Senior Writer for Salon Premium Media Group Coal:Clean, green power machine?; Forget about that nasty oil or radioactive nuclear waste: If you want tobreathe fresh air, says the coal industry, burn, baby, burn!, 10/5/04,http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2004/10/05/clean_coal/index.html)Environmental and corporate watchdog groups have taken pains to debunk the nonprofit front group'strumped-up "Don't worry, love coal" claims, but in an election year where coal-loving swing states such asWest Virginia and Pennsylvania are very much in play, both presidential candidates have embraced the"clean coal" mantra. That's easy enough for them to do even if their positions on global warming differ,because "clean coal" is one of those catchphrases that mean less the closer you look at them. Ultimately,"clean coal" is an umbrella term for many technologies, everything from widely available scrubbers thatreduce sulfur dioxide, which causes acid rain, to cutting-edge carbon-sequestration technologies that holdout the hope of capturing greenhouse gases and storing them under the earth in vast geologic reserves.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38423.pdfhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38423.pdfhttp://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2004/10/05/clean_coal/index.htmlhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38423.pdfhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38423.pdfhttp://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2004/10/05/clean_coal/index.html


18/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DAUNIQUENESS: A2 FUTUREGEN

THE COLLAPSE OF FUTUREGEN DIDNT KILL CLEAN COAL BUT RATHER WILL SPEEDPRODUCTION UPMontague2008 (Peter Montague is a Staff Writer for Rachels Democracy & Health News, A Rocky Startfor 'Clean Coal', 2/7/08, http://www.celsias.com/article/a-rocky-start-for-clean-coal/ )So it seems apparent that the Department of Energy beheaded the Mattoon Futuregen project not to derail so-called"clean coal" but to accelerate its development, aiming to get CCS demonstration projects going morequickly in more places simultaneously.Like the mythical Hydra, a giant many-headed serpent with poisonous breath, Futuregen and its progeny will be hard to kill.

CLEAN COAL IS INEVITABLEINDUSTRIAL PUSH AND BIPARTISAN POLITICAL SUPPORT, THISOVERWHELMS THE RECENT COLLAPSE OF FUTUREGENMontague2008 (Peter Montague is a Staff Writer for Rachels Democracy & Health News, A Rocky Startfor 'Clean Coal', 2/7/08, http://www.celsias.com/article/a-rocky-start-for-clean-coal/ )Naturally, with the coal, oil, automobile, mining and railroad industries depending upon it, carbon capture andstorage will not be easily derailed. Both political parties enthusiastically endorse the coal industry's "cleancoal" campaign. In his 2008 State of the Union address Jan. 28, President Bush said, "Let us fund new technologies that can generatecoal power while capturing carbon emissions." And, as noted above, both Senator Barack Obama and Senator HillaryClinton support carbon capture and storage.So Futuregen may be dead, but carbon capture and storage is anything but.

http://www.precaution.org/http://www.celsias.com/article/a-rocky-start-for-clean-coal/http://www.precaution.org/http://www.celsias.com/article/a-rocky-start-for-clean-coal/http://www.precaution.org/http://www.celsias.com/article/a-rocky-start-for-clean-coal/http://www.precaution.org/http://www.celsias.com/article/a-rocky-start-for-clean-coal/


19/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DALINK: GLOBAL WARMING

COAL DEPENDENCE WILL RAMAIN HIGHCLEAN COAL COULD REDUCE EMISSIONSBUT SHORTTERM GLOBAL WARMING IS KEY TO CREATE MOTIVATION FOR INNOVATIONCoal Industry Advisory Board2008 (The Coal Industry Advisory Board is a group of high-levelexecutives from coal-related industrial enterprises, under the International Energy Agency, Clean Coal

Technologies: Accelerating Commercial and Policy Drivers for Deployment, 08,http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:an3800g0z3MJ:www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB

_2008.pdf+https://www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB_2008.pdf )Coal is and will remain the worlds most abundant and widely distributed fossil fuel. Burning coal, however, canpollute and it produces carbon dioxide. Clean coal technologies address this problem. The widespreaddeployment of pollution-control equipment to reduce sulphur dioxide, NOx and dust emissions from industry is just oneexample which has brought cleaner air to many countries. Since the 1970s, various policy and regulatory measures have created a growing commercial market for these clean coal technologies, with the result that

costs have fallen and performance has improved. More recently, the need to tackle rising CO2 emissions to address climate change meansthat clean coal technologies now extend to include those for CO2 capture and storage (CCS).

http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:an3800g0z3MJ:www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB_2008.pdf+https://www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB_2008.pdfhttp://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:an3800g0z3MJ:www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB_2008.pdf+https://www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB_2008.pdfhttp://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:an3800g0z3MJ:www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB_2008.pdf+https://www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB_2008.pdfhttp://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:an3800g0z3MJ:www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB_2008.pdf+https://www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2008/Clean_Coal_CIAB_2008.pdf


20/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DALINK: RENEWABLES

REPLACEMENT OF OLD COAL PLANTS MAKE NOW KEYITS ONLY A QUESTION IF WE USE CLEANCOAL OR A RENEWABLEWNA2008 (World Nuclear Association"Clean Coal" Technologies, 2/08, http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf83.html)New "clean coal" technologies are addressing this problem so that the world's enormous resources of coalcan be utilised for future generations without contributing to global warming. Much of the challenge is incommercialising the technology so that coal use remains economically competitive despite the cost ofachieving "zero emissions".As many coal-fired power stations approach retirement, their replacement gives much scope for 'cleaner'electricity. Alongside nuclear power and harnessing renewable energy sources, one hope for this is via"clean coal" technologies, such as are now starting to receive substantial R&D funding.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf83.htmlhttp://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf83.htmlhttp://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf83.htmlhttp://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf83.html


21/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DALINK: RPS

RPS WOULDNT EXCLUDE COAL WITH CARBON CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION ALSO KNOWN ASCLEAN COALTHIS CREATES A DISINCENTIVE FOR CLEAN COALMontgomery2007 (W. David Montgomery is a Reporter for CRA International and a Writer for theAmerican Enterprise Institute, California's Climate Law: Boon or Boondoggle?Transcript, 6/28/07,http://www.aei.org/events/filter.all,eventID.1516/transcript.asp )

The idea of Renewable Portfolio Standard is to create a set of more or less market-based instruments; youactually create something you can trade. But it only includes what are classified as renewables, and renewables generally mean wind, solar, and biomass.I'm in a little trouble of being sure about wind, biomass as renewable. Pennsylvania includes waste coal asa renewable resource so there is a certain amount of the politically correct resource, but coal with carboncapture and sequestration, which effectively removes 90 percent of emissions. Nuclear power, which hasno emissions, are almost never included as part of the Renewable Portfolio Standard.So it is a little hard to see what the policy problem is that the Renewable Portfolio Standard is trying to address other than creating a market for people who produce wind, solar, and a couple of other kinds of

energy.The difficulty is that, when that Renewable Portfolio Standard is binding and forces, for example, a lot of windin the market and there is also an emission cap, the Renewable Portfolio Standard drives out in ourmodeling coal with carbon capture and sequestration.So something that costs 50 percent more is forced into the market and replaces what would otherwisehave been chosen under the motivation of the emission cap, which is a much cheaper way of getting to exactly the same result for greenhouse gas emissions. And I would be more broad about it; I would say, Wehave sulfur regulations, we have mercury regulations, we have NOx regulations. And all of those set up the incentive to choose the cost minimizing fuel and the RPS as kind of looking for a problem to solve, butforcing a particular way of meeting all of our environmental aspirations.

THE PLAN WOULD EXCLUDE CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGIES WHICH DISINCENTIVISES THEIR USE

AND DEVELOPMENTJosten2007 (Brus Josten is the Executive Vice President for the Chamber of Commerce of the UnitedStates of America in a Letter to Rep. John Dingell and Rick Boucher, 6/15/07http://energycommerce.house.gov/Climate_Change/RSP%20feedback/US%20Chamber%2006%2015%2007.pdf)One of the major drawbacks to current and RPS bills that have circulated through Congress is the definition of what energysources are renewable. Clean, safe, and reliable energy sources such as hydropower, nuclear power, andclean coal technology have typically been excluded from this definition. As a result, the RPS accomplishesprecisely what energy legislation should not do: it picks winners and losers. Should Congress choose to bind all states to a baselinerenewable portfolio standardwhich, again, the Chamber does not consider necessarythen it must strive to be as inclusive as possible. If the true policy goal of an RPS is toencourage energy production, there is no legitimate reason why certain clean, safe energy producers areleft standing at the door while others benefit.

http://www.aei.org/events/filter.all,eventID.1516/transcript.asphttp://energycommerce.house.gov/Climate_Change/RSP%20feedback/US%20Chamber%2006%2015%2007.pdfhttp://energycommerce.house.gov/Climate_Change/RSP%20feedback/US%20Chamber%2006%2015%2007.pdfhttp://www.aei.org/events/filter.all,eventID.1516/transcript.asphttp://energycommerce.house.gov/Climate_Change/RSP%20feedback/US%20Chamber%2006%2015%2007.pdfhttp://energycommerce.house.gov/Climate_Change/RSP%20feedback/US%20Chamber%2006%2015%2007.pdf


22/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DABRINK

WERE ARE ON THE BRINK OF CREATING CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY CONTINUED EFFORTS AREKEYTHESE CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGIES WOULD SOVLEBauer2007 (CARL O. BAUER, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ENERGY,TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, DEPARTMENTOF ENERGY in a Hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for the 110th Congress,United States Senate, in the First Session, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY, 8/1/07, U.S. GOVERNMENTPRINTING OFFICE, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais)

Today, nearly three out of every four coal-burning power plants in this country are equipped with technologiesthat can trace their roots back to the Clean Coal Technology Program. Approaches demonstrated throughthe program include coal processing to produce clean fuels, combustion modification to control emissions,post-combustion cleanup of flue gas, and repowering with advanced power generation systems. Theseefforts helped accelerate production of cost-effective compliance options to address environmental issuesassociated with coal use. Relative to carbon capture and storage, DOE is making significant progress indeveloping the technologies and infrastructure needed for deployment of these technologies in a futurecarbon-constrained world. Evidence of this progress includes:The Carbon Sequestration Atlas of the United States and Canada, developed by NETL, the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (Partnerships), and the National Carbon Sequestration Database andGeographical Information System, contains information on stationary sources for CO2 emissions, geologic formations with sequestration potential, and terrestrial ecosystems with potential for enhanced carbonuptake, all referenced to their geographic location to enable matching sources and sequestration sites.

Carbon dioxide capture technology is being developed for solvent, sorbent, membrane, and oxy-

combustion systems that, if successfully developed, would be capable of capturing greater than 90 percenof the flue gas carbon dioxide at a significant cost reduction when compared to state-of-the-art, amine-based capture systems. Research and systems analysis have identified potential cost reductions of 3045percent for the capture of CO2.In addition, ionic liquid membranes and absorbents are being developed for capture of CO2 from power plants. Ionic liquid membranes have beendeveloped at NETL for pre-combustion applications that surpass polymers in terms of CO2 selectivity and permeability at elevated temperatures.Field projects have demonstrated the ability to map CO2 injected into an underground formation at a much higher resolution than previously anticipated and confirmed the ability of perfluorocarbon tracers totrack CO2 movement through a reservoir.The Carbon Sequestration Regional Partnerships have brought an enormous amount of capability and experience together to work on the challenge of infrastructure development. Together with DOE, thePartnerships secured the active participation of more than 500 individuals representing more than 350 industrial companies, engineering firms, state agencies, non-governmental organizations, and other supportingorganizations.The Partnerships are conducting field tests to validate the efficacy of carbon capture and storage technologies in a variety of geologic storage sites throughout the United States and Canada. Using the extensivedata and information gathered during the initial stages of the project, the 7 Partnerships identified the most promising opportunities for carbon sequestration in their Regions and are performing 25 geologic fieldtests.

Developing the technologies needed to support a widespread expansion of CO 2 EOR could substantiallyincrease existing U.S. reserves and production.The DOE efforts listed above are providing the elements needed to enable this expansion by advancing capturetechnologies to ensure a reliable low-cost supply of CO2 and improved EOR technologies to optimize for carbon sequestration co-benefits.

WERE ON THE BRINK OF DEVELOPMENT NOWCONTINUED DEVELOPMENT IS KEY

Harper2007 (Ronald R. Harper is the Chief Executive Officer and General Manager for Basin ElectricPower Cooperative in a Hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for the 110thCongress, United States Senate, in the First Session, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY, 8/1/07, U.S.GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE,http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais)Basin believes that we are on the threshold of tremendous opportunity with respect to continuing the use of fossilfuels in this country. Technology must, however, be developed to use this resource much more wisely andefficiently, including addressing how to capture carbon dioxide.The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was a step in the right direction by providing taxincentives, loan guarantees and other programs to encourage the commercial development of the next generation of clean coal technologies.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais


23/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DAINTERNAL LINK: ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESSKEY

CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGYS ARE ON THE BRINK OF BEING DEVELOPED NOW MAKINGMAINTAINACE OF ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS THE ONLY BARRIER TO ADOPTIONTHISSOLVES CLIMATE CHANGE AND WOULD SUBSTITUE OIL

Science Daily2006 (Ultra-clean Coal: Could The Price Now Be Right To Help Fight Climate Change?,3/14/06, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060314085423.htm )ScienceDaily (Mar. 14, 2006) A new chemical process for removing unwanted minerals from coal could lead toreductions in carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power stations.

There is already a way of burning coal in a cleaner, more efficient fashion that would reduce carbon dioxideemissions: this is where the coal is turned into a gas and used to drive a turbine. However, problems with cleaning the coal before it is burnthave made generating electricity in this way very expensive. This new chemical process could make itmore commercially viable.Under development by a University of Nottingham team with EPSRC funding , the new approach involves using chemicals to dissolve unwantedminerals in the coal and then regenerating the chemicals again for re-use. This avoids the expense of using fresh chemicals each time, aswell as the need to dispose of them, which can have an environmental impact. By removing unwanted minerals before the coal enters the power plant the new process helps protect the turbines from corrosiveparticles.

The aim is to cut unwanted minerals in coal from around 10% to below 0.05%, making the coal 'ultraclean'. Removing these minerals before using the coal to generate power prevents the formation of harmful particles during electricity production. To do this, the team is using specific chemicals to react withthe minerals to form soluble products which can be separated from the coal by filtration. This process is known as 'leaching'. Hydrofluoric acid is the main chemical being tested. The chemicals not only dissolve the

minerals but are also easy to regenerate from the reaction products, so they are constantly recycled. It is this aspect that has largely been overlooked in past research, but is virtually essential if chemical coal-cleaning is to be environmentally and commercially viable.

Dr Karen Steel of the School of Chemical, Environmental and Mining Engineering is leading the project."A lot of research took place in the 1970s and 1980s tosee if coal-cleaning was viable," she says. "The conclusion was that it was too expensive. With the environmenthigh on the global agenda and coal certain to remain a key energy source for decades, it makes sense tosee if the perception is still justified today."If it proves technically viable and economically competitive, the new process could help ensure that worldcoal reserves are harnessed with less impact on climate change.Background information

The new process could also help ensure commercial take-up of high-efficiency "combined cycle" power technologies, which have potential to deliver significant carbon dioxide reductions. A combined cycle uses botgas and steam turbines to produce electricity, with the waste heat from the gas turbines used to heat the steam turbines. By increasing generating efficiency, this reduces both the amount of fuel required and theemissions produced per unit of electricity generated.In combined cycles where coal is gasified ('coal gasification'), mineral matter in mined coal gives rise to corrosive particles in the gas, causing severe damage to the turbine that generates electricity. There are twoways of protecting the turbine -- removing the particles from the gas before it reaches the turbine, or removing unwanted minerals before the coal enters the power plant. The new process focuses on the secondoption.Coal gasification involves the use of steam to turn coal into the gases carbon monoxide and hydrogen. These are then combusted in a gas turbine, offering efficiency gains that reduce the amount of carbon dioxideproduced by 30-50%, compared with conventional coal combustion.

The University of Nottingham research project "Development of a Process for Production of Ultra-Clean Coal" began in June 2005 and will run until October 2007. It is receiving EPSRC funding of just over 126,000.This is one of many initiatives worldwide looking into ways of using coal to generate electricity more cleanly.Coal currently meets one-third of the UK's electricity needs and will play a key role in meeting growing global energy demand in the decades ahead. Identifying and deploying effective ways of harnessing it at

acceptable environmental and economic cost is an urgent priority for the global energy industry.There are two ways to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants -- (i) increase the thermal efficiency of the power generation process and so produce fewer carbon dioxide emissions per unit of electricitygenerated, and (ii) capture the carbon dioxide for l ong-term storage in secure geological structures. Both are necessary for fighting climate change.At present, natural gas is the preferred fossil fuel for UK electricity generation as it gives a high thermal efficiency on combustion. However, gas resources are becoming scarcer than coal, so efforts are now focusingon increasing the thermal efficiency of coal-fired power stations to match the thermal efficiency of natural gas-fired power stations.

Carbon dioxide has been identified as the main gas contributing to climate change. Climate change is nowaccepted as a fact by an overwhelming majority of the global scientific community.Potential uses for ultra-clean coal, apart from power generation, include production of heavy fuel oil,graphite and carbon fibres. Dr Steel's research has further benefits. As the chemicals are being regenerated, valuableadditional products are made, e.g. pure silica -- a raw material used in the manufacture of a huge range of products such as silicon chips and solar cells.The ultra-cleancoal itself also has non-fuel uses. As a raw material for manufacturing high purity carbon-based products,e.g. electrodes for the aluminium industry, it could act as a substitute for oil.

THE ABILITY TO MAINTAIN PROFITABLITY AND SUCESSFUL DEPLOYMENT IS KEY TO SUCCESSFULCLEAN COALBauer2007 (CARL O. BAUER, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ENERGY,TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, DEPARTMENTOF ENERGY in a Hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for the 110th Congress,United States Senate, in the First Session, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY, 8/1/07, U.S. GOVERNMENTPRINTING OFFICE, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais)

The success of the clean coal R&D will ultimately be judged by the extent to which emerging technologiesget deployed in domestic and international marketplaces. Deploying technologies into the internationalmarketplace requires that the technologies address environmental and operational performancerequirements, as well as financial challenges relative to the ability of plants to dispatch or sell its electricityat an acceptable place in the auction, which characterizes the access to the market needed to gain adequate return on investment for the utilities.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060314085423.htmhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060314085423.htmhttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais


24/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

This includes , in the regulated market, the ability to recover cost in the rate-base, the technical and financial risksassociated with the deployment of new coal technologies are key factors in determining whether they willachieve success in the marketplace, and are often difficult to overcome for new technologies seeking to make entry.



25/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DAINTERNAL LINK: R&D KEY

COAL USE IS INEVITABLEWERE ON THE BRINK OF CLEAN COAL BUT CONTINUED R&D IS KEYSUCESSFUL DEVELOPMENT IS KEY TO THE ENERGY SECTOR AND THE OVERALL U.S. ECONOMYPhillips2007 (Jeff Phillips is a Program Manager for Advanced Coal Generation for the Electric PowerResearch Institute, in a Hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for the 110thCongress, United States Senate, in the First Session, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY, 8/1/07, U.S.GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE,http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais)Coal is the energy source for half of the electricity generated in the United States. Even with theaggressive development and deployment of alternative energy sources, numerous forecasts of energy usepredict that coal will continue to provide a major share of our electric power generation throughout the21st century. Coal is a stably priced, affordable, domestic fuel that can be used in an environmentallyresponsible manner. Criteria air pollutants from all types of new coal power plants have been reduced by morethan 90 percent compared with plants built 40 years ago. Through the development and deployment ofadvanced coal plants with integratedCO2 capture and storage (CCS) technologies, coal power will become part of the solutionto satisfying both our energy needs and our global climate change concerns.However, a sustained RD&D program at heightened levels of investment and resolution of legal and regulatory unknowns for long-term geologic CO2 storage will be requiredto achieve the promise of clean coal technologies. The members of EPRIs CoalFleet for Tomorrow programa research collaborative comprising more than 60organizations representing international power generators, equipment suppliers, government research organizations, coal and oil companies, and a railroad see crucial roles for both industry and governmentsworldwide in aggressively pursuing collaborative RD&D over the next 20 years to create a full portfolio of commercially self-sustaining, competitive advanced coal power generation and CO2 capture and storage

technologies.

The potential return on this investment is enormous. EPRIs Electricity Technology in a Carbon-Constrained Future study suggests that it istechnically feasible to reduce U.S. electric sector CO2 emissions over the next 25 years while meeting theincreased demand for electricity. The study showed that the largest single contributor to emissionsreduction would come from the integration of CCS technologies to advanced coal-based power plantscoming on-line after 2020. Economic analyses of scenarios to achieve the studys emission reduction goalsshow that a 2030 U.S. energy mix including advanced coal technologies with integrated CCS results inelectricity at half the cost of a 2030 energy mix without advanced coal with CCS.In the case with advanced coal with CCS, the U.S. economy is $1 trillion per year larger than in the casewithout advanced coal and CCS, with a much stronger manufacturing sector. A previous EPRI economic study based on financial marketoptions principles found a similarly large benefit to U.S. consumers of having coals price-stabilizing influence on the electricity system.

R&D AND TECH DEMONSTRATION IS KEY TO CLEAN COALKatzer et al2007 (See Cite Page)Finding #6: It is premature to select one coal conversion technology as the preferred route for cost-effective electricity generation combined with CCS. With present technologies and higher quality coals, the cost ofelectricity generated with CCS is cheaper for IGCC than for air or oxygen driven SCPC. For sub bituminous coals and lignite, the cost difference is significantly less and could even be reversed by future technical

advances. Since commercialization of clean coal technology requires advances in R&D as well as technologydemonstration, other conversion/combustion technologies should not be ruled out today and deserve R&Dsupport at the process development unit (PDU) scale.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.waishttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:38602.wais


26/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: AFFORDABLE ENERGY 2NC

CONTINUED R&D FOR CLEAN COAL IS KEY TO AFFORDABLE ENERGYStarkey2008 (Joseph P. Strakey is chief technology officer for the National Energy TechnologyLaboratory in Pittsburgh, Clean coal is vital to energy outlook 6/15/08,http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0615vip-strakey0615.html )

The economic prosperity of the United States has been, and is currently, strongly linked to the abundanceand affordability of fossil fuels.

To ensure a future that is both secure and prosperous, we must develop and deploy a mix of technologies to satisfy our growing need for electric power and other forms of energy.

Advanced clean coal technology will be an important part of our future energy portfolio as we transition toa sustainable energy future with zero emissions.Managing greenhouse-gas emissions is now the biggest challenge for coal.

The National Energy Technology Laboratory, or NETL, has estimated that using currently available technologies to capture and store 90 percent of the carbon dioxide (CO{-2}) produced by pulverized-coal-firedpower systems would raise the cost of electricity by over 80 percent. For integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) systems, the cost of electricity would increase by about 35 percent.

Capturing and storing CO{-2} reduces the efficiency of pulverized-coal systems by 30 percent and IGCCsystems by 20 percent.

This results in increased needs for coal and for water, a particularly important issue in arid regions.Clearly, energy technologies that are capable of economically and efficiently capturing and permanentlystoring CO{-2} are needed.

THIS IS KEY TO THE ECONOMY6 WARRENTS

CARE2006 (Coalition for Affordable and Reliable Energy, Fueling Growth; Economic Impact, 06,http://www.careenergy.com/fueling_growth/impact.asp)As America's most vital commodity, electricity is critical to our economic strength. At the wholesale level,electricity is a commodity, and at $217 billion a year it is one of the largest commodities in the U.S.economy.* Market forces are powerfully oriented toward demanding low prices for commodities. The lower theprices, the greater the downward pressure on inflation, which is why changes in commodity prices are considered a key indicator of inflationary trends.* When any commodity is projected to have stable and declining prices, economists predict low inflation.Since electricity is one of the biggest commodities bought and sold in our nation, low and declining electricrates will moderate inflationary pressure for years to come, thereby protecting the integrity of savings andinvestments.

There is a direct connection between electricity, new technologies and the nation's economy.* Increasing electricity demand is a direct measure of the fast-growing use of electric-based technologies

such as telecommunications devices and computer and internet-oriented equipment, which boost the U.S.economy.* The growing dependence on electricity is best illustrated by the continued close relationship betweenelectricity usage and the general level of economic activity. Each percentage increase in real GDP between 1970and 2000 has, in general, resulted in just over a one percent rise in the demand for electricity.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0615vip-strakey0615.htmlhttp://www.careenergy.com/fueling_growth/impact.asphttp://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0615vip-strakey0615.htmlhttp://www.careenergy.com/fueling_growth/impact.asp


27/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: AFFORDABLE ENERGY (A2 ALTERNATIVESCHEAPER)

WIND AND SOLAR POWER ARE MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE THAN COAL POWERMinqi2007 (Li Minqi is a Staff Writer for the Journal of Contemporary Asia Peak oil, the rise of China andIndia, and the global energy crisis 11/1/07, http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-

the-rise-of.html)Prices or unit costs data can be confusing or misleading sometimes, as it is not always clear whether prices or costs are subsidised or not and what items are included. Trainer (2005; 2006b) made direct estimatesof capital costs of wind and solar power based on Australian prices (see Table 2). Trainer's estimates suggest that wind power is about 20% more expensive than acoal-fired power plant. Solar power costs range from 3 to 35 times those for coal-fired power. If solar poweis used on a large scale, then given the intermittency and variability problems, storage would be necessaryto deliver a reasonably reliable electricity output. Taking into account storage, the cost of solar power islikely to range from 6 to 35 times that of coal-fired power. (8)

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-the-rise-of.htmlhttp://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-the-rise-of.htmlhttp://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-the-rise-of.htmlhttp://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7248586/Peak-oil-the-rise-of.html


28/77


2008-2009 X-GULLIE

CLEAN COAL DAIMPACT: AFFORDABLE ENERGY (SUSTAINABLE)

COAL IS THE ONLY SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SOURCEALL YOUR ALTERNATIVES FAILVaux2004 (Gregson Vaux is a Chemical Scientist, The Peak in U.S. Coal Production; LNG Import IssuesKey, 5/27/04,http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/052504_coal_peak.html )Nuclear energy can be used to generate electricity and can even make motor fuels, but safety concerns, waste disposalissues, and needs for further technological development mean that nuclear energy will not be a majorityenergy source for several decades. Hydroelectric power has served the U.S. well but is now near itsmaximum potential because there are simply almost no rivers remaining to be dammed. In addition, watershortages have affected the reliability of hydroelectric power. Wind power has a moderately promisingfuture but the unreliability of wind has limited its use throughout the world. Even countries such as Denmark that have made heroic effortsto develop wind power are connected to a larger electrical grid so that they can rely on more traditional sources of electricity when the wind is not blow