Student Responses

Dear Group Members,

After listening to the February 7, 2008 OnPoint broadcast “Clean Coal Dreams and Climate Realities”, my position is that the federal government should use the funds budgeted for the FutureGen project to develop renewable energy sources. According the program, coal provides about 49 % of the world’s electric power. We are relying too much on one source of energy. Coal is a dirty source of energy. Beginning with the mining process, coal devastates our landscapes and introduces other byproducts into our environment. Like oil, there is not an endless supply of coal to provide energy. At some point we will exhaust the supplies of both coal and oil.

Coal sequestration involves the storage of CO2 in underground geologic structures. After listening to this broadcast, I have concerns about storing CO2 underground. Are we creating another situation like we did with nuclear power where the waste products of energy production need to be stored somewhere and for how long? And what happens to it eventually, do we just keep piling it up? We have already outgrown our landfills with just regular everyday trash. Also, not every area is geologically capable of storing CO2 underground. Does that mean that the CO2 is transported to other locations for storage? In my opinion, the long term effects of this process and the storage of CO2 have not been adequately researched.

Another issue with the process of coal sequestration is enforcement of an agreement between different governments to comply with standards for operating coal sequestration plants and storing the CO2. Besides the United States and a few other major world powers that have the resources both in people and technology to comply, there are large governments like China who do not have the government infrastructure to insure compliance.

The federal government needs to seek a resolution to the energy program that does not contribute to the “Greenhouse Effect”. Governments worldwide need to get behind research into renewable energy sources and enforce guidelines that protect our environment as well as provide for a usable energy source. Development of renewable energy sources needs to be where our government, the energy industry and world leaders invest time and money.

I, like most of you, feel that the money spent on coal sequestration is a good idea, but it would be a waste of time. I feel that the money could be more beneficial in other aspects towards saving the Ozone. I am going to be honest and this is my first reason, I feel this whole deal is about money and the profit that the companies, who own the rights, to the coal would be making. Lets face it, I am not trying to get off topic, but look at the gas prices and how much it costs per barrel now. We have had the technology to reduce the gas, emissions in our expensive SUVs for a long time. Why isn’t anyone proceeding with THAT technology? We don't because the companies involved in that trade would stand to lose billions. Coal is no different. My number two reason is that I do support the government funding part of the bill and investigating it further. The reason I say part is because of the current war we are fighting on terrorism, the country does not have that kind of money. Look at the price of the American dollar compared to other countries. The war has drained the bank account. Look at what the military is doing and you could understand. As one of our classmates has already mentioned and this is also one of my reasons, is that there are far better things we could be doing and using instead of coal. To piggyback on this reason, another classmate has already mentioned, but I totally agree. My third reason is that even if the US went totally green, it wouldn’t matter; we have to get the other extremely populated countries involved. China and Japan are just a few that have to be on board for any change to happen and make a difference. The way I see it is that the damage has already been done and we are almost in the "try to fix it" stage.

Dear Classmates,

The FutureGen project is a highly controversial topic. I’m a firm believer in stopping the abuse on the environment and possible recovering what we can for them. I don’t think that the federal government should provide exclusive funding for the capturing and storing of carbon underground.

One of the main reasons I believe that the federal government shouldn’t provide exclusive funding is because there are so many other resources for energy that they could spend the money on. Things like wind energy, water energy, and solar energy are environmentally friendly and in the long run could be cheaper. These options are already developed and in use, while finding a way to capture and store carbon is a relatively new idea and will take years to develop.

Another reason I don’t think the government shouldn’t provide exclusive funding is because it is far too expensive for just the government to handle. I think that the larger energy companies, the ones burning the coal, should be the main contributors to this project. Right now with the economy hitting a rough patch, I don’t think the government could afford to invest too much into this project at the moment. I mean the estimated cost of the project before the plug was pulled was somewhere around 1.8 billion dollars. I think the coal companies and the energy companies burning the coal should hold the larger part of the responsibility.

The last reason I don’t think the government shouldn’t spend the money on the coal is that the scale for this is huge! Just under 49% of US energy is coal energy and the carbon emissions are enormous. Pumping all the carbon underground just isn’t realistic. The carbon released into the air from coal is in such large amounts that to capture it, liquefy it, and then pump in underground is an enormous project that just doesn’t seem possible.

Coal is important to energy, but I really don’t think that there will be any kind of solution for coal in the near future. I think it could take many more years before there is a solution for coal.

I don't really have a firm stance, but at the moment, I don't think the government shouldn't spend the money on this project right now.

After listening to "Clean Coal Dreams and Climate Realities” hosted by Tom Ashbrook I find myself on the fence with whether or not the federal government should provide the funding to begin coal sequestration. For me it is a “catch 22” situation. Since 49% of our power is generated by coal, we are forced to consider the impact of the CO2 emissions and look for cleaner coal technology. If we implement FutureGen and start sequestering coal; who is going implement this program in other countries whose CO2 emissions are high? Their coal-powered plants will still be pouring out CO2 and they will continue to build these plants. Our efforts in coal sequestering might be muted by others countries who continue to use coal. Since the cost of a program is so extravagant, how can poorer countries afford such a program? I understand the need for coal sequestering, but I do not believe it is our only alternative. I think that cleaner coal technology is worth pursuing, but not completely at the expense of other possible energy sources. Implementing a price on CO2 emissions was an idea brought to the discussion by author Jeff Goodell. By placing a price on CO2 emission, the market would influence itself and sway the coal industry to seek cleaner coal methods.

I don’t think that the federal government should provide the necessary funds to support FutureGen or carbon underground storage.

One of the main reasons I don’t think that the government should fund this project is because of the environmental damage it will cause. Though carbon capturing is an attempt to slow global warming, the amount of energy the FutureGen technology uses offsets any attempt at mitigation.

FutureGen will also cost the government nearly $800 million dollars. The project was initially billed at $1.8 billion. In my opinion, that kind of money should be spent on alternative energy sources that would cost less and be more effective.

Many of the methods FutureGen intends on using are questionable and somewhat dangerous. For example, one of their proposed ideas regarding carbon sequestration/waste management is deep well injections. This method would only work if the well was previously contaminated with toxins. There have been many cases where ammonia and other harmful wastes have leaked out and into clean water streams, creating a hazard wherever that water is used.