[an error occurred while processing this directive]

LATEST SUBMISSIONS

The path to affordable energy security

Wednesday, November 7 at 12:00 AM

By Kevin R. Collins, Denver

Xcel Energy’s postponement of an advanced clean-coal power plant that captures and buries its greenhouse gas emissions comes at a time when U.S. demand for electricity will increase 17.7 percent in the next decade while supply is expected to grow only 8.4 percent.

Reserve generating capacity, normally 10 percent to 15 percent, could be down to 1 percent or zero percent in some places, and Yale professor Charles Perrow, who follows power-supply shortfalls, says “I’m prepared to see many more blackouts occurring. ... it’s really going to be a freight train running into disaster.”

This is not an encouraging scenario, to say the least. While a variety of energy options exist, each possesses its own challenge. Nuclear power has waste issues, coal is associated with greenhouse gases and other emissions, wind and sun are inconsistent, hydropower is tapped out, natural gas costs and supplies are volatile, and conservation, no matter how hard we try, won’t close the gap.

Xcel deserves immense credit for its leadership in pursuing clean-coal technologies, but its decision exemplifies the stark economic reality of pursuing leapfrog science to solve today’s energy problems.

Converting coal to gas, burning the gas, and capturing and burying the carbon dioxide it creates is the holy grail of clean coal — and we should vigorously pursue it. But as Xcel quickly learned, the costs and uncertainties are barriers to progress. The U.S. government’s “FutureGen” project that will use the same technology is already significantly over budget and won’t begin operation until at least 2012.

Our country needs a pragmatic effort to construct a workable, achievable national strategy that balances energy supply and demand, environmental protection, and economic stability.
Statesmanship on energy policy must return to Washington and our state capitals. It is imperative that we, through our elected officials, come to the table with a realistic understanding of today’s energy realities and a shared commitment to finding appropriate solutions.

That begins with defining a shared goal of meeting our nation’s growing energy demands in ways that ensure continued economic growth and afford greater environmental protection. Achieving this balance will not come without costs, but it is more achievable than some would lead us to believe. What will be required is a heightened political will and a backdrop of bipartisan support to take action and make these dual goals a national imperative.

Any comprehensive solution will require an integrated national approach that includes conservation, support for alternative and renewable energies, new technologies and better use of traditional energy sources. A hearty dose of realism is needed about what bridging technologies can help us through the near term while we wait for leapfrog technologies that are decades away.

Here is one decisive piece of realism: Coal supplies more than 50 percent of U.S. electricity and more than 80 percent of Colorado’s electricity. Due to its abundance and price stability, coal will — and must — continue to be a major source in meeting U.S. and world electricity demand for decades to come. While proponents of alternative energy are often adamant in their rejection of coal as a continued long-term energy resource, reality dictates otherwise. To dismiss this reality is simply dangerous — dangerous to long-term energy supply and price stability.

Understanding this reality, it is incumbent on us to make coal as clean as possible as soon as possible — and we can. Progress is being made, whether it is near-term solutions, such as refined coal and other precombustion technologies, or more distant solutions such as the government’s “FutureGen” program.

There is no single cure for our energy and environmental symptoms. Yet there are specific actions that we can take today to place us on the appropriate path to affordable energy security and a better environmental quality of life. With the energy technology companies already here, Colorado can help chart that course for the nation and perhaps the world.

Kevin R. Collins is president and CEO of Evergreen Energy Inc., a Denver-based refined coal producer.

READER COMMENTS

The "shot gun" approach to "alternate energy sources" is what we do NOT need. It is a pie in the sky hope and in 15 years we would have fallen further behind.
We need to get off of the CO2 as a pollutant "feel good" kick. But politicians deem that political suicide... riiiight.. when 70% of the American public could care less about the U.N. report and doubt seriously the significance of man's actions in "global warming". What it really amounts to is another avenue for government control and power. (Carbon taxes?)

We have the technology now to switch to hydrogen run cars. The benefit of this is enormous because the retooling costs are minimal compared to every other alternative and older cars can be converted. Try that with a fancy dan Hydorgen fuel cell...hah...

We have all of the oceans, gulfs, lakes, rivers and streams to draw from. We could immediately start converting our current power producers that use coal to begin to manufacture Hydrogen now and would cost a lot less than injecting CO2 into the ground...

But no one is listening. We've got the feel good crowd wanting Solar panels and windmill farms, we've got the same people wanting Hydrogen "fuel cells". Not one of them know of the economics, the expense of the manufacturing or the efficiencies of each compared to Hydrogen run vehicles and evenutally hydrogen run power grids.

We are lost... The answer is here.. it's not a majic pill .... but we don't have a leader like Kennedy that said "We'll put a man on the moon within ten years. All we get today is,"By 2020 (13 years from now) we will have reduced our gas consumption by 20%, and the crowd roars it's approval. Every one numbly nodding that this is the best we can do... NOT!

Where are the visionaries?

America has always been lucky to have visionaries just when it is needed most,
Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Henry Ford, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan... Where are they now???

God help us...ooops, did I offend?

Posted by Father OMalley on November 7, 2007 05:33 PM

At $100 per barrel, it would seem to me that we have lots of sensible alternatives that weren't economic at $40 p/b but easily make the grade today. The price is right and there is plenty of downside wiggle-room at $100. What we are missing is the will--its so much easier to whine and complain. We are at the cusp of $5 at the pump and $2,000 per month heating bills (back east), its just a matter of time. We need to act now. The lead/lag times in the energy business can be as long as a decade.

We need to reclaim that which we put "out of bounds"--85% of the outer continental shelf, ANWR, the Roan and the Vermillion, nuke power plants, new crude refineries, coal gasification, shale, etc. It makes no sense to watch China and Cuba joint venture an energy project some 45 miles off the coast of Key West when we can't even consider that location. The energy solution is right under our butts, but we are paralized.

Economics aside, we are also projecting weakness and vulnerability as the bad guys watch in total amasement, laughing and plotting their next attack on our most vulnerable spot. I'm afraid that it going to take a crisis of monumental proportions for America to return to consciousness.

Posted by Hank on November 7, 2007 08:26 AM