The thing that burns, never returns.
Taking away those we have…
Wise men say that coal is a 19th century solution for 21st century problems. But burning coal to produce energy is even worse than a lag in time and technology, or that its being unsustainable. Coal is outright dangerous, for various reasons, such as:
- Burning coal emits harmful waste such as carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, sulphuric acids, arsenic and ash (twice as much carbon dioxide when compared to natural gas) and increases GHG emission.
- It causes heavy pollution.
- The burning of coal in large quantities, such as in factories can lead to acid rains.
- Coal can be cleaned and/or turned into a liquid of gas but this technology has yet to be fully developed and adds to the expense of creating fuel via coal.
- Coal mining is harmful to the landscape and the large and noisy equipment used for mining may affect local wildlife.
- Transporting coal requires an extensive transportation system and can also cause additional pollution in the form of emissions from transportation vehicles.
- There are limited stocks of coal remaining, it is non-renewable and projected to be depleated this millenium.
- Lastly, it is not very well known but releases from coal combustion contain naturally occuring radioactive materials – mainly, uranium and thorium. To give a comparison, coal fired power plants produce 100 to 400 times as much radioactive material as nuclear power plants are permitted to.
It is not hard to visualize how harmful the uranium ore is. Observer investigation, recently uncovered a link between dramatic rise in birth defects in Punjab, India and pollution from coal-fired power stations.
“The children had massive levels of uranium in their bodies, in one case more than 60 times the maximum safe limit. …
An Observer investigation has now uncovered disturbing evidence to suggest a link between the contamination and the region’s coal-fired power stations. …
The findings have implications not only for the rest of India – Punjab produces two-thirds of the wheat in the country’s central reserves and 40% of its rice – but for many other countries planning to build new power plants, including China, Russia, India, Germany and the US. In Britain….” Gethin Chamberlain reports for the London Observer, August 30, 2009.
Some accuse the renewable energy pro’s for sacrificing goods (the so called “clean” coal for instance) for non-viable perfects. I concur that large scale wind and solar energy are not still totally cost-effective and developed, yet there is nothing wrong in urging its development or using and promoting the use of clean energy in areas where we can replace fossil fuels.
Tags: coal, coal vs. clean energy, coal vs. solar energy, disadvantages of coal, hazards of coal to the environment, India, uranium
Yes and CALL for legal action against Environment MINISTERs Victoria NSw COMMONWEALTH Minister Peter Gerret in AUSTRALIA as the largest polluter COAL mines HAZELWOOD ANGLESEA in THE WORLD and the largest destroyer of the natural environment Gavin Jannings for deliberately damaging my health and health of my family by approving coal powered stations and coal mines.