‘ Clean coal’ power stations hide their dirty secrets

YOU and your readers should be aware the term “clean coal” now has two very distinct meanings.

It used to mean a system where the carbon dioxide emitted by burning coal is captured and disposed of – usually Carbon Capture and Storage ( CCS).

However, the coal lobby and their apologists are now using the term to refer to modern highly efficient coal- fired power stations ( ultra supercritical).

The difference is significant. Coal consists of carbon, and when it burns it produces carbon dioxide, which is a major contributor to global warming.

So even the most advanced “clean” coal- fired power station is adding to global warming unless it has effective carbon capture systems.

These are still very much in the experimental stage and hugely expensive.

As evidenced by the recent dramatic power outages in NSW, with major industries forced to shut down and consumers blacked out, coal- fired power stations are an outdated expensive technology, requiring extensive distri- bution systems from each centralised power station, making the power system vulnerable to significant climatic events or terrorism.

As we are starting to see some of the early effects of global warming, such extreme climatic events will become more and more common.

The solution is to have a network of smaller power stations, solar, wind, hydro, pumped storage, etc with some thermal backup for extreme situations.

So to even consider a new “base load” coal- fired power station is a step back to the 20th century. Most other developed countries have embraced renewables to such an extent that renewables are now nearly as cheap as polluting coal- fired power stations, and much cheaper than the so called “clean coal” power stations.

North Queensland needs to be looking to the future with projects such as Copperstring and Hells Gate dam, and a new capital for the State of North Queensland, not to the past. DAVID BROOKE- TAYLOR,

Douglas.