Thursday, October 12, 2006 11:54 PM CDT
Geochemist: FutureGen plan hinges on carbon dioxide sequestration
By HERB MEEKER, Staff Writer
hmeeker@jg-tc.com
CHARLESTON -- A geochemist with the Illinois State Geological Survey on Thursday explained how the FutureGen Alliance project can bridge the gap for the world on problems from climate change and energy needs.
Sallie Greenberg said most geologists today agree something is happening with climate change or the effect known as global warming. Though the earth’s temperatures have fluctuated throughout geologic history, the average temperature has increased worldwide by one degree Fahrenheit over the last century, Greenberg said. Though that sounds minimal, she cited effects of higher average temperatures that are already observed: hotter summers and colder winters on average, more droughts and wildfires, permafrost melting, coral reef bleaching and shifts in plant ranges and animal populations.
“Most geologists today wouldn’t argue that something is going on,” she said during a presentation on FutureGen and related issues in the Eastern Illinois University Physical Science Building as part of a geology-geography department presentation for Earth Science Week. “And this might be caused by nature and from the increased use of fossil fuels. But there is evidence of an increase in carbon dioxide in the last 200 years in the atmosphere.”
Carbon dioxide is critical to most theories on climate change because it is an abundant greenhouse gas that can trap the sun’s radiation. Greenberg said new ways must be developed to reduce the emission of 7 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the earth’s atmosphere over the next 50 years. That is a process known as “stabilization,” which holds the emission rate of greenhouse pollutants to 2005 levels.
That is why FutureGen has been proposed as a way to keep carbon dioxide emissions out of the air and still use coal to fuel power plants, eventually across the globe. It would build and test a near-zero emissions plant using new technology for coal gasification in one of four sites in Illinois or Texas. Mattoon and Tuscola have two of the four finalist sites. The final site will be selected one year from now, and the plant would start operations in 2012.
“There is not just one silver bullet for doing this,” said Greenberg, citing other efforts like energy conservation, renewable energy and nuclear energy.
Not everything is new about FutureGen, which has the federal government working with an international consortium of power companies to produce a process that can change the feasibility of coal for power generation. There are two coal gasification plants that harness coal in a cleaner way for power companies: One is located near Terre Haute, Ind. There are already efforts that extract hydrogen, sulfur and other elements from the coal-burning process.
The carbon dioxide sequestration, or underground storage, is innovative, but not new, with projects under way in Norway and Africa. Sequestration of a different sort has been in place for decades near Champaign with underground storage of natural gas, Greenberg said.
“FutureGen would use saline reservoir storage in Mount Simon Sandstone. And that would place the carbon dioxide under several layers of shale capstones,” said Greenberg. “The carbon will be in porous sandstone. This is how oil has been held underground for millions of years. We are using the knowledge we have learned over the years to make this work.”
The sequestration process will work like a reverse oil well. The carbon dioxide will be stored in liquid form with high pressures applied prior to the injection process and then through the natural pressures present more than 7,000 feet below the ground.
But will the carbon dioxide come back up to the surface through fractures in the capstones or flaws in the sequestration plan?
Greenberg said the FutureGen Alliance has a long list of safeguards for monitoring all types of elements or areas, including shallow groundwater, injection wells and the air. She added there will be safety plans should a leakage of carbon dioxide occur.
During a question-and-answer session Thursday, an audience member asked if money, not scientific advancement, was the true goal of the FutureGen project. He noted lives have been lost due to pollution of water and the air from, for example, mountaintop mining in Kentucky and other Appalachian states.
He also asked if an environmental mess would be left at the expense of Illinois taxpayers if the FutureGen plan does not work and the plant is abandoned. He noted Texas has agreed to not leave FutureGen Alliance liable if problems arise in the future.
Greenberg said FutureGen as a research facility is a not-for-profit effort and not intended “to make a profit off your health.”
She agreed the no-liability issue under consideration in Illinois is “the rabbit in the hat,” and the state must decide whether it follows the lead of Texas. There is a commitment to keep the facility on-line for 10 years, and then a decision would be made to continue it or sell the plant.
“Everyone with FutureGen is invested in the technology being safe,” she said.
Contact Herb Meeker at hmeeker@jg-tc.com or 238-6869.
Add your comments
Not already registered?
Then click Here.
Comment policy:
JG-TC.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed. Comments posted on Saturday may not be reviewed until Sunday afternoon.
In order to keep the page a set width, long lines (mostly long links) will be chopped. Try putting spaces in your links or consider using tinyurl.com to make a smaller link that you can include.
We will never edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to remove comments that violate our code of conduct.
No comment may contain:
* Potentially libelous statements; such as accusing somebody of a crime, defamation of character, or statements that can harm somebody's reputation.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults, threats, harassment or inciting violence.
* Commercial product promotions.
If you have any questions, please contact our moderator.
|
|
|
Tara wrote on Apr 13, 2007 7:46 PM: