sci/tech sensation news magazine

CHARLESTON - The same day two energy companies announced plans to build West Virginia's first coal-to-gasoline plant, a spokeswoman for one of the state's largest environmental groups was trying to convince state lawmakers that coal-to-liquids technology would be a step in the wrong direction.

Vickie Wolfe of the West Virginia Environmental Council said coal- to-liquid technology was less efficient than conventional fuels, resulted in more greenhouse gas emissions and would lead to more environmental damage caused by coal mining.

"Coal is not clean and won't be," she told lawmakers on the Joint Committee on Economic Development, which is studying the issue.

CONSOL Energy of Pittsburgh and Synthesis Energy Systems of Houston announced July 28 they were entering into a joint venture to build a coal gasification plant in Marshall County.

Coal-to-liquid technology is seen as a tool by many policymakers for decreasing the nation's reliance on foreign oil. It has been used by the Germans during World War II and by South Africa, which lost access to oil due to international embargoes resulting from the country's apartheid policies.

The reason coal-to-liquid hasn't been more widely used is the expense of converting coal into useable fuel. But now with a barrel of oil costing as much as $147, coal-based fuels can compete commercially.

Before Wolfe spoke to committee members, they heard from state Division of Energy Director Jeff Herholdt, who pointed to figures showing energy demand will continue to rise over the next two decades. Coal is expected to meet more than a quarter of that demand.

Asked by a committee member what the state was doing to promote coal-to-fuel technology, Herholdt said "I certainly have to run that by the governor."

But he also said the governor has traditionally stressed it is the state's job to provide the infrastructure businesses need to build coal-to-liquid plants.

Wolfe didn't think that would be a wise use of resources. She said the process of producing coal-based fuels uses about half the BTUs the fuel actually puts out, making it less energy efficient than traditional fuels. She compared it to corn-based ethanol, which has been criticized for taking nearly as much energy to produce than it delivers.

"It is not a very efficient process," she said of coal to liquids. Converting coal to liquid also produces roughly twice the amount of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, than the production of traditional fuels. CONSOL and Synthesis said they would bury the CO2 deep withinthe earth, a process known as carbon sequestration.

However, carbon sequestration has yet to be shown effective on a large-scale industrial basis. Wolfe pointed to the climate change report produced by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which determined the technology was decades away from maturing.

She also pointed to research stating even with sequestration, coal to gas technology still puts out more CO2 than traditional fuels.

A large part of Wolfe's presentation was trying to convince lawmakers to start thinking about alternatives to coal as an energy source. She said coal led to environmental damage and referred to a recent study by a West Virginia University researcher that says people living in coal-mining communities had more health problems.

Committee members took no action of Wolfe's suggestions, given the hearing was only for informational purposes.

Copyright State Journal Corporation Aug 1, 2008

(c) 2008 State Journal, The. Provided by ProQuest LLC. All rights Reserved.

Source: State Journal