| Twisted
analogy doesn’t make coal plant right
By KEN MIDKIFF
Published
Friday, November 16, 2007 (http://archive.columbiatribune.com/2007/nov/20071116comm003.asp)
Equating emissions
of carbon dioxide with producing food is ludicrous. Equating a coal-burning
power plant with farming makes little or no sense.
But that is
exactly what one of the supporters of the proposed coal-burning
power plant of the Associated Electric Cooperative Inc. (AECI) said.
The Associated Press article, published in this paper Wednesday,
quoted the AECI board member as saying, "There are those who
contend we shouldn’t build any more fossil fuel plants. This
would be similar to proclaiming that we are destroying our land
by producing food, so we shouldn’t produce any more food."
For those not
knowledgeable about this issue, a brief synopsis: AECI wants to
build a 780-megawatt coal-burning power plant near Norborne, a small
town in northwest Missouri. AECI supplies electricity to about 57
rural electric cooperatives throughout the state. The Missouri Department
of Natural Resources already has issued a preliminary permit that
allows AECI to begin construction.
There is a bit
of irony in this proposal. AECI also is constructing several wind-energy
generators in the same general area, and three of those wind turbines
will be dedicated to producing electricity for Columbia.
But, back to
the twisted analogy comparing energy to food.
There is little
doubt that producing food has an effect on the environment. Some
food production, such as pasture-fed beef, is almost benign. Other
food production - that which relies heavily on herbicides, pesticides
and chemical fertilizers - has harmful effects, ranging from local
to oceanic pollution. Still other types - concentrated animal feeding
operations (CAFOs) - have dire results locally, regionally, nationally
and globally.
However, under
no circumstances does food production - agriculture - threaten all
life. But the emissions from coal-burning power plants do.
That is precisely
where the analogy becomes twisted. No matter how smelly or devastating
to local water bodies a CAFO is, it doesn’t contribute to
melting polar caps, rising ocean levels or to an overall global
temperature increase. Coal-burning power plants do by emitting tons
and tons of carbon dioxide, the primary global warming gas.
There are better
ways. It is totally possible, as AECI knows, to produce electricity
- and lots of it - by non-polluting wind turbines. It is not energy
or electricity that is the problem, rather it is how it is produced.
No one is saying
that food production should be halted.
A large number
of people are saying that emissions of global warming gases should
be severely curtailed, and that means we must find other ways to
meet our energy needs.
As usual, the
elected officials serving Norborne and the surrounding area point
to jobs and economic development. That sort of thinking is extremely
short-sighted to the point of myopic.
The solution
is simple: There are ways to produce energy that don’t heat
up the planet and benefit the local economy on a long-term basis.
The proposed coal-burning power plant of AECI does neither.
|