Coal power has a broken relationship with the world economy

Half of the electric power in the United States is generated by coal, compared to 80% in China. India also has a growing appetite for electricity and right now coal is its cheapest solution. With so much of the world’s power centered on coal, any country that’s serious about reducing carbon emissions will need to renovate or replace coal power plants with something cleaner.

Clean coal has a nebulous reputation, and it seems to mean different things depending on who you ask. Obama supports it, and suggests that one way to reduce carbon emissions from coal is to extract key chemicals from it that are capable of creating fuel, leaving the carbon in a solid state.

Specifically the process extracts “. . . hydrogen and carbon monoxide from the coal to make syngas, a fuel that can be used to make electricity without emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere,” according to NPR. That method is gathering attention because it doesn’t require governments to force a move away from coal completely – a move that would have significant economic effects.

There’s a fundamental conflict between renewable energy and coal generated power because coal is cheap. It’s part of the infrastructure that enables humans to focus on pursuits other than food and shelter. Increasing the costs of that infrastructure would impact our way of life and would place strain on an already tenuous economic recovery.

Obama has committed to reducing coal’s greenhouse emissions in the United States and is spending $404 million to figure out an extraction process for generating syngas. China is also investing in renewable energy, and with such a large population demanding more electricity the timing becomes critical. If China can create a green infrastructure before it’s completely developed, that will ease its path.

The country has some incentive to find alternatives to coal, as it has expensive transportation costs associated with moving coal from mines in the northwest to the east.