Is it true that the least efficient are also the biggest polluters? Yes, in ALL cases where technology exists to clean things up but regulators have been slow to force adoption, "dirty-twice-over" energy-producers continue to be allowed to operate.
Well, the good folks at the Environmental Integrity Project have released their updated report on the 50 dirtiest power plants. This caught my eye because of recent testimony of the magnitude of professed efficiency gains California power has achieved over the years.Here's a brief summary for time-pressed blog-readers:
Coal plants are the dirtiest (although I'm not certain if coal energy is considered more dirty than, say, oil). Of note, coal plants:
- Generate the most waste per kilowatt-hr (least efficient) as a group
- Coal plants contribute more than any other source to mercury waste / poison / toxin at 40% of all
- Throw more tons of carbon dioxide into the air than any other plants.
The report says that more coal plants are on the way (investments already being undertaken), possibly further dirtying the US's energy-source mix.
EFFICIENCY
Is it true that the least efficient are also the biggest polluters? Yes, in ALL cases where technology exists to clean things up but regulators have been slow to force adoption, "dirty-twice-over" energy-producers continue to be allowed to operate.
- Yes, for mercury emissions. The worst plants, about 18% of all energy, generated 30% of all mercury toxins. Technology exists to capture 90% of mercury waste.
- Yes, for sulfur-dioxide. Years after trying to end the "acid raid", dirty plants, accounting for just under 14% of all energy, generated 40% of all SO-2 emissions. Technology exists (via sulfur "scrubbers") to capture 98% of SO-2 emissions. [n.b. some plants have scrubbers 'scheduled' ...]
- Yes, for nitrogen oxides. Again, years after trying to end the "acid raid", the dirty plants, about 12% of all energy produced, threw off 25% of all NOx emissions. Technology exits (types of catalytic reduction) that can remove upwards of 75% of all NOx emissions.
- No, for carbon-dioxide. The big plants have similar efficiency, as a group. Efficiency of small plants varies enormously. So-called carbon-sequestration technology is ... not in use at any large plant in the US (or in the World, that I know).
Is necessity the mother of invention?
You make the call. Have a look at the national energy-source mix and see if states that are energy rich have gotten efficient or not:
CHANGES
To date, I know of no power company that has voluntarily reduced emissions. (Let me know if you've heard of one).
oh, if you like playing with databases, here's the EPA's file (although it's not clear whether this or the one used in the study if more current, to me).
