Clean Coal? Myth, or Reality?

 In the last 15 years there has been a lot of debate - and confusion - over the term “clean coal.” What does “clean coal” actually mean? Is it better for the planet, or just as bad as ‘traditional’ coal… and for that matter, what’s the difference? Despite what coal industry leaders would have you believe, “clean coal” is something of a misnomer. There is no such thing as truly “clean coal” in terms of environmental protection, and the term is simply a buzz phrase invented to sway public opinion on how coal affects the planet. 

The true difference between “clean coal” and traditional coal mining is in a practice implemented during the mining process known as carbon capture and storage. In this process, the CO2 emitted during the mining process is recaptured and sent via a pipeline down into the earth for storage, to prevent it from being released into the atmosphere (Grossman). Usually the locations that are chosen for CO2 relocation are areas that have already been excavated, such as oil and gas fields, or even offshore refineries, but essentially the goal in this is that the CO2 is meant to stay in the earth until it is eventually chemically bound with the soil and rock where it can’t escape back into the atmosphere.

Although it can’t be denied that this is at least a small step in the right direction in terms of environmental protection, it does nothing to address the other environmental and health consequences of coal mining in general. Burning coal is known to release heavy metals and other pollutants such as mercury, lead, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides (ucsusa.org). This air pollution has been proven to cause health conditions ranging from neurological disorders and brain damage, to asthma and breathing difficulties, to cancer and even premature death.  Waterways of coal mining areas are affected as well; the ash that remains after burning coal finds its way into lakes, ponds, and rivers where it contaminates drinking water supplies and destroys the habitats of aquatic animals.

Despite millions of people still advocating for the use of fossil fuels, it seems that global public opinion is starting to sway in the right direction as more and more people become aware of the dangers associated with using non-renewable fossil fuels. Although they are different industries, there are a lot of parallels between the coal and tobacco industries in this regard. Scientists have known since the 1940s that there were links between smoking and lung cancer (and a host of other diseases and ailments), and in the 1950’s it was proven that smoking causes lung cancer (Tontonoz). In spite of that fact though, tobacco companies did - and still do - everything they can to suppress that negative association with their products. There are hundreds of examples of vintage cigarette ads featuring doctors, housewives, and even children and household pets touting the benefits of a cleaner cigarette available on the internet (stadford.edu), and although we laugh at these ads in hindsight, we are actively living through the same phenomenon with the coal industry. Millions upon millions of dollars have been and will continue to be spent by both industries to clean up their public images. According to Richard Conniff’s Article The Myth of Clean Coal published in 2008 “They’re bankrolling the “Clean Coal” campaign to the tune of $35 million this year alone. That’s a little less than the tobacco industry spent on a successful fight against antismoking legislation in 1998, and almost triple what health insurers paid for the “Harry and Louise” ads that helped kill health care reform in the early 1990s. In addition to the ads, the “Clean Coal” campaign has so far also sponsored two presidential election debates (where, critics noted, no questions about global warming got asked).”

It seems that coal industry leaders are aware that their popularity is waning, and using terms like “clean coal” is an attempt to ingratiate themselves back into public favor. Fortunately, the coal industry is still a business like any other at the end of the day, and all businesses are at the mercy of public opinion. 

Works Cited

"Coal Power Impacts." Union of Concerned Scientists, July 2019, www.ucsusa.org/resources/coal-power-impacts.

Collection: Pure & Clean, Stanford.edu, tobacco.stanford.edu/cigarettes/fresh-pure-natural-toasted/pure-clean/.

Conniff, Richard. "The Myth of Clean Coal." YaleEnvironment360, 2 June 2008, e360.yale.edu/features/the_myth_of_clean_coal#:~:text=The%20coal%20industry%20and%20its,more%20than%20an%20advertising%20slogan.

Grossman, David. "Everything You Need to Know About Clean Coal." PopularMechanics.com, 19 May 2022, www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/news/a27886/how-does-clean-coal-work/

Tontonoz, Matthew. "How Do Cigarettes Cause Cancer?" , 7 Dec. 2018, www.mskcc.org/news/how-do-cigarettes-cause-cancer#:~:text=Scientists%20have%20known%20that%20smoking,could%20cause%20cancer%20in%20mice.