Pre-Debate Facts on Coal, Nuclear, and Clean Energy

WASHINGTON - In advance of tonight's presidential debate on
energy and the economy, Greenpeace released a new backgrounder
comparing different energy sources. The release comes after Vice
Presidential candidate Sarah Palin unveiled a new slogan at a rally in
Ohio: "Drill, baby, drill and mine, baby, mine!" to promote more oil
drilling and more coal mining.

"Conservation,
wind, and solar are where jobs are sprouting in America," said John
Passacantando, Executive Director of Greenpeace USA. "If Sarah Palin
really wants to help get America's economy going, she should be
screaming ‘Blow, baby, blow' and ‘shine, baby, shine.'"

Further information comparing coal, oil and nuclear power with the
green economy is below. The full backgrounder is available at http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/assets/binaries/debate-backgrounder

.

THE FACTS ON COAL

Coal Kills Jobs

• The coal industry is one of the least job-intensive
  industries in America. According to the University of Massachusetts's
  Political Economy Research Institute, investing in wind and solar power
  would create 2.8 times as many jobs as the same investment in coal;
  mass transit and conservation would create 3.8 times as many jobs as
  coal. (http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/assets/binaries/green-job-creation-table)

  "Every dollar we invest in dirty
  energy like coal and oil is a dollar we can't spend investing in
  creating jobs in the clean energy economy," Passacantando said. "Just
  about the only way you could generate fewer jobs than the coal industry
  is by investing in more oil drilling."

  • Green investment would create
    approximately triple the number of high-paying jobs (at least $16
    dollars an hour) as spending the same amount of money within the oil
    industry. (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/06/green_jobs.html)
    • Coal is one of the biggest
      contributors to global warming, which is conservatively projected to
      cause a $3.8 trillion annual drag on the U.S. economy by 2100 through
      increased extreme weather, drought, disease, insect infestation and
      other impacts (http://www.nrdc.org/media/2008/080522.asp)
    • Green investment is projected to
      reduce the unemployment rate to 4.4 percent from 5.7 percent (based on
      U.S. labor market conditions in July 2008).

    Source data and further information:
    Pollin, Robert (University of Massachusetts) et. al. ""Green Recovery:
    A Program to Create Good Jobs & Start Building a Low-Carbon
    Economy." September, 2008 (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/green_recovery.html)

     

    Coal Kills People

    • Pollution from coal-fired power
      plants causes 23,600 premature deaths, 21,850 hospital admissions,
      554,000 asthma attacks, and 38,200 heart attacks every year. That
      translates into 3,186,000 lost work days nationwide every single year
      and $167.3 billion a year in additional health care costs, much of it
      borne by taxpayers. Source: http://www.catf.us/publications/reports/Dirty_Air_Dirty_Power.pdf

• In Ohio, where Governor Palin called for more dependence on
  coal, power plants are responsible for 1,743 deaths, 1,638 hospital
  admissions, and 2,873 heart attacks every year. Source: http://www.catf.us/publications/reports/Dirty_Air_Dirty_Power.pdf

• Citizens of a growing number of other states are wise to
  coal's dangers and are taking action. California, Kansas, Florida, and
  Idaho have effectively outlawed the construction of new coal-fired
  power plants; nationally, at least 59 proposed coal projects have been
  cancelled due to public opposition, failure to meet permitting
  requirements, or lack of funding.. Source: http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2014

The Myth of "Clean Coal"

• "Clean coal" technology has, until recently, referred to the
  scrubbers used to sweep nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, and other
  regulated pollutants from coal-fired power plants. But today the coal
  industry, and now the presidential campaigns, use the term as shorthand
  for carbon capture and sequestration (or CCS), a largely-theoretical
  technology that would separate carbon dioxide from smokestacks and bury
  it in the ground to limit its global warming impact.

• The first attempt to demonstrate the feasibility of CCS was a
  project in Illinois called FutureGen. But the government was forced to
  abandon the trial in January after years of technical failures and
  budget overruns. Nationwide, approximately $5.2 billion in taxpayer and
  ratepayer money has been invested in the technology, however a recent
  government report found that of 13 projects examined, eight had serious
  delays or financial problems, six were years behind schedule, and two
  were bankrupt. (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d081080.pdf)

• Even if engineers are able
  to overcome the chemical and geological challenges of separating and
  safely storing massive quantities of CO2, a study published this month
  shows that CCS requires so much energy that it would increase emissions
  by 40 percent of smog, soot, and other dangerous pollution. http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/35181/title/Carbon_sequestration_frustratio

More information: "False Hope," May, 2008 Greenpeace Report on Problems with CCS: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/climate-change/coal/carbon-capture-and-storage

Coal Destroys Mountains and Forests and Pollutes America's Water Supply

• Most coal mining in the Eastern U.S. today uses an intensive
  practice known as mountain top removal to extract coal from the ground.
  Mountain-top removal has leveled more than 450 mountains across
  Appalachia. (Map of destroyed mountains at http://www.flickr.com/photos/nationalmemorialforthemountains/255150433/)
  • Mountain top removal destroys
    ecosystems, stripping away topsoil, trees, and understory habitats,
    filling streams and valleys with rubble, poisoning water supplies, and
    generating massive impoundments that can cause catastrophic floods.
    (pics and info at
    http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/09/majority_of_american_public.php)

  More information at: http://www.mountainjusticesummer.org/facts/steps.php

OIL FACTS

Greenpeace has released a new video about America's addiction to oil, available at http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/break-the-addiction.

Oil drilling causes oil spilling

• Hurricane Ike resulted in at least three missing oil rigs.
  One missing rig was owned by Rowan Cos., resulting in a $60 million
  claim. The rig has never been recovered.
  (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080916/rowan_hurricane_update.html?.v=1)

• Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
  caused 124 offshore spills for a total of 743,700 gallons. 554,400
  gallons were crude oil and condensate from platforms, rigs and
  pipelines, and 189,000 gallons were refined products from platforms and
  rigs. (http://www.mms.gov/tarprojectcategories/hurricaneKatrinaRita.htm)

• As global warming worsens,
  supercharged storms like Katrina and Rita will continue to pummel
  coastal areas and oil infrastructure, meaning more oil spills are
  inevitable.

Oil drilling won't lower gas prices

• The United States burns 24 percent of the world's oil, yet it
  only has 3 percent of the world's oil reserves. Even if the country
  drilled every drop of oil the U.S. has on shore or off its coasts, it
  will never be able to drill its way to lower oil prices or energy
  security. The country simply burns more than it could ever drill.

• Offshore oil drilling is
  not a short-term fix. It will take at least a decade to bring new
  leases into production. It will be years before exploration will begin
  and years after that before production will start. If any effect were
  to be felt on gas prices (most likely only a few pennies per gallon),
  that effect is decades away.

• Offering up more of the
  coastline for drilling won't lower gas prices. There is no correlation
  between increased drilling and lower gas prices. The number of drilling
  permits increased by 361 percent from 1999 to 2007, yet prices continue
  to spike.

• Oil prices are set on the
  global oil market, which means that all oil produced around the world
  is all sold at the same price. There is no guarantee that the country
  would even be using the oil that was drilled in the U.S.--it would pay
  the same rate as the rest of the world.

• Although seven years have passed since the attacks of 9/11,
  America's nuclear power plants remain highly vulnerable to terrorist
  attack even thought U.S. officials acknowledge that the architect of
  the attacks - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - originally planned to fly the
  planes into nuclear facilities in the U.S. Moreover, according to the
  Congressional Research Service, nuclear power plants are not designed
  to withstand airliner attack. (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/crs/rs21131.pdf)
  

   
  

  Nuclear power can't compete with clean energy as a solution to global warming.
  

  
  

  
  
  • In
    2003, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) under the directorship of
    McCain's own economic advisor, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, indicated that loan
    guarantees for nuclear plants had a 50 percent chance of defaulting.
  
  

   

  CBO considers the risk of default on such a loan guarantee to be very
  high-well above 50 percent. The key factor accounting for this risk is
  that we expect that the plant would be uneconomic to operate because of
  its high construction costs, relative to other electricity generation
  sources. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/42xx/doc4206/s14.pdf

Nuclear power requires massive taxpayer subsidies.

• Last July, six major U.S. banking institutions including
  Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch
  & Morgan Stanley sent a letter to the Department of Energy (DOE).
  In it, the bankers told DOE that unless the U.S. taxpayer backed 100
  percent of the debt incurred by nuclear corporations that they would
  have difficulty "accessing capital markets. "We believe these risks,
  combined with the higher capital costs and longer construction
  schedules of nuclear plants as compared to other generation facilities,
  will make lenders unwilling at present to extend long-term credit to
  such projects in a form that would be commercially viable," their
  letter said. http://www.lgprogram.energy.gov/nopr-comments/comment29.pdf

The French Model? France's Nuclear Industry Has Been Plagued by Delays, Cost Overruns, and Leaks

• While politicians point to France as an model for new nuclear
  plants in the United States, France's new Evolutionary Power Reactor
  (EPR) has had tremendous cost overruns and is now estimated to cost
  $6.5 billion dollars per plant.
• One French-designed plant in
  Finland has experienced "flawed welds for the reactor's steel liner,
  unusable water-coolant pipes and suspect concrete in the foundation
  already have pushed back the delivery date of the Olkiluoto 3 unit by
  at least two years." (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aFh1ySJ.lYQc&refer=home)

The clean energy economy is creating jobs and prosperity

• Colorado's recent investment in wind power technology
  demonstrates the viability of large-scale clean energy solutions. Two
  years ago, when Colorado voters were considering a measure to require
  10 percent of their electricity to come from clean sources, Xcel
  Energy, the state's biggest electric utility fought the initiative
  tooth and nail. However, after the ballot initiative passed, Xcel
  installed thousands of megawatts of clean energy, met the requirement
  eight years ahead of schedule, and quickly agreed to double its goal to
  20 percent. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/17/AR2008081702193.html)

• The same program could
  easily be duplicated across the country. Enough wind power blows
  through the Midwest corridor every day to also meet 100 percent of US
  electricity demand. Similarly, geothermal energy is capable of
  providing tremendous electricity supplies for America.

• Scientists have shown that
  enough solar energy hits the earth every 40 minutes to meet 100 percent
  of the entire world's energy needs for a year. A report released by the
  energy consulting firm Clean Edge in June showed that solar energy
  could meet 10 percent of the of the country's electricity needs by 2025.

• Plug-in hybrids running on clean energy provide transportation for the equivalent of approximately $1 / gallon (http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/8/25/132857/180 and http://select.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/opinion/05kristof.html?_r=1&oref=sl...).

SOURCES:

State-by-state analysis of green investment:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/06/green_jobs.html

"Renewable Power's Growth in Colorado Presages National Debate":

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/17/AR2008081702193.html

New data on how investing in green economy solutions like wind and
solar would create about twice the jobs as the Wall Street bailout: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081013/hurowitz

More details on taxpayer giveaways to energy companies in the bailout bill: http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/enviro-tax-letter.pdf