- Three female fugitives wanted in New Jersey restaurant theft arrested in Illinois
- Man guilty in 2012 crash into home that injured 8-year-old
- McDonald’s: Federal complaint says company is joint employer
- T-Mobile settlement: $90M for cell phone bill cramming
- Shelter Care Ministries gets $30,000 grant
- Even more dead bees?
- Holiday travel: 98.6 million plan getaway, most on record
- Scam artists posing as utility reps, demanding payment
- Holiday mailing deadlines approach, Rockford Post Office warns
- Hispanics more than half of all renters, yet most are uninsured
To the Editor: Carbon Capture system wastes energy and money
Planned since 2003, a coal-fired Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) electrical generation plant was to be built in Mattoon, Ill., at a cost of $2.4 billion. In August, however, the location of the proposed plant was moved to Meredosia in western Illinois, and the CO2 emissions were to be piped 75 miles back to Mattoon to be pumped into the ground. Even without this additional step, the CCS process requires at least 25 percent more energy than a conventional coal generator. This means one-fourth more coal has to be mined, transported and burned to get the same output. Some environmental benefit. Dan Howells of Greenpeace calls CCS “nothing more than an industry pipe dream.”
In Florida, by contrast, one coal plant uses a gasification process (IGCC) that burns 15 percent less fuel and is10 percent more efficient. U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin (D) of Illinois, however, wants none of that. He says that “It really made no sense to build a power plant to prove what’s already being tested in three or four commercial facilities.” In other words, we don’t want to build something that already works. Always expect the government to spend more to get less—and send you the bill.
William J. Lee
From the Sept. 15-21, 2010 issue