Benefit of emission reduction in coal-fired power plants demonstrated with environmental burden index

Coal-fired power plant operators can make substantial reductions in actual greenhouse gases and huge reductions in other emissions. Operating costs would be reduced while the cost of electricity and life cycle costs would not increase. The large investment to accomplish this would greatly boost the U.S. economy. This is the conclusion of the McIlvaine Company in its just completed analysis: Power Plant Environmental Burden Analysis.

Robert McIlvaine, president of McIlvaine Company (USA) says "We do not have to wait until CO₂ capture technologies are commercialized. CO₂ and other equivalent emissions can be reduced 85 percent with a low cost but innovative holistic approach. By adopting the European strategy of replacing old coal-fired plants with new efficient ones, we can have our cake and eat it too: a better environment and a better economy and no rise in electricity cost." The concepts of eco-efficiency and sustainability of necessity require the assignment of numerical values to a range of environmental burdens. McIlvaine has created an index which includes a range of air pollutants and greenhouse gases. Most decisions to reduce air pollutants result in greenhouse gas increases. The energy required to remove NO_x from stack gases results in added electricity consumption and, therefore, increased CO₂ emissions. The reverse is occasionally true as well. Increases in particulate emissions will lead to global cooling. However, the harm caused by the increased particulate emissions would far outweigh the greenhouse gas benefits. All air pollutants have been numerically equated based on the burden (harm) they cause. Air toxics have been ranked based on the EPA draft "Lesser Quantity Emission Rate (LQER)". NO_x, SO₂, and particulate have been ranked based on a variation of the LQER. This equates particulate with the most benign toxic and equates NO_x and SO_x at 1/10 the most benign toxic.