Search This Blog

Sunday, August 9, 2020

American ancestry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

American ancestry
Total population
21,227,906
6.6% of the US population in 2017
Regions with significant populations
Southern United States and Midwestern United States
Languages
English (American English dialects)
Religion
Predominantly Christianity (Mainly Protestantism)
Related ethnic groups
American ancestries

American ancestry refers to people in the United States who self-identify their ancestral origin or descent as "American", rather than the more common officially recognized racial and ethnic groups that make up the bulk of the American people. The majority of these respondents are visibly White Americans, who either simply use this response as a political statement or are far removed from and no longer self-identify with their original ethnic ancestral origins. The latter response is attributed to a multitude of generational distance from ancestral lineages, and these tend be of English, Scotch-Irish, or other British ancestries, as demographers have observed that those ancestries tend to be seriously undercounted in U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey ancestry self-reporting estimates. Although U.S. Census data indicates "American ancestry" is commonly self-reported in the Deep South and Upland South, the vast majority of Americans and expatriates do not equate their nationality with ancestry, race or ethnicity, but with citizenship and allegiance.

Historical reference

The earliest attested use of the term "American" to identify an ancestral or cultural identity dates to the late 1500s, with the term signifying "the indigenous peoples discovered in the Western Hemisphere by Europeans." In the following century, the term "American" was extended as a reference to colonists of European descent. The Oxford English Dictionary identifies this secondary meaning as "historical" and states that the term "American" today "chiefly [means] a native (birthright) or citizen of the United States."

American westward expansion is idealized in Emanuel Leutze's famous painting Westward the Course of Empire Takes Its Way (1861). The title of the painting, from a 1726 poem by Bishop Berkeley, was a phrase often quoted in the era of "manifest destiny".
 
President Theodore Roosevelt asserted that an "American race" had been formed on the American frontier, one distinct from other ethnic groups, such as the Anglo-Saxons. He believed, "The conquest and settlement by the whites of the Indian lands was necessary to the greatness of the race...." "We are making a new race, a new type, in this country." Roosevelt's "race" beliefs certainly weren't unique in the 19th and early 20th century. Eric Kaufmann has suggested that American nativism has been explained primarily in psychological and economic terms to the neglect of a crucial cultural and ethnic dimension. Kauffman contends American nativism cannot be understood without reference to the theorem of the age that an "American" national ethnic group had taken shape prior to the large-scale immigration of the mid-19th century.

Nativism gained its name from the "Native American" parties of the 1840s and 1850s. In this context "Native" does not mean indigenous or American Indian but rather those descended from the inhabitants of the original Thirteen Colonies (Colonial American ancestry). These "Old Stock Americans", primarily English Protestants, saw Catholic immigrants as a threat to traditional American republican values, as they were loyal to the papacy.

Flag of the Know Nothing or American Party, c. 1850

Nativist outbursts occurred in the Northeast from the 1830s to the 1850s, primarily in response to a surge of Catholic immigration. The Order of United American Mechanics was founded as a nativist fraternity, following the Philadelphia nativist riots of the preceding spring and summer, in December 1844. The New York City anti-Irish, anti-German, anti-Catholic secret society the Order of the Star Spangled Banner was formed in 1848. Popularised nativist movements included the Know Nothing or American Party of the 1850s and the Immigration Restriction League of the 1890s. Nativism would eventually influence Congress; in 1924, legislation limiting immigration from Southern and Eastern European countries was ratified, while quantifying previous formal and informal anti-Asian previsions, such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the Gentlemen's Agreement of 1907.

Modern usage

Statistical data

According to U.S. Census Bureau; "Ancestry refers to a person's ethnic origin or descent, 'roots,' or heritage, or the place of birth of the person or the person's parents or ancestors before their arrival in the United States".


According to 2000 U.S census data, an increasing number of United States citizens identify simply as "American" on the question of ancestry. The Census Bureau reports the number of people in the United States who reported "American" and no other ancestry increased from 12.4 million in 1990 to 20.2 million in 2000. This increase represents the largest numerical growth of any ethnic group in the United States during the 1990s.

In the 1980 census, 26% of United States residents cited that they were of English ancestry, making them the largest group at the time. Slightly more than half of these individuals would cite that they were of "American" ancestry on subsequent censuses when the option to do so was made available, with areas where "American" ancestry predominates on the 2000 census corresponding to places where "English" predominated on the 1980 census.

In the 2000 United States Census, 6.9% of the American population chose to self-identify itself as having "American ancestry". The four states in which a plurality of the population reported American ancestry were Arkansas (15.7%), Kentucky (20.7%), Tennessee (17.3%), and West Virginia (18.7%). Sizable percentages of the populations of Alabama (16.8%), Mississippi (14.0%), North Carolina (13.7%), South Carolina (13.7%), Georgia (13.3%), and Indiana (11.8%) also reported American ancestry.

Map showing areas in red with high concentration of people who self-report as having "American" ancestry in 2000

In the Southern United States as a whole, 11.2% reported "American" ancestry, second only to African American. American was the fourth most common ancestry reported in the Midwest (6.5%) and West (4.1%). All Southern states except for Delaware, Maryland, Florida, and Texas reported 10% or more American, but outside the South, only Missouri and Indiana did so. American was in the top five ancestries reported in all Southern states except for Delaware, in four Midwestern states bordering the South (Indiana, Kansas, Missouri, and Ohio) as well as Iowa, and six Northwestern states (Colorado, Idaho, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming), but only one Northeastern state, Maine. The pattern of areas with high levels of American is similar to that of areas with high levels of not reporting any national ancestry.

In the 2014 American Community Survey, German Americans (14.4%), Irish Americans (10.4%), English Americans (7.6%) and Italian Americans (5.4%) were the four largest self-reported European ancestry groups in the United States, forming 37.8% of the total population. However, English, Scotch-Irish, and British American demography is considered to be seriously undercounted, as the 6.9% of U.S. Census respondents who self-report and identify simply as "American" are primarily of these ancestries.

Academic analysis

Reynolds Farley writes that "we may now be in an era of optional ethnicity, in which no simple census question will distinguish those who identify strongly with a specific European group from those who report symbolic or imagined ethnicity."

Stanley Lieberson and Mary C. Waters write: "As whites become increasingly distant in generations and time from their immigrant ancestors, the tendency to distort, or remember selectively, one's ethnic origins increases.... [E]thnic categories are social phenomena that over the long run are constantly being redefined and reformulated." Mary C. Waters contends that white Americans of European origin are afforded a wide range of choice: "In a sense, they are constantly given an actual choice—they can either identify themselves with their ethnic ancestry or they can 'melt' into the wider society and call themselves American."

Professors Anthony Daniel Perez and Charles Hirschman write: "European national origins are still common among whites—almost 3 of 5 whites name one or more European countries in response to the ancestry question. ... However, a significant share of whites respond that they are simply "American" or leave the ancestry question blank on their census forms. Ethnicity is receding from the consciousness of many white Americans. Because national origins do not count for very much in contemporary America, many whites are content with a simplified Americanized racial identity. The loss of specific ancestral attachments among many white Americans also results from high patterns of intermarriage and ethnic blending among whites of different European stocks."

Social and economic stratification in Appalachia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Areas included within the Appalachian Regional Commission's charter.
 
The Appalachian region of the Eastern United States is home to over 25 million people and covers parts of mostly mountainous areas of 13 states, including Mississippi, Alabama, Pennsylvania, New York, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, Maryland, and the entire state of West Virginia. The near-isolation of the area's rugged topography is home to communities with a distinct culture, who in many cases are put at a disadvantage because of the transportation and infrastructure problems that have developed.

Appalachia is often divided into three regions—southern (portions of Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, North and South Carolina, and Tennessee), central (portions of Kentucky, southern West Virginia, southern and southeastern Ohio, Virginia, and Tennessee), and northern (parts of New York, Pennsylvania, northern West Virginia, Maryland, and northern and northeastern Ohio) Appalachia. Though all areas of Appalachia share problems of rural poverty, inadequate jobs, services, transportation, education, and infrastructure, some elements (particularly those relating to industry and natural resource extraction) are unique to each sub-region. For example, Appalachians in the central sub-region experience the deepest poverty, partially due to the area's isolation from urban growth centers.

Appalachia is particularly interesting in the context of social and economic divisions within and between the region's socioeconomic communities. In addition, outsiders' often incorrect and over-generalized external perspectives, and their relationship to culture and folklore of this near-isolated area, are important to the region's future development.

Poverty, politics, and uneven economic development

Though industry and business existed in Appalachia before the 20th century, the major modern industries of agriculture, large-scale coal mining, timber, and other outside corporate entries did not truly take root until this time. Many Appalachians sold their rights to land and minerals to such corporations, to the extent that 99 percent of the residents control less than half of the land. Thus, though the area has a wealth of natural resources, natives are often poor. Since at least the 1960s, Appalachia has a higher poverty rate and a higher percentage of working poor than the rest of the nation. Wages, employment rates, and education also lag. The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) was created in 1965 to address some of the region's problems, and though there have been improvements, serious issues still exist. Communities that are not considered "growth centers" are bypassed for investment and fall further behind. In 1999, roughly a quarter of the counties in the region qualified as "distressed," the ARC's worst status ranking. Fifty-seven percent of adults in central Appalachia did not graduate from high school (as opposed to less than 20 percent in the general U.S.), roughly 20 percent of homes have no telephone, and the population is declining.

According to the statistics conducted by ARC, one out of every three Appalachians suffered from poverty; their average income was 23 percent lower than the average level of American per capita income; and due to the poor infrastructure, health care, high unemployment rate and other tough living conditions, two million or more Appalachians left their homes during the 1950s. Poverty in Appalachian had not been given attention until the 1960s. In the year 1960, the Region's government was trying to solve the poverty problem with a will. After one year, the newly elected President John F. Kennedy was touched by the poverty he saw there and decided to improve the living standard of Appalachians. In 1963, President Kennedy set up President's Appalachian Regional Committee, aimed to formulate a program to improve the Appalachian economy. The program was outlined in 1964. One year later, his successor, President Lyndon B. Johnson submitted PARC's reports to the Congress and the program was passed in 1965.

Infrastructure as an agent of poverty

One of the factors at the root of Appalachian economic struggles is the poor infrastructure. Though the region is crisscrossed by many U.S. and interstate highways, those routes primarily serve cross-country traffic rather than local traffic. Towns closer to the major highways and nearer to the many larger cities fringing the region (Pittsburgh, Wheeling, Columbus, Cincinnati, Atlanta, Washington, D.C., etc.) are disproportionately better-off than rural regions in the mountainous interior.

Transportation may be the reason which most restricts the development of the economy. So after the Appalachian Regional Commission was established, road construction has become the first concern of regional development. In the following years, the Commission has spent plenty of capital on road construction.

Instead of being tied to the land, jobs in the towns tend to emphasize industry and services—important signs of a more diversified economy. However, aside from the major urban centers along its perimeter, the entire Appalachian region still suffers from population decline and the loss of younger residents to the cities.

Another factor affecting development has been sheer inequality in power between the classes. Historically, elites interested in satisfying personal goals have controlled Appalachian politics to the expense of the region's poorer residents. Seeing no personal benefit to establishing infrastructure, they generally eschewed developments that would have been difficult and expensive to establish in the mountainous areas. Instead, they allowed the region to rely on industry—using barges to send natural resources to market, requiring that workers have only minimal education, etc.--and created no infrastructure for business.

There is a lot of evidence to show that economic status generally has a positive effect on education. This positive link suggests that people in Appalachia are less educated than in rest areas of the nation. "Labor economists estimated that the inflation-adjusted rate of return to an additional year of schooling is about 10 percent on average". (Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland) This means, each additional school year will contribute a 10 percent average gain in earnings. "At the same time, this 10 percent average return masks important variation in returns across individuals with different levels of schooling". (Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland) High school graduates often earn more than those with GED recipients. During past decades, the Appalachian population are better educated than many years ago, but it still lags behind the United States' average level. From Burris's research, the central lands of Appalachia have been dominated by landowners who only show interest in the profits of mountaintop coal mining, undermining the importance of those who live in the areas and the effect their business has on their lives. It is the cyclical way of life where those who profit from the detrimental effects are the ones who do not have to endure those effects. This economy has caused a region-wide depression on the people as well as other afflictions such as illness and addiction. The goal is to eliminate the depression and need people feel to abuse pain medications. As systems work together to aim attention of younger generations at education instead of drugs. "For well over a century now, central Appalachia has been ruled by absentee landowners only interested in making the highest profit available from natural resource extraction, primarily coal. From the beginning of its presence in the mountains, the coal industry intentionally created single-industry economies to exert absolute control over the people, the politicians, the land and the wealth that still flows out of the mountains". (American Psychologic Association) 

Now, with roughly 100,000 jobs left for miners, Appalachianites are unable to access jobs or the resources and opportunities necessary to lift themselves out of poverty. Some academics contend that the situation of Appalachianites amounts to one similar to that in third world countries: Residents live on land that cannot be traded outside of trusted circles or used as collateral because, due to the history of unincorporated businesses with unidentified liabilities, there are not adequate records of ownership rights. This "dead" capital is a factor that contributes to the historical poverty of the region, limiting Appalachianites' abilities to use their investments in home and other land-related capital.

Political inequalities

The elite class instilled strong systems of inequality into Appalachian politics and economy. For instance, the powerful have a history of encouraging racial divisions in order to divide workers and pit them against each other, spurring competition and serving to lower workers' wages. Family history and economic status are also bases of discrimination: One resident notes of employers, "If you have a rich name, they'll take you--otherwise you can't get no work."

Since the 19th century, coal operators and plantation bosses have discouraged education and civic action, allowing workers to become indebted to plantation stores, live in company housing, and generally make themselves vulnerable to the interests of their powerful employers. Community members who experienced a justifiable fear of punishment for speaking out against the corruption of the status quo developed a habit of compliance rather than democratic institutions for social change. Fearful of punishment, middle class residents allied themselves with the elites rather than challenging the system that colored their everyday lives. Burdened by the choice between exile and exploitation, the actual and potential middle class left the region, widening the gap between the poor and those in power. Observers often perceive a fatalistic attitude on the part of the Appalachian people; many suggest that this is due to the history of political corruption and disenfranchisement, which led to weak civic cultures and a sense of powerlessness. Says a volunteer in the area, "the people usually regard politicians as crooks who won't do anything."

In the remote mountain districts, violent feuds often happen. Appalachians use assassination and guns as weapons, against each other for several years. The major participants are always the elite class and people who are fighting for their political rights.

Educational disadvantages

In 2000, 80.49 percent of all adults in the United States were high school graduates, as opposed to 76.89 in Appalachia. Almost 30 percent of Appalachian adults are considered functionally illiterate. Education differences between men and women are greater in Appalachia than the rest of the nation, tying into a greater trend of gender inequalities.

Education in Appalachia has historically lagged behind average literacy levels of United States. At first, education in this region was largely nurtured through religious institutions. Children who found time away from family work were often taught to read about the Bible and Christian morality. Then, after the civil war, some districts established primary schools and high schools. People began to access standard education during this period, and higher education in large communities was expanded at that time. Lately, in the late 19th century and early 20th century, education in rural areas has been advanced; some settlement schools and sponsored schools were established by organizations. In the 20th century, the national policy has begun affecting education in Appalachia. Those schools were trying to meet the demands which federal and state settled. Some public schools were facing the problem of gathering funds because of government's No Child Left Behind policy. (DeYoung 1517–1521) 

Since Appalachia is a place with abundant resources such as coal, mineral, land and forest, the main jobs here are lumbering, mining and farming. None of these jobs need a high education, and employers don't decide the jobs based on their education level. A diploma has not been a priority in job finding. Many children of school age dropped school to help their family work. Women in Appalachia have less opportunity in access of jobs. Many kinds of jobs in this area require a strong body, so that men are preferred than women by employers when they are seeking jobs.

The National Career Development Association has organized a program hoping to increase the education in the Appalachia region, which has been deprived of what other parts of the nation take for granted. The region is primarily utilized for mining, coal, and its other natural resources and farmland. Families that live in these parts have become accustomed to a certain way of life whether it involve school or working. Many kids are not given the opportunity to be successful, only to remain in the family business surrounding one of the many natural resources from their land. The New Opportunity School for Women, NOSW, has begun offering 14 women a 3-week course in Berea, Kentucky, on employment opportunities, skills, basic knowledge that they may not have received. The NOSW also offers a residential housing opportunity to those with low-income after their participation in the course and thereafter. This brings hope to Appalachian women, although it only allows 14 participants, it is a start and that number can only grow with growth within the Appalachian region.

"Women from the Appalachian region of Kentucky and surrounding south central Appalachian states share common challenges resulting from low educational attainment, limited employment skills, few strong role models and low self-esteem. The presence of these challenges are directly linked to high incidences of early marriage, teen pregnancies, divorce, domestic violence, substance abuse and high school dropout rates". (National Career Development Association.)

This program provides interview, job search, computer and other basic skills that are useful in careers for those less skilled. Women can participate freely, no extra money is required. Participants are provided with classes from Monday to Friday, 8 am to 12 pm and afternoon is internship time. These classes are mainly about: job search, interview skill, math, women's health, computer skills, leadership development, and self-protection. (National Career Development Association) Internships not only include working in a real work site, but also include a training of choosing interview clothes and make-ups. The organizer will also hold some events during the weekends except for additional classes. For instance, the American Association of University Women and the Berea Younger Women's Club are available for participants to choose. They can also go for a field trip to some places. All these efforts are conducted to help women build confidence in job finding. As a vulnerable group of people, these rich experiences can help them become an active part in their living communities. After graduating from NOSW, professional agencies will provides each of them counseling services about education. This program has achieved active outcomes. According to a recent survey, after attending this program, 80 percent of those women participants have incomes for less than 10,000 dollars per year with their half high school degree. Among them, 79 percent of graduates are employed, 55 percent of graduates got an associate degree (two-year), a bachelor's degree or even a master's degree, and 35 percent of graduates got a Certification Program degree. (National Career Development Association)

Gender inequalities in Appalachia

Women have traditionally been reedited to the domestic sphere, often lack access to resources and employment opportunities, are disproportionately represented in peripheral labor markets, and have lower wages and higher vulnerability to job loss. Throughout the region, women typically earn 64 percent of men's wages. However, when adjusted for the fact that women take less risky jobs, that require less qualifications, they make roughly the same amount. Women are also often the hardest-hit by poverty—for example, 70 percent of female-headed households with children under the age of six are in distressed counties, a figure substantially higher than the national average.

Where there is oppression, there is opposition. There are a lot of fearless and outstanding women in Appalachia who stood out to fight for their rights. Women in the Appalachia have long earned their reputation for being strong as well as struggling. Among the many men within the region, women have participated in the fields, mines, and labor movements. Many women have given their all and then some for their families and to stand up for what they believe in. Women have also made waves through literature, art, and keeping their stories and family history alive within their culture.

"Women have played a major role in the labor and activist movements in the coal-bearing regions of Appalachia.", "Other crucial roles for women have involved education, literature, healthcare and art, and the promotion of minorities in our region". (Appalachian Voices).

There are many achievements conducted by outstanding women leadership. Those women devoted their lifelong efforts in improving their social status and in fighting against poverty in their communities and their living regions. A woman named Kathy Selvage was a citizen lobbyist for years and worked in the fight against a proposal for a Wise County coal-fired plant. She says that Appalachian women are people of action. Lorelei Scarbro helped establish a community center in Whitesville, W.V. to encourage outside activity besides the home and workplace. This reunites them with togetherness and a place to convene about ideas and local build-up. Vivian Stockman is the face of the stand against mountaintop removal and has worked endlessly to spread the word through photos of the detrimental effects it has on the land that people call home. These women, among countless others have done everything they can to end the poverty and depression that has plagued their region for so long.




"A coal miner's daughter from Wise County, Va., Selvage has always had a great respect for miners, but when a coal company began blasting off mountaintops in her community, Selvage began working to bring national exposure to mountaintop removal coal mining". (Appalachian Voices). Rural Appalachian has found projects to help women save for their life especially life after retirement. It is kind of program to help females who have problems in raising their children and retirement save money. Some women have saved surprisingly a little for their retirement and they are facing the risk of running out of their money. Appalachian Savings Project was established to alleviate this risk by recreating saving plans for those self-employed women workers who do not have those plans provided by companies. This program is aiming to help the female workers who have children to care about. Anita Wallace is a mother who operates a family day care in Athens County, Ohio. She is 40 years old while her husband is 47 years old and they have three of their own children to raise. As Wallace is self-employed, she has not provided with company retirement plans, for example, company 401(k). She often complaints about that it is expensive to raise children. Since she is not employed by another company, to have retirement funds is a difficult thing for her. Appalachian Saving Project made her an offer that "if she saved 600 dollars in United States saving bonds in a year, it would match half of that".(Npr) Wallace thought it was a great idea, because even if she has not enough money to put in one month, she doesn't need to worry about that. Now she has an account and save 50 dollars per month in it. This program is designed to help women with low or relatively low incomes save for their retired life and to alleviate the retirement crisis for them. Due to the lagged economic status in Appalachian regions and discriminations, there are an increasing number of women who are getting jobs without comprehensive benefits, such as retirement plans. Instead of consumption, it is an investment to have this saving account. Many mothers put their children at first place and will not start to save money for their retirement until their children are independent and do not need their help any more. However, this program is encouraging them to save money for their own need instead of their kids'. There are also some complaints. Most of them complain that they don't have enough time to attend the financial classes and money is always not enough to spare. In a word, the road ahead of Appalachian Saving Project will not be flat. All it wants is that women can realize they can save for themselves and then save more.

Outside perspectives and stereotypes

Though mainstream Americans assume that Appalachian culture is homogeneous in the region, many distinct locales and sub-regions exist. Over-generalizations of Appalachianites as impulsive, personalistic, and individualistic "hillbillies" abound. Many scholars speculate that these stereotypes have been created by powerful economic and political forces to justify exploitation of Appalachian peoples. For example, the same forces that put up barriers to prevent the development of civic culture promulgate the image of Appalachian peoples as politically apathetic, without a social consciousness, and deserving of their disenfranchised state. In spite of the region's desperate need for aid, weariness of being represented as "helpless, dumb and poor" often creates an attitude of hostility among Appalachianites.

Appalachians as a separate status group

It has been suggested that Appalachia constitutes a separate status group under the sociologist Max Weber's definition. The criteria are tradition, endogamy, an emphasis on intimate interaction and isolation from outsiders, monopolization of economic opportunities, and ownership of certain commodities rather than others. Appalachia fulfills at least the first four, if not all five. Furthermore, mainstream Americans tend to see Appalachia as a separate subculture of low status. Based on these facts, it is reasonable to say that Appalachia constitutes a separate status group.

Environmental justice and coal mining in Appalachia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Environmental justice and coal mining in Appalachia is the study of environmental justice – the interdisciplinary body of social science literature studying theories of the environment and justice; environmental laws, policies, and their implementations and enforcement; development and sustainability; and political ecology – in relation to Coal mining in Appalachia.

The Appalachian region of the Southeastern United States is a leading producer of coal in the country. Research shows that people who live in close proximity to mountaintop removal (MTR) mines have higher mortality rates than average, and are more likely to live in poverty and be exposed to harmful environmental conditions than people in otherwise comparable parts of the region.

In the late 1990s, several Appalachian women, including Julia Bonds, began to speak out against MTR and its effects on the people and environment of mining communities. Research has shown that MTR is causing "irreparable" environmental damage in Appalachia. The blasting of mountaintops has polluted stream and water supplies have been contaminated by toxic waste from coal processing called slurry ponds. Scientists have noted an increase in respiratory and heart problems among area residents, including lung cancer. Mortality rates and birth defect rates are higher in the areas surrounding surface mining locations.

Coal mining production in Appalachia declined from 1990 to 2015, but there is some debate over why. Cited factors include a rising demand for clean energy, environmental policies and regulations set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and globalization. The number of coal mining jobs in the region remained steady from 2000 to 2010, but declined by 37% between 2011 and 2015. Less production is responsible for much of this job loss, but improved mining techniques like mountain-top removal also contributed. Discourse around coal in the area has sparked a debate in academia over whether it creates wealth or poverty. The core debate centers around coal production's impact on local and national economy.

Background

Coal production

Appalachia is one of three coal-mining regions in the United States; the others are the Interior coal region, and the Western coal region, which includes the Powder River Basin. Eight states lie in the Appalachian coal region: Alabama, eastern Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. West Virginia is the largest coal-producing state in Appalachia, and the second-largest coal-producing state in the United States, accounting for about 11% of the nation's total coal production in 2014 (the largest coal-producing state is Wyoming, which lies in the Western coal region and accounts for 40% of U.S. coal production). Two other states in the Appalachian coal region, Kentucky and Pennsylvania, account for 8% and 6% of U.S. coal production, respectively.

The coal industry in Appalachia has changed over time. According to U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration data, Central Appalachia—consisting of southern West Virginia, eastern Kentucky, western Virginia, and eastern Tennessee—made up almost 29% of U.S. coal production in the U.S. in 1990, but only about 13% by 2013. By contrast, coal production in Northern Appalachian has remained relatively stable, going from 16% in 1990 to 12.5% in 2013. As a result, "both regions account for nearly the same share of U.S. coal production" as of 2014.

In the Appalachian coal region, 72% of coal produced came from underground mines. This is a much higher percentage than in the Western coal region, where 90% of all coal produced comes from surface mines.

History

Historically, "the building of coal towns began in the 1880s, peaked in the 1920s, and virtually ended with the coming of the Great Depression" when the availability of other forms of energy—namely, oil, gas, and hydroelectricity—reduced demand for coal. The company town was particularly dominant in southern Appalachia; in 1925, almost 80% of West Virginia coal miners lived in company towns, while an average of 64.4% of coal miners in Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee lived in company towns.

Impacts of coal mining in Appalachia

Strip mining in Barnesville, Ohio

Since 1995, the Appalachian region has produced about half of the United States' coal. Although Appalachia has played a large role in contributing to the coal supply of the United States, the communities surrounding such mining practices have suffered immensely. Several studies have shown disparities between mining communities and non-mining communities in terms of public health, environmental degradation, pollution, and overall quality of life in Appalachia. Variations of surface coal mining techniques in the Appalachia include contour, area, high-wall, auger, and mountaintop removal mining (MTR).

Surface mining

The damage caused by mountaintop removal strip mining has had a calculable effect on the environment and communities in Appalachia. The resource rich region remains economically deprived and suffers from the externalities of coal mining, including the health problems caused by coal pollution. The Office of Surface Mining (OSM) is the federal agency tasked with regulating strip-mining under the Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA). According to OSM, "[t]o the extent that low income populations are prevalent in the coalfields, the impacts of mountaintop mining are felt disproportionately by these environmental justice populations".

Most local residents are unable to see the extent of the damage that has been caused by surface mining. Geologist Sean P. Bemis investigated claims by local residents that the extent of the damage was not easily visible. In interviews with the research team, former miner Chuck Nelson stated that the extent of the destruction is only clearly visible from a plane. Coalfield resident activist Maria Gunnoe gave a similar account to the researchers, saying "I never realized it was so bad. My first fly-over with South Wings [non-profit aviation organization], and that right there is what really fired me up. When I got off the plane that day, I cried all the way across the tarmac, all the way home ..." The Government Accountability Office (GAO) confirmed this in a 2009 report:
Despite the public scrutiny that surface mining in mountainous areas has received, the public is limited in its ability to access information on the scope of these operations - their size, location, and how long they have been in operation - and on what the mountain can be expected to look like after mining operations have ceased and the land has been reclaimed
— Government Accountability Office (GAO), as quoted in Fighting King Coal
There are no official records of the total number of "disturbed acres" that have resulted from surface mining, but geospatial analysis has shown that between 1.05million and 1.28million acres of land and more than 500 mountains in West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia have been surface mined.

Mountaintop removal

One form of surface mining is mountaintop removal (MTR). This technique may remove up to 800 to 1000 feet of mountaintops, to reach coal seams not accessible by other surface mining techniques. This practice was used on a small scale in the 1970's and became heavily used in the 1990's. This extraction technique became popular because the increased demand for high-grade low-sulfur coal, due to the Clean Air Act amendments passed in 1990. The process of MTR begins by the deforestation of a chosen mountaintop, then it is blasted with explosives. Next all of the excess soil and rock or "spoil" is moved out, after the mining operation is complete this will be replaced. Once this rock has been disturbed in this process, swelling will take place. The spoil will expand by fifteen to twenty five percent, due to air incorporation and voids. This excess spoil or "overburden" then is dumped into nearby streams or valleys, this process is called a valley fill. Since the boom in MTR usage as many as 500 mountaintops have been destroyed and 2000 miles of waterways have been filled.  Mountaintop mining and valley fills can lead to large scale landscape changes. These may include: fragmentation of forests, conversion of habitats, and loss of large tracts and forested areas.  There also may be adverse effects to the people living in these Appalachian mining communities Micheal Hendrix a researcher at Indiana State University, in an interview with Yale, stated that “The number of excess deaths every year comes to about 1,200 people who live in these mining communities compared to other parts of Appalachia.” The diseases most prevalent in these MTR areas include: cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and COPD. These are not only the occupational illnesses of miners but of the general public. Birth defects especially heart defects risk goes up by 181% in MTR areas. Researchers are beginning to research smaller particulate matter as the cause of these illnesses, and increased mortality.

Effects on health

Several studies have found that communities within the Appalachian region surrounding coal mining practices disproportionately experience negative health effects than communities with no coal mining. Such health disparities are largely attributed to the contamination of water and land associated with coal surface mining. MTR has increased salinity, metals, magnesium, and sulfates within Appalachian watersheds, threatening human health. Sixty-three percent of stream beds near coalfields within the Appalachia mountains have been identified as "impaired" due to high toxic chemical and metal contamination. In West Virginia, 14 counties are experiencing water that exceeds safe drinking water standards by seven times more than non-mining counties. Combustion waste and fly ash from MTR lend to toxic dusts pollute the surrounding air and have contributed to increased levels of cancer, cardiovascular disease, liver disease, and kidney disease. Public health costs of pollution in the Appalachia are upwards of 75 billion dollars a year. In a comparative analysis of health-related quality of residences in counties with and without coal mining Appalachia "reported significantly fewer healthy days for both physical and mental health". The same study highlights strong correlations between heavy coal mining counties and a greater risk of depression and severe psychological distress. Areas in the Appalachia with coal surface mining exhibit greater rates of adverse health effects and reduced self-rated health in comparison to the national average. In addition, studies from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health have concluded a high "relationship between surface coal mining jobs and the prevalence of pneumoconiosis". Lastly, through examination of mortality rates, county-level poverty rates, and coal mining within counties of the Appalachia, it was identified that coal mining areas of Appalachia experienced higher mortality rates then counties with no coal mining.

Environmental impacts

Mountaintop removal coal mining in Martin County, Kentucky

Coal surface mining has heavily altered the hydrological cycle and landscape of the Appalachia causing environmental degradation and contributing to ecosystem damages beyond repair. Surface coal mining in the Appalachian has contributed to the destruction of over 500 mountain tops. In addition, it has led to the clearance of over 1 million acres of forests and contributed to the degradation or permanent loss of over 12000 miles of streams crucial to the Appalachia watershed from 1985- 2001. Increased salinity and metal contamination of the Appalachian streams have led to toxic effects of fish and bird species. Mountaintop removal, or MTR, is a type of surface mining that has played a major role in negatively impacting the Appalachian environment. When MTR is used, it causes much of the contaminants from the process to be emptied into surrounding valleys which, oftentimes, make their way into nearby streams. These wastes are disposed in "valley fills" which have collapsed and produced heavy flash floods in Appalachia. The Environmental Protection Agency approximates that between 1985 and 2001, over 700 miles worth of streams in the Appalachians were covered by these "valley fills" due to mountaintop removal coal mining.

Social and economic impacts

Appalachia has historically been one of the most impoverished regions of the country.

There is a debate about whether coal production is a source of wealth or poverty in Appalachia. The U.S. geological survey and the U.S. bureau of mines states that there is a coal-wealth paradox in Appalachia. Appalachia is home to some of the largest coal mines yet the average per capita income is only about 68% of the national per capita income. However, work done by Black and Sanders shows that between 1970 and 1980 the increase in coal production substantially boosted the pay of low skilled workers in Appalachia and likely caused a decrease in income inequality.

Although coal mining industries are often associated with increased jobs and economic growth, this association does not hold for Appalachia, where two-thirds of the counties have higher levels of unemployment than the nation and per capita personal wages falling 20% lower than the nation. More specifically, in Hendryx and Zullig's comparative analysis of Appalachia counties, those with coal mining had greater economic disparities and more poverty than those without industry. The shift towards coal surface mining from underground mining led to a 50% decline in mining jobs from 1985 to 2005, and competition from cheap natural gas also decreased demand for coal, leading some mines to close or reduce extraction, which further increased unemployment. From 2014 to 2015, overall mining employment for Appalachia has dropped by 15.9%. A NASA study states that promises of beneficial post-mining development in the Appalachian region have yet to materialize. A 2017 study found that neighborhoods closest to coal impoundments are "slightly more likely to have higher rates of poverty and unemployment, even after controlling for rurality, mining-related variables, and spatial dependence".

Specific events

Buffalo Creek Disaster

In 1972, a slurry pond built by Pittson Coal Company collapsed. In what is known as the Buffalo Creek disaster 130 million gallons of sludge flooded Buffalo Creek. More recently, a waste impoundment owned by Massey burst in Kentucky, flooding nearby streams with 250 tons of coal slurry.

Law and regulation

The Black Lung Benefits Act of 1973 provided payments to coal miners disabled from Coalworker's pneumoconiosis or "black lung disease" and their dependent survivors.

The 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) created two programs: one for regulating active coal mines and a second for reclaiming abandoned mine lands.

In the view of Jedediah Purdy, The Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act improved the quality of air and water for much of America, but created "sacrificial zones" in America, including coal mining communities in Appalachia, that hid the environmental effects of industry and agriculture from people in suburbs but increased exposure to danger for people who lived near sites of pollution.

These laws, along with the National Environmental Policy Act form the basis in law for regulation of coal mining, including mountaintop removal mining. Regulations issued on the basis of these laws focus on issuing or withholding permits for new mining operations; the regulations themselves have been contested. As of 2012, these laws did not take into account direct effects on communities near mines nor economic or racial disparities in those communities, and regulations and executive orders issued that attempted to address such environmental justice concerns had been struck down, and legal challenges based on potential effects on local communities generally failed, since neither the law nor regulations were written to address these concerns and judges ruled based on what the law and regulations actually said.

The Affordable Care Act is a federal government health care law; it includes provisions that amend the Black Lung Benefits program. The Black Lung Benefits program details the extent to which coal miners have their medical coverage compensated by the federal government. The ACA provisions that amend the Black Lung Benefits program are commonly known as the Byrd Amendments taking its name from the late West Virginia Congressman Robert Byrd. The Byrd Amendments are found in Section 1556 of the ACA. Among the many protections the Byrd Amendments provides coal miners, it covers medical expenses for coal miners who worked at least 15 years underground (or comparable surface mining) and who have a totally disabling respiratory impairment. Further, it shifts the burden of proof of disability due to "black lung disease" from these coal miners back to the coal companies. Coalworker's pneumoconiosis or "black lung disease" can be a common health problem faced by retired coal miners.

The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977

Early attempts to regulate strip-mining on the state level were largely unsuccessful due to lax enforcement. The Appalachian Group to Save the Land and the People was founded in 1965 to stop surface mining. In 1968, Congress held the first hearings on strip mining. Ken Hechler introduced the first strip-mining abolition bill in Congress in 1971. Though this bill was not passed, provisions establishing a process to reclaim abandoned strip mines and allowing citizens to sue regulatory agencies became parts of SMCRA.

SMCRA also created the Office of Surface Mining, an agency within the Department of the Interior, to promulgate regulations, to fund state regulatory and reclamation efforts, and to ensure consistency among state regulatory programs.

Advocacy groups

The study of justice has often been defined by the theories of John Rawls. Justice theory has focused on the principles by the which to distribute goods in a society. The defining arguments of the environmental justice movement were about patterns that violated some of these distributive principles of justice theory. Several contemporary scholars have developed theories of justice that are broader then the distributional theory of justice.

The study of justice theory, as applied to the environmental justice, has primarily focused on "maldistribution". In other words, this area of study has concentrated on the fact that poor communities, indigenous communities and communities of color are often disproportionately impacted by environmentally-related negative externalities and receive less environmental protection.

Environmental justice has been identified by scholars as a movement that acknowledged the disproportionate effects of environmental damage and toxic contamination on the poor and people of color. It has also been noted that the race and class of the parties effects the community's chances of success in enacting reforms. Environmental justice groups were community grassroots organizations that combined environmentalism with issues of race a class equality. These groups organized in opposition to the disproportionate threat mountain communities faced from health hazards like acid mine drainage.

Save Our Cumberland Mountains

Save Our Cumberland Mountains (SOCM, pronounced "sock 'em") was founded when thirteen residents of the Tennessee coalfields petitioned their state government to make coal landholders pay a fair share of taxes. SOCM later grew into one of most significant community organizations in the region and went on to lead a major legislative campaign against employers who replaced their permanent employees with long-term temporary workers.

J.W. Bradley was the president of SOCM for its first five years. He had worked in the deep mines and was outspoken about what he called the "evils of strip mining." He believed in using litigation to pursue reform. In 1974, SOCM established the East Tennessee Research Corporation as a public interest law firm. By 1976, SOCM was trying to ban strip mining and targeting individual strip mining operations.

An attorney who worked with SOCM in the 1970s has written that very few people of color were involved with SOCM in the early years. He highlights the importance of regional organizations like the Highlander Research and Education Center that "seek to bring together diverse communities to share their knowledge about the inner dynamics of environmental justice issues".

Mountain Justice

Mountain Justice began in 2005 as a summer-long campaign for the abolition of MTM. The organization was started after a 2004 mining accident in Virginia. A three year old was killed when a boulder rolled off a MTM site above his home. The first MJ meeting took place in Knoxville, Tennessee and included activists from Coal River Mountain Watch (CRMW), the Sierra Club, Appalachian Voices, and Katuah Earth First (KEF!). Their mission statement includes a commitment to non-violence.

Coal pollution mitigation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Government Accountability Office diagram showing emissions controls at a coal fired power plant

Coal pollution mitigation, often called clean coal, is a series of systems and technologies that seek to mitigate the pollution and other environmental effects normally associated with the burning (though not the mining or processing) of coal, which is widely regarded as the dirtiest of the common fuels for industrial processes and power generation.

Approaches attempt to mitigate emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases, and radioactive materials, that arise from the use of coal, mainly for electrical power generation, using various technologies. Historical efforts to reduce coal pollution focused on flue-gas desulfurization starting in the 1850s and clean burn technologies. These efforts have been very successful in countries with strong environmental regulation, where emissions of acid-rain causing compounds and particulates have been reduced by up to 90% since 1995. More recent developments include carbon capture and storage, which pumps and stores CO2 emissions underground, and integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) involve coal gasification, which provides a basis for increased efficiency and lower cost in capturing CO2 emissions.

There are seven technologies deployed or proposed by the National Mining Association for deployment in the United States:
Of the 22 clean coal demonstration projects funded by the U.S. Department of Energy since 2003, none are in operation as of February 2017, having been abandoned or delayed due to capital budget overruns or discontinued because of excessive operating expenses.

Regulations

Since the 1970s, various policy and regulatory measures have driven coal pollution mitigation. In the US, the Clean Air Act was the primary driving force in reducing particulate emissions and acid rain from coal combustion. As regulations have increased the demand for coal pollution mitigation technologies, costs have fallen and performance has improved.

The widespread deployment of pollution-control equipment to reduce sulfur dioxide, NOx and dust emissions is just one example that brought cleaner air to many countries. The desire to tackle rising CO2 emissions to address climate change later introduced Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS).

Within the United States, Carbon Capture and Storage technologies, also sometimes referred to as carbon capture and sequestration, are mainly being developed in response to regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency—most notably the Clean Air Act—and in anticipation of legislation that seeks to mitigate climate change.

Loan guarantees and tax incentives have a long history of use in Australia, EU countries, and the US to encourage the introduction of coal pollution mitigation and other technologies to reduce environmental impact.

Environmental impact of coal

Greenhouse gases

Combustion of coal—which is mostly carbon—produces carbon dioxide as a product of combustion. According to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the burning of coal, a fossil fuel, is a significant contributor to global warming. (See the UN IPCC Fourth Assessment Report). Burning 1 ton of coal produces 2.86 tons of carbon dioxide.

Carbon sequestration technology has yet to be tested on a large scale and may not be safe or successful. Sequestered CO2 may eventually leak up through the ground, may lead to unexpected geological instability or may cause contamination of aquifers used for drinking water supplies.

As a quarter of world energy consumption in 2019 was from coal, reaching the carbon dioxide reduction targets of the Paris Agreement will require modifications to how coal is used.

Measurement of pollution and availability of pollution data

In some countries, such as the EU, smokestack measurements from individual power plants must be published. Whereas in some countries, such as Turkey, they are only reported to the government not the public. However, since the late 2010s satellite measurements of some pollutants have been available.

Combustion By-products

By-products of coal combustion are compounds which are released into the atmosphere as a result of burning coal. Coal includes contaminants such as sulfur compounds and non-combustible minerals. When coal is burned, the minerals become ash (i.e. particulate matter or PM) and the sulfur forms sulfur dioxide (SO2). Since air is mostly nitrogen, combustion of coal often leads to production of nitrogen oxides. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are primary causes of acid rain. For many years—before greenhouse gasses were widely understood to be a threat—it was thought that these by-products were the only drawback to using coal. These by-products are still a problem, but they have been greatly diminished in most advanced countries due to clean air regulations. It is possible to remove most of the sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter (PM) emissions from the coal-burning process. For example, various techniques are used in a coal preparation plant to reduce the amount of non-combustible matter (i.e. ash) in the coal prior to burning. During combustion, fluidized bed combustion is used to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions. After burning, particulate matter (i.e. ash and dust) can be reduced using an electrostatic precipitator and sulfur dioxide emissions can be further reduced with flue-gas desulfurization. Trace amounts of radionuclides are more difficult to remove.

Coal-fired power plants are the largest aggregate source of the toxic heavy metal mercury: 50 tons per year come from coal power plants out of 150 tons emitted nationally in the US and 5000 tons globally. However, according to the United States Geological Survey, the trace amounts of mercury in coal by-products do not pose a threat to public health. A study in 2013 found that mercury found in the fish in the Pacific Ocean could possibly be linked to coal-fired plants in Asia.

Potential financial impact

Whether carbon capture and storage technology is adopted worldwide will "...depend less on science than on economics. Cleaning coal is very expensive." 

Cost of converting a single coal-fired power plant

Conversion of a conventional coal-fired power plant is done by injecting the CO
2
into ammonium carbonate after which it is then transported and deposited underground (preferably in soil beneath the sea). This injection process however is by far the most expensive. Besides the cost of the equipment and the ammonium carbonate, the coal-fired power plant also needs to use 30% of its generated heat to do the injection (parasitic load). A test-setup has been done in the American Electric Power Mountaineer coal-burning power plant.

One solution to reduce this thermal loss/parasitic load is to burn the pulverised load with pure oxygen instead of air.

Cost implications for new coal-fired power plants

Newly built coal-fired power plants can be made to immediately use gasification of the coal prior to combustion. This makes it much easier to separate off the CO
2
from the exhaust fumes, making the process cheaper. This gasification process is done in new coal-burning power plants such as the coal-burning power plant at Tianjin, called "GreenGen".

Costs for China

As of 2019 costs of retrofitting CCS are unclear and the economics depends partly on how the Chinese national carbon trading scheme progresses.

Costs for India

As of 2019 some argue that "with the right policy initiatives and market design" gasification with CCS would be cost effective for some coal plants.

Politics

Australia

In Australia, carbon capture and storage was often referred to by then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as a possible way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. (The previous Prime Minister John Howard had stated that nuclear power was a better alternative, as CCS technology may not prove to be economically feasible.)

Canada

In 2014 SaskPower a provincial-owned electric utility finished renovations on Boundary Dam's boiler number 3 making it the world's first post-combustion carbon capture storage facility. The renovation project ended up costing a little over $1.2 billion and can scrub out CO2 and toxins from up to 90 percent of the flue gas that it emits.

China

Since 2006, China releases more CO
2
than any other country. Researchers in China are focusing on increasing efficiency of burning coal so they can get more power out of less coal. It is estimated that new high efficiency power plants could reduce CO2 emission by 7% because they won't have to burn as much coal to get the same amount of power.

Japan

Following the catastrophic failure of the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant in Japan that resulted from the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami, and the subsequent widespread public opposition against nuclear power, high energy, lower emission (HELE) coal power plants were increasingly favored by the Shinzō Abe-led government to recoup lost energy capacity from the partial shutdown of nuclear power plants in Japan and to replace aging coal and oil-fired power plants, while meeting 2030 emission targets of the Paris Agreement. 45 HELE power plants have been planned, purportedly to employ integrated gasification fuel cell cycle, a further development of integrated gasification combined cycle.

Japan had adopted prior pilot projects on IGCC coal power plants in the early-1990s and late-2000s.

United States

In the United States, "clean coal" was mentioned by former President George W. Bush on several occasions, including his 2007 State of the Union Address. Bush's position was that carbon capture and storage technologies should be encouraged as one means to reduce the country's dependence on foreign oil.

During the US Presidential campaign for 2008, both candidates John McCain and Barack Obama expressed interest in the development of CCS technologies as part of an overall comprehensive energy plan. The development of pollution mitigation technologies could also create export business for the United States or any other country working on it.

The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, signed in 2009 by President Obama, allocated $3.4 billion for advanced carbon capture and storage technologies, including demonstration projects.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said that "we should strive to have new electricity generation come from other sources, such as clean coal and renewables", and former Energy Secretary Dr. Steven Chu has said that "It is absolutely worthwhile to invest in carbon capture and storage", noting that even if the U.S. and Europe turned their backs on coal, developing nations like India and China would likely not.

During the first 2012 United States presidential election debate, Mitt Romney expressed his support for clean coal, and claimed that current federal policies were hampering the coal industry.

Office of Clean Coal and Carbon Management

The Office of Clean Coal and Carbon Management is part of the United States Department of Energy. It sponsors research into "clean coal" technology. 

Criticism of the approach

Environmentalists such as Dan Becker, director of the Sierra Club's Global Warming and Energy Program, believes that the term "clean coal" is misleading: "There is no such thing as clean coal and there never will be. It's an oxymoron." The Sierra Club's Coal Campaign has launched a site refuting the clean coal statements and advertising of the coal industry.

Complaints focus on the environmental impacts of coal extraction, high costs to sequester carbon, and uncertainty of how to manage end result pollutants and radionuclides. In reference to sequestration of carbon, concerns exist about whether geologic storage of CO2 in reservoirs, aquifers, etc., is indefinite/permanent.

The palaeontologist and influential environmental activist Tim Flannery made the assertion that the concept of clean coal might not be viable for all geographical locations.

Critics also believe that the continuing construction of coal-powered plants (whether or not they use carbon sequestration techniques) encourages unsustainable mining practices for coal, which can strip away mountains, hillsides, and natural areas. They also point out that there can be a large amount of energy required and pollution emitted in transporting the coal to the power plants.




The Reality Coalition, a US non-profit climate organization composed of the Alliance for Climate Protection, the Sierra Club, the National Wildlife Federation, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the League of Conservation Voters, ran a series of television commercials in 2008 and 2009. The commercials were highly critical of attempts to mitigate coal's pollution, stating that without capturing CO2 emissions and storing it safely that it cannot be called "clean coal".


Greenpeace is a major opponent of the concept, because they view emissions and wastes as not being avoided but instead transferred from one waste stream to another. According to Greenpeace USA's Executive Director Phil Radford speaking in 2012, "even the industry figures it will take 10 or 20 years to arrive, and we need solutions sooner than that. We need to scale up renewable energy; 'clean coal' is a distraction from that."

Clean coal

The term Clean Coal in modern society often refers to the carbon capture and storage process. The term has been used by advertisers, lobbyists, and politicians such as Donald Trump.

Prior terminology

The industry term "clean coal" is increasingly used in reference to carbon capture and storage, an advanced theoretical process that would eliminate or significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions from coal-based plants and permanently sequester them. More generally, the term has been found in modern usage to describe technologies designed to enhance both the efficiency and the environmental acceptability of coal extraction, preparation, and use.

U.S. Senate Bill 911 in April, 1987, defined clean coal technology as follows:
"The term clean coal technology means any technology...deployed at a new or existing facility which will achieve significant reductions in air emissions of sulfur dioxide or oxides of nitrogen associated with the utilization of coal in the generation of electricity."
Before being adopted in this fashion, historically "clean coal" was used to refer to clean-burning coal with low levels of impurities, though this term faded after rates of domestic coal usage dropped. The term appeared in a speech to mine workers in 1918, in context indicating coal that was "free of dirt and impurities." In the early 20th century, prior to World War II, clean coal (also called "smokeless coal") generally referred to anthracite and high-grade bituminous coal, used for cooking and home heating.

Clean coal technology is a collection of technologies being developed in attempts to lessen the negative environmental impact of coal energy generation and to mitigate worldwide climate change. When coal is used as a fuel source, the gaseous emissions generated by the thermal decomposition of the coal include sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), mercury, and other chemical byproducts that vary depending on the type of the coal being used. These emissions have been established to have a negative impact on the environment and human health, contributing to acid rain, lung cancer and cardiovascular disease. As a result, clean coal technologies are being developed to remove or reduce pollutant emissions to the atmosphere. Some of the techniques that would be used to accomplish this include chemically washing minerals and impurities from the coal, gasification (see also IGCC), improved technology for treating flue gases to remove pollutants to increasingly stringent levels and at higher efficiency, carbon capture and storage technologies to capture the carbon dioxide from the flue gas and dewatering lower rank coals (brown coals) to improve the calorific value, and thus the efficiency of the conversion into electricity. Concerns exist regarding the economic viability of these technologies and the timeframe of delivery, potentially high hidden economic costs in terms of social and environmental damage, and the costs and viability of disposing of removed carbon and other toxic matter.

In its original usage, the term "Clean Coal" was used to refer to technologies that were designed to reduce emission of pollutants associated with burning coal, such as washing coal at the mine. This step removes some of the sulfur and other contaminants, including rocks and soil. This makes coal cleaner and cheaper to transport. More recently, the definition of clean coal has been expanded to include carbon capture and storage. Clean coal technology usually addresses atmospheric problems resulting from burning coal. Historically, the primary focus was on SO2 and NOx, the most important gases in causation of acid rain, and particulates which cause visible air pollution and have deleterious effects on human health.

Technology

Several different technological methods are available for the purpose of carbon capture as demanded by the clean coal concept:
  • Pre-combustion capture – This involves gasification of a feedstock (such as coal) to form synthesis gas, which may be shifted to produce a H2 and CO2-rich gas mixture, from which the CO2 can be efficiently captured and separated, transported, and ultimately sequestered, This technology is usually associated with Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle process configurations.
  • Post-combustion capture – This refers to capture of CO2 from exhaust gases of combustion processes.
  • Oxy-fuel combustion – Fossil fuels such as coal are burned in a mixture of recirculated flue gas and oxygen, rather than in air, which largely eliminates nitrogen from the flue gas enabling efficient, low-cost CO2 capture.
The Kemper County IGCC Project, a proposed 582 MW coal gasification-based power plant, was expected to use pre-combustion capture of CO2 to capture 65% of the CO2 the plant produces, which would have been utilized and geologically sequestered in enhanced oil recovery operations. However, after many delays and a cost runup to $7.5 billion (triple the initial budget), the coal gasification project was abandoned and as of late 2017, Kemper is under construction as a cheaper natural gas power plant.

The Saskatchewan Government's Boundary Dam Integrated Carbon Capture and Sequestration Demonstration Project will use post-combustion, amine-based scrubber technology to capture 90% of the CO2 emitted by Unit 3 of the power plant; this CO2 will be pipelined to and utilized for enhanced oil recovery in the Weyburn oil fields.

An oxyfuel CCS power plant operation processes the exhaust gases so as to separate the CO2 so that it may be stored or sequestered
 
An early example of a coal-based plant using (oxy-fuel) carbon-capture technology is Swedish company Vattenfall’s Schwarze Pumpe power station located in Spremberg, Germany, built by German firm Siemens, which went on-line in September 2008. The facility captures CO2 and acid rain producing pollutants, separates them, and compresses the CO2 into a liquid. Plans are to inject the CO2 into depleted natural gas fields or other geological formations. Vattenfall opines that this technology is considered not to be a final solution for CO2 reduction in the atmosphere, but provides an achievable solution in the near term while more desirable alternative solutions to power generation can be made economically practical.

Other examples of oxy-combustion carbon capture are in progress. Callide Power Station has retrofitted a 30-MWth existing PC-fired power plant to operate in oxy-fuel mode; in Ciuden, Spain, Endesa has a newly built 30-MWth oxy-fuel plant using circulating fluidized bed combustion (CFBC) technology. Babcock-ThermoEnergy's Zero Emission Boiler System (ZEBS) is oxy-combustion-based; this system features near 100% carbon-capture and according to company information virtually no air-emissions.

Other carbon capture and storage technologies include those that dewater low-rank coals. Low-rank coals often contain a higher level of moisture content which contains a lower energy content per tonne. This causes a reduced burning efficiency and an increased emissions output. Reduction of moisture from the coal prior to combustion can reduce emissions by up to 50 percent.

Demonstration projects in the United States

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) began conducting a joint program with the industry and State agencies to demonstrate clean coal technologies large enough for commercial use. The program, called the Clean Coal Technology & Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI), has had a number of successes that have reduced emissions and waste from coal-based electricity generation. The National Energy Technology Laboratory has administered three rounds of CCPI funding and the following projects were selected during each round:
  • Round 1 CCPI Projects
    • Advanced Multi-Product Coal Utilization By-Product Processing Plant
    • Demonstration of Integrated Optimization Software at the Baldwin Energy Complex
    • Gilberton Coal-to-Clean Fuels and Power Co-Production Project
    • Increasing Power Plant Efficiency: Lignite Fuel Enhancement
    • TOXECON Retrofit for Mercury and Multi-Pollutant Control on Three 90-MW Coal-Fired Boilers
    • Western Greenbrier Co-Production Demonstration Project
    • Commercial Demonstration of the Airborne Process
    • Integration of Advanced Emission Controls to Produce Next-Generation Circulating Fluid Bed Coal Generating Unit
  • Round 2 CCPI Projects
    • Airborne Process Commercial Scale Demonstration Program
    • Demonstration of a Coal-Based Transport Gasifier
    • Mercury Species and Multi-Pollutant Control Project
    • Mesaba Energy Project
  • Round 3 CCPI Projects
These programs have helped to meet regulatory challenges by incorporating pollution control technologies into a portfolio of cost-effective regulatory compliance options for conventional and developmental coal-fired power plants. This portfolio has positioned the U.S. as a top exporter of clean coal technologies such as those used for SOx, NOx and mercury, and more recently for carbon capture, consistent with a goal of deploying advanced coal-based power systems in commercial service with improved efficiency and environmental performance to meet increasingly stringent environmental regulations and market demands, leading to widespread, global deployment which will contribute to significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The DOE continues its programs and initiatives through regional sequestration partnerships, a carbon sequestration leadership forum and the Carbon Sequestration Core Program, a CCS research and development program.

According to a report by the assistant secretary for fossil energy at the U.S. Department of Energy, clean coal technology has paid measurable dividends. Technological innovation introduced through the CCT Program now provides consumers cost-effective, clean, coal-based energy.

Clean coal and the environment

According to United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the burning of coal, a fossil fuel, is a major contributor to global warming. (See the UN IPCC Fourth Assessment Report). As 26% of the world's electrical generation in 2004 was from coal-fired generation (see World energy resources and consumption), reaching the carbon dioxide reduction targets of the Kyoto Protocol will require modifications to how coal is utilized.

Coal, which is primarily used for the generation of electricity, is the second largest domestic contributor to carbon dioxide emissions in the US. The public has become more concerned about global warming which has led to new legislation. The coal industry has responded by running advertising touting clean coal in an effort to counter negative perceptions and claiming more than $50 billion towards the development and deployment of "traditional" clean coal technologies over the past 30 years; and promising $500 million towards carbon capture and storage research and development. There is still concern about clean coal technology being perceived as more environmentally friendly than it is, and the term "Clean Coal" has been used as an example of "greenwashing". According to the Sierra Club, "Despite the industry's hype, there's no such thing as 'clean coal.' But new technologies and policies can help reduce coal plants' deadly emissions."

Conjunction with enhanced oil recovery and other applications; commercial-scale CCS is currently being tested in the U.S. and other countries. Proposed CCS sites are subjected to extensive investigation and monitoring to avoid potential hazards, which could include leakage of sequestered CO2 to the atmosphere, induced geological instability, or contamination of water sources such as oceans and aquifers used for drinking water supplies.

The Great Plains Synfuels plant supports the technical feasibility of carbon dioxide sequestration. Carbon dioxide from the coal gasification is shipped to Canada where it is injected into the ground to aid in oil recovery. A drawback of the carbon sequestration process is that it is expensive compared to traditional processes.

Genome editing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedi...