The coal gasification process converts coal into a gas that can burn cleaner than coal itself. The technology removes sulfur dioxide, mercury and carbon dioxide from the gas, which cuts in half the amount of pollution typically produced by a traditional coal plant.
Duke has endured considerable criticism from consumer advocates and environmentalists in connection with the Edwardsport power plant.
The Edwardsport power plant, which was originally projected to cost about $1.5 billion, ultimately cost about $3.5 billion to build, according to the Associated Press. The cost overruns, which are projected to increase electric rates for Duke's customers in Indiana by about 15%, resulted in several people at Duke and elsewhere losing their jobs.
In 2011, the Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor claimed that Duke had imposed $530 million in Edwardsport costs onto customers, testifying that the "escalating costs have been borne solely by ratepayers, with the benefits going to the [Duke] shareholders."
Meanwhile, Greenpeace and other environmental groups have expressed doubts about Duke's environmental bona fides, at least partially because of its support for coal gasification technology. For example, in 2009, the New Scientist described the pursuit of advanced coal gasification technology as a "stupid idea."
While I admire Duke Energy for several reasons, I find it hard to disagree with the New Scientist's cynical assessment. Coal gasification may be cleaner than traditional coal, but it is still far dirtier – and probably more expensive – than other cutting edge natural gas technologies.
For example, Bloom Energy, the cleantech startup company based in Sunnyvale, CA, has pioneered a solid-oxide fuel cell technology for only about $1 billion. In other words, one company created a potentially disruptive clean energy technology for less than the cost overrun of a single coal gasification power plant.
