Groups debate MU's future without coal

Alternative energy is cleaner but less cost effective.

By Megan Donohue

Published Feb. 26, 2010

The MU power plant burns 130,000 tons of coal annually to provide utility for more than 14 million square feet of facilities on the university's main campus.

Student groups such as Coal Free Mizzou and Sustain Mizzou are concerned with coal's effect on the environment, Coal Free Mizzou spokeswoman Melissa Vatterott said.

"Although the planet has natural changes in temperature and climate over millions of years, our additions of these added chemicals into the air is accelerating these things," Vatterott said. "In the end, we are going to run out of coal, and it will be more costly in terms of how it affects the environment and human health."

Coal Free Mizzou was created last semester amid a campaign conducted by the Sierra Club, which is leading students to protest coal use on 35 campuses across the country. Group members are calling for a complete reduction of MU's coal use, but they don't have a specific time frame for that reduction.

MU is taking steps to reduce its coal use, but student protesters shouldn't expect a "quick fix." To power the 16.5 million square feet of facilities on MU's main campus, coal is a much cheaper option than alternative energy.

"MU administrators search continually for the most efficient, environmentally friendly ways to keep our campus running," Chancellor Brady Deaton said in a statement provided for The Maneater.

Expensive alternatives

There are many options for the university to use instead of coal, but the issue is finding the right fit and cost.

"There are dozens of examples of alternatives, including natural gas, biomass, geothermal, as well as wind and solar," said Bruce Nilles, director for Sierra Club's national coal campaign.

Vatterott said MU is installing a new biomass boiler that will offset MU's coal usage by up to 25 percent but there are other things the university could be doing.

It takes about two tons of biomass to equal the same energy as one ton of MU's coal, Campus Facilities spokeswoman Karlan Seville said.

"The future cost of biomass and coal are uncertain and are based on market conditions, however, we expect that the biomass costs will continue to be comparable to coal," Seville said.

Students and others are calling for solar energy as a cost-efficient alternative. Alumnus Jim Pierobon, vice-president of policy and marketing at Standard Solar Inc., said solar energy is a very viable possibility for a university like MU.

"Collectively, all of these flat-roofed buildings and parking garages, together with the open spaces that are next to the Hearnes Center and Mizzou Arena and other places can generate megawatts worth of electricity," Pierobon said.

Groups, such as the MU College Republicans have taken issue with Coal Free Mizzou's requests, saying Sierra Club fed facts to students without creating a concrete solution.

"In my mind, Coal Free Mizzou consists of nothing more than a pawn of the Sierra Club," MU College Republicans member Brett Dinkins said.

Dinkins said a lot of people signing the clean coal petitions don't even know what they would do.

"I am sure there are a lot of good people in these groups, but I don't think they realize that they are being told what to do and what they are being told to do is very hard and fast," Dinkins said. "Even Coal Free Mizzou doesn't have an idea of what we need to go to in order to get off of coal. Until they can present this idea, I think they need to step back and see what they are doing."

The costs would actually be higher in the long run due to the inefficiency of power plants, Nilles said.

"Most of these coal plants are really old, so we are not taking a brand new car and saying crush it and turn it into something else," Nilles said. "We have very old coal plants many of them that are well beyond their life expectancy, and that is what happens with many of these campuses."

Although the MU power plant still runs primarily on coal, it is neither past its life expectancy nor inefficient, according to the Environmental Protection Agency Web site.

The EPA states the power plant provides MU "with a very efficient, reliable, and cost effective method to meet its energy needs in an environmentally positive manner."

Other campuses

Many other campuses have either already committed to transition off coal in the near future or are moving in that direction.

"What we've seen is as campuses get serious about doing their part on global warming one of the first things they do is get rid of their old coal power plants," Nilles said. "We are down to 60, and two of them are studying how to get off of them."

Ball State University has drawn up a plan to trade coal for one of the world's biggest geothermal heating plants, and other universities, including the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Columbia University and Penn State University are considering their options.

"Madison just appropriated money to get rid of their coal plant," Nilles said. "North Carolina announced this past Friday that it was putting together a task force, including the Sierra Club, to get beyond coal."

Virginia Tech University has taken a different route by creating its own goal to be 80 percent below 1990 level emissions by 2050. Virginia Tech has declined signing any of the official, popular statements and promises, such as the American College & University Presidents' Climate Commitment, which outlines a set of steps toward cleaner energy, but is still willing to talk with activists.

Steps toward cleaner energy

Deaton and UM system President Gary Forsee signed the Climate Commitment, which means the university must initiate the development of a comprehensive plan to achieve climate neutrality.

Although Forsee signed the Climate Commitment, he was unwilling to support the recent cap-and-trade legislation.

"As currently written, we have grave concerns and oppose this legislation for the detrimental impact it will have on the University of Missouri system," Forsee said in his Nov. 17, 2009, letter to Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, R-Mo.

Forsee said his main problem with cap-and-trade was the price increases because it would increase energy costs up to 50 percent. He also said the UM system has been making changes and will continue to make changes at a more realistic pace.

MU has won 14 international, national and state awards for energy management techniques, including the 2008 Missouri Waste Control Coalition's Outstanding Achievement Award based on MU replacing a portion of their coal with old tires.

The Sustainable Endowments Institute also graded MU overall "B-," and an "A" in the area of climate change and energy.

Besides installing a biomass boiler, the university has been successful in using corncobs, waste wood and switch grass as alternative fuels, Seville said. Additionally, coal fly ash, a harmful byproduct of burning coal, is returned to the mine instead of being deposited in landfills, Seville said.

And though MU is taking steps toward cleaner energy to answer students' concerns, it's doing this at a more realistic pace than students wanted last semester.

"The university is committed to not burning coal anymore and we're going to do that as fast as we possibly can," Sustainability Coordinator Steve Burdic said. "We are not going to bankrupt ourselves to stop burning coal."