Future Gen

little egyptian · PostDec 12, 2007#12007-12-12T16:27+00:00

Announcement on Future Gen will apparently come next week. Story.

Mattoon and Tuscola are in with 2 Texas locations as the finalists.

It will produce 275 megawatts of electricity, but it will sequester the carbon emissions into old coal and oil fields under the earth. It is meant to be a test case for the US.

My feeling is that Texas will get it because of their current connections in the Administration, but you never know.

Here are some links to the project:

Future Gen Dept. of Energy Page

Future Gen Alliance

Here are some renderings.

PostDec 17, 2007#22007-12-17T01:05+00:00

More today from the Post.

FutureGen: A glimpse of coal's future?

By Jeffrey Tomich

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

12/15/2007

For the 4,400 residents of Tuscola, Ill., anticipation this holiday season goes beyond the annual Yule log lighting ceremony and Santa Chase 5k race.

The city, 150 miles northeast of St. Louis, is among four sites bidding for a $1.75 billion experimental coal-fueled power plant, called FutureGen, that will also produce hydrogen and emit virtually no pollution. Other finalists are Mattoon, 25 miles south of Tuscola on Interstate 57, and the Texas cities of Odessa and Jewett.

A winner will be announced Tuesday by the FutureGen Industrial Alliance, a consortium of a dozen of the world's largest energy and mining companies, including St. Louis-based Peabody Energy Corp., that's developing the project with the U.S. Energy Department.

To the cities bidding for the project, there is a lot riding on the decision, including 150 full-time jobs, 1,300 construction jobs and the cachè of being the home of "the world's cleanest coal-fueled power plant." Analysts, environmentalists and energy executives say there's more at stake.

shimmy · PostDec 17, 2007#32007-12-17T04:36+00:00

Odessa...that's the place from Friday Night Lights, right?

little egyptian · PostDec 17, 2007#42007-12-17T14:30+00:00

Shimmy wrote:Odessa...that's the place from Friday Night Lights, right?

Yep. So, they already have that, they don't need this too.

I am really, really hoping they base this in Illinois. The jobs and economic boost are good, but I think the more important aspect is the long term impact. I know it would mean a lot to the universities. SIU, for instance, is one of the leading coal research centers in the US, and to have this research facility so close, would really boost them. More importantly, however, is the potential for this to develop into other coal-based developments. I know everyone is put off by coal because of its harmful effects, but coal is the most important and abundant resource in Illinois. If we can find ways to use coal cleanly and effectively, it could have a major impact on the U.S. energy needs, not to mention it will provide a lot of jobs and money to the Illinois economy.

Here are some Illinois coal facts (Source)

Coal underlies 37,000 square miles of Illinois -- about 65 percent of the state's surface.

Most of the coal is bituminous with high-energy values -- between 10,000 and 14,000 Btu/lb.

Illinois' coal reserves contain more Btu's than the oil reserves of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

Recoverable coal reserves in Illinois (38 billion tons) account for almost one-eighth of the total U.S. coal reserves and one-quarter of the nation's bituminous coal reserves.

In 2005, 18 Illinois mines employed 3,895 miners and generated roughly 20,000 spin-off jobs.

The typical coal miner earns $45,450 per year.

shimmy · PostDec 17, 2007#52007-12-17T23:28+00:00

It would especially mean a lot for southern Illinois, since that's a huge part of the economy.

I also didn't know coal miners get paid that much. Rightfully so though, it is one of the most dangerous if not the most dangerous profession.

framer · PostDec 18, 2007#62007-12-18T05:13+00:00

Coal power will be around for a long time (there's enough known reserves to last many, many decades at current use levels), so it's smart that we figure out how to burn it in a more environmentaly friendly manner.

I hope Illinois wins this thing, but it looks like Texas is throwing huge amounts of money at it.

jmatthewmckee · PostDec 18, 2007#72007-12-18T15:04+00:00

It appears Mattoon has been chosen!

little egyptian · PostDec 18, 2007#82007-12-18T15:56+00:00

Yep. This is fantastic news for central Illinois.

Here is the breaking report. I am sure there will be a bigger report later today.

The immediate jobs and economic boost will be good, but it is the long term impact of this thing that will be the real benefit. If we can figure out a way to use Illinois' coal cleanly, there could be potentially huge benefits of that in the near and far term.

framer · PostDec 19, 2007#92007-12-19T05:26+00:00

Excellent! I'm thrilled to hear that my Texas prediction was wrong.

little egyptian · PostDec 19, 2007#102007-12-19T19:15+00:00

Here is an article on the effect it should have on SIU.

The Southern Illinoisan:

SIU will see effects of FutureGen plant

By Adam Testa, The Southern

SIUC Director of Coal Research John Mead (back) is greeted by Max Yen, director of Materials Technology Center at SIUC, to a press conference about the announcement of Mattoon, as the site for FutureGen at the SIUC Stone Center in Carbondale on Tuesday, Dec. 18. Also in the picture is SIUC Chancellor Fernando Trevino. PAUL NEWTON, THE SOUTHERN

Officials in Mattoon and Tuscola gave the same reply when asked who they wanted to help with their bids to win the proposed FutureGen power plant - Glenn Poshard.

Bill Hoback, bureau chief of the Illinois Office of Coal Development, said both cities requested the Southern Illinois University president and former U.S. congressman. Poshard became an integral part of the state's efforts to attract the nearly $2 billion project, and he celebrated with the people of Mattoon Tuesday morning.

After returning to Carbondale from Mattoon Tuesday afternoon, Poshard joined SIU Carbondale Chancellor Fernando Trevino, SIUC Coal Research Center Director John Mead, state Sen. Gary Forby, D-Benton, state Rep. Dan Reitz, D-Steeleville, and Hoback in addressing the importance of the FutureGen project to Southern Illinois.

While many believe the region's coal industry will see a positive impact, the university will also see the effects of the plant, mainly in terms of the Coal Research Center and other research opportunities.

Continue Reading ...

debaliviere · PostDec 19, 2007#112007-12-19T21:03+00:00

Great news for the region!

moorlander · PostJan 29, 2008#122008-01-29T18:58+00:00

yup...

Energy Dept. to back out of FutureGen

The U.S. Department of Energy plans to yank its support for the FutureGen project, a highly-touted a $1.75 billion experimental coal-fueled power plant that is supposed to be built in Mattoon, Ill.

Federal energy officials plan to announce on Wednesday that they are going to "pursue alternatives to FutureGen" as it is currently envisioned, said Frederick Palmer, a lobbyist for Peabody Energy and key player in a industry alliance backing FutureGen. "It means DOE no longer backs a Mattoon, Illinois FutureGen facility."

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and other Illinois lawmakers held a session with Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman today to talk about FutureGen's status. Durbin and other participants were not immediately available for comment.

By Deirdre Shesgreen

01/29/2008

Source

little egyptian · PostJan 29, 2008#132008-01-29T19:09+00:00

Ho Hum. They just have to screw everything up, don't they. But, you could see this coming. The Private Investors were getting ticked about the lack of action on the part of the Dept. of Energy, so they went ahead and announced Mattoon as the site with the DOE's consent. So, things were obviously bad behind the scenes.

So, now what's left? The Industry I am sure is fond of the idea of carbon sequestration. Peabody and all the rest are in this because they want to see if that will work because if it does, they can build a lot more coal fired power plants, which means more coal mines, etc. etc. etc. - If this works, a lot of people stand to benefit. So, I still think there will be interest in completing this project. But, who is going to pay for it? Will the Industry fork over the money themselves as a R&D project? Or will the project fail because no one is willing to pony up that R&D money?

By the way ... anyone think the DOE would be pulling out if this project was in Texas? Ridiculous.

tge-atw · PostJan 30, 2008#142008-01-30T15:53+00:00

Bush administration up to its old tricks. I tried to post the article from the PD this morning, but failed. What a ***** joke these guys are. Bush proposed this thing in the first place so that he could look like he was doing something progressive with energy policy. He even mentioned clean coal in the latest state of the union address. It's all lies.

juiceinkirkwood · PostJan 31, 2008#152008-01-31T00:06+00:00

They've been talking about this project for like 12 years. Glad to see they choose a location and then back out.

beer city · PostJan 31, 2008#162008-01-31T01:09+00:00

Disappointing-

Makes you wonder if had gone to Texas, there still might be some federal interest.

southsidepride · PostFeb 07, 2008#172008-02-07T20:23+00:00

Shimkus rips Bush a new one over Future Gen.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument

way to go Shrub! Does anyone buy into this "Bush is a man of his words" crap anymore?

crbswiss · PostFeb 07, 2008#182008-02-07T21:49+00:00

There is no such thing as "Clean Coal." Even if the emissions at power plants can be significantly reduced, the mining alone emits huge amounts of carbon into the air, causes mercury and lead runoff into groundwater and topsoil, and destroys entire ecosystems. Not to mention all the carbon emissions released during the transport of the coal to the power station.

juiceinkirkwood · PostFeb 08, 2008#192008-02-08T02:59+00:00

^^ Then build a windmill.

little egyptian · PostFeb 08, 2008#202008-02-08T03:27+00:00

Juice13610 wrote:^^ Then build a windmill.

Right, until we have viable alternatives, we have no choice but to figure out how to make coal work. Carbon Sequestration is an attempt at that. It is perfect, course not. But, it was one of the better ideas we had until the feds pulled the plug on it.

juiceinkirkwood · PostFeb 08, 2008#212008-02-08T12:04+00:00

^^ Yeah, my comment was in jest.

I don't understand...I had heard about this project for years (literally), and as soon as they finally pick the destination for it, they pull the plug? I mean, I was reading about Matoon and the 2 Texas towns in competition for this for a year or two now.

threeonefour · PostFeb 08, 2008#222008-02-08T14:43+00:00

I'm glad Rep. Shimkus called out the Bush Administration on this unfortunate farce, especially since he's been one of the president's more ardent defenders at times.

It's truly unfortunate that the residents of eastern and southern Illinois were misled in this process. Aside from the immediate Mattoon area, this could have been a huge boon for the entire region, and for research efforts at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. Coal is an imperfect energy resource, but this could've been a way to make the most of one of southern Illinois' most abundant natural resources. This sucks.

framer · PostFeb 09, 2008#232008-02-09T04:52+00:00

And what about that joker who called Mattoon "a swamp"?

moorlander · PostDec 05, 2008#242008-12-05T16:55+00:00

Friday, December 5, 2008

Change in White House bodes well for FutureGen

St. Louis Business Journal - by Patrick L. Thimangu

With a new administration headed to Washington, Peabody Energy Corp. and a coalition of 11 other energy companies see new prospects for federal backing of FutureGen, the stalled $1.8 billion coal-fueled, near-zero emissions experimental power plant in Mattoon, Ill., about 150 miles northeast of St. Louis.

The group, known as FutureGen Alliance Inc., is betting on President-elect Barack Obama’s stated support for development of cleaner coal technologies. The consortium also is drawing support from U.S. Sens. Dick Durbin and Kit Bond, of Illinois and Missouri respectively, and former U.S. House Leader Dick Gephardt, whose lobbying firm Gephardt Group LLC has been retained by Peabody.

Alliance members expect federal backing will help create breakthroughs in producing energy from coal, an abundant fossil fuel that’s currently used to generate half of the nation’s electricity and 80 percent of the electricity used in Missouri. Potential advancements would guarantee continued viability of coal companies and energy producers, which face pressure from environmental groups and government entities concerned about global warming.

Peabody, the world’s largest private sector coal producer, is the only St. Louis-based member of the FutureGen Alliance.

“(Peabody’s) goal is continual emission improvement leading to near-zero emission,” said Frederick Palmer, senior vice president of government relations at Peabody and a board member of FutureGen. “FutureGen is an integral part of achieving that goal, for the long-term sustainability of using more coal, not less.”

read more here

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... ory10.html

little egyptian · PostDec 06, 2008#252008-12-06T16:46+00:00

A switch from a Texas president to an Illinois president interested in greening the country.

Yeah, I like FutureGen's chances at this point.

Future Gen

Future Gen

Future Gen

Choose Display Mode