There is a lot of talk about "sequestering" the carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants. It is very difficult to safely sequester billions of tonnes of gas underground without it leaking over geologic time. Consider that in its present form, coal is sequestered carbon, and very stable. Perhaps for the sake of miners' lives, our air, our health, and our planet we ought to leave the coal right where it is right now.

This was a great, informative piece, no matter what your stance on global warming or energy policy. I was surprised at what a short lifespan is predicted. The Kaiparowitz field, which I incidentally don't want mined at this time, will no doubt be revisited in the future. At what point will Americans (and others) start seeing coal and oil as more valuable as a source of material for plastics, etc, rather than just burn it for transport and electricity production? Many of the most valuable substances we are surrounded by are derived from these fossil fuels.

...Kirk! Sounds like you've got it all figured out. What do suggest we replace coal with to produce the electricity needs in Utah? And BTW, are you personally willing to pay 4 to 8 times more than you're paying now for electricity?

Dr. Ron Paul has discussed returning federal lands to the states. If Kaiparowits was once again a part of the state trust lands, how much revenue would it generate for the education fund?

<i>...Kirk! Sounds like you've got it all figured out. What do suggest we replace coal with to produce the electricity needs in Utah?</i>

Replace coal with thorium. Thorium has roughly a million times the energy density of coal and enough has been mined, processed, and buried in the desert in Nevada (in sealed drums) to supply Utah with energy for decades.

Research at Oak Ridge National Lab in the 1950s and 60s showed how thorium could be used as an energy source in a super-safe, super-efficient reactor that uses thorium in liquid-fluoride salts. Recent peer-reviewed work by Dr. Ralph Moir of Lawrence Livermore National Lab shows that these reactors will be far less expensive than today's solid-core uranium-burning reactors.

This article states that most of the cost of sequestering CO2 is for separating it out. If the plant effluent was used to grow algae and produce biodiesel, the algae would separate the CO2 for you and you could recover much of your costs by selling the biodiesel. Check out the Central Utah Biodiesel Project!

with the price of fuel over $3.00 a gallon I believe coal is the answer to the nations energy crisis, With the strike of a pen Bill Clinton done away with years and years of energy I hope the kaiparowits plateu will be revisited soon by a President who is really concerned with people, The good Lord never made coal to be left in the earth.

Funny, I figured the good Lord put that coal in the Earth so it wouldn't have to end up in my children's lungs.

When the Lord sees fit to make his position on coal known to us, then you can quote it. Until then, I suggest keeping speculation to a minimum.

45 years at current usage...with Utah's population predicted to keep rising, usage will undoubtedly rise, and that 45 years will shrink. Climate change and pollution aside, it seems as though it would be smart to start planning for life after coal here in Utah. Thorium sounds interesting. Is it polluting? How water intensive is the energy producing process? Concentrating Solar and Geothermal also seem like they deserve a seat at the table.