The Board of Trustees of Pennsylvania State University has approved a plan to spend $25-million to $35-million to convert the campus’s aging coal plant to natural gas.
In an interview with The Chronicle, Steven M. Maruszewski, assistant vice president for the physical plant, said forthcoming federal regulations on coal burning would have required costly upgrades for the steam plant.
Penn State’s analysis showed that the up-front costs of updating pollution controls for coal burning were high and the long-term fuel costs lower, while the immediate costs of converting to natural gas were low although the long-term fuel costs could be higher. In the end, he said, the two options were about even—but university officials anticipated that coal and its emissions could be subject to stricter regulations to come.
Cornell University, Duke University, and the University of North Carolina, among other major institutions, have also started switching to natural gas. What makes Penn State’s decision notable are the political ramifications. Pennsylvania is deeply, historically tied to coal—the university itself has a number of scholars devoted to coal research—and coal interests in the state are still powerful. Drive along any of the major roads in the state and you’ll probably see billboards like the one pictured above. (Flickr picture by Adventures of a GoodMan: World Travel Photography and Stories.)
“It’s politically dicey because there are people on both sides of the argument—well, three sides of the argument,” Mr. Maruszewski said. There are the coal advocates, the natural-gas advocates, and people who would rather see the university eschew both of those for something even cleaner and renewable. “This is one of those things where you aren’t going to satisfy everyone.”
Two factors might have helped the university make the switch, he said. First, the university does not burn Pennsylvania coal anymore—the state cannot provide a grade of coal that will burn well in the campus steam plant.
Second, as the state becomes a hotbed of gas drilling, natural-gas interests in Pennsylvania may be just as powerful as coal interests. Albert G. Horvath, the university’s senior vice president for finance and business, told the Centre Daily Times that although natural-gas prices can be volatile, he hoped that the gas reserves in the Marcellus Shale region—which includes active extraction sites in Pennsylvania—would help ensure steady prices and supply.
The Marcellus gas has been controversial, but coal’s public image has been even more troublesome lately: Student activists, sometimes supported by the Sierra Club and other national environmental organizations, have pressured colleges to dump coal in favor of fuels that have lesser carbon emissions—which would be just about any fuel.
Mr. Maruszewski said the switch to natural gas was just a step toward cleaner and more-sustainable energy sources—although those remain undefined and undeveloped at the moment. The university has considered other options for energy, including biomass and geothermal sources.
Follow Buildings & Grounds through your favorite RSS reader:
8 Responses to Penn State to Dump Coal for Natural Gas
thais - January 25, 2011 at 7:53 pm
Does Penn support hydraulic fracturing to get its gas? Perhaps coal is a “dirty” burn but it does not destroy the aquifers,just the air we breathe. There are enough problems in the Northern and Southern Tiers without our educational systems supporting or aiding in causing them. We can get a lot from the wind and sun that we have not begun to tap into.
megginson - January 26, 2011 at 9:09 am
Regarding that billboard: One reason that coal has provided 100 years of affordable electricity is that coal has also enjoyed 100 years of externalizing many of the very real costs that come from its mining and burning. The following is a quote by Dr. Jeremy Fisher, Scientist, Synapse Energy Economics Inc., and appeared just yesterday in an article in the online Centre Daily Times:
“The existing coal fleet in the United States exacts an expensive toll on the U.S. The fleet itself is fairly inexpensive to operate, and for years has been a source of cheap electricity. However, we know now that each year, emissions of acid gasses and toxic particulates are at the root of thousands of premature deaths each year. The fleet leaches waste into our groundwater and rivers, heats hundreds of waterways with thermal effluent, consumes millions of acre-feet of water, and releases the largest fraction of emissions which are leading us quickly towards a very different climate. These costs, as dramatic as they may be, are almost completely hidden from the public view and are invisible to consumers.”
For more, see http://www.centredaily.com/2011/01/25/2476095/cost-of-electric-power-report.html#ixzz1C9MJvtkv
11134078 - January 26, 2011 at 2:19 pm
And then there’s this from today’s (Jan 26) Ithaca Journal: “Pa. fracking blowout spews fluid onto state forest lands.” It’s Talisman Energy this time. For the story see http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20110125/NEWS01/101250370/Pa.+fracking+blowout+spews+fluid+onto+state+forest+lands
oscarw - January 26, 2011 at 8:38 pm
Awww, Penn goes to gas from coal? How considerate. Everyone east of them has been choking on their airborne filth for generations.
As to the coal industry saying “no bailouts”, believe that only if you have your head submerged in a fouled stream in Appalachia. That industry has destroyed, FOREVER, mountaintops and stream and buried valleys and faced no consequences, legal or monetary. Buying congressmen (and women) sure has paid off for the coal industry for generations. No bailout, indeed.
becauseisaidso - February 1, 2011 at 4:41 pm
Please to see Penn taking an enlightened approach…something I wonder if Kentucky and West Virginia will ever, ever do. Too many coal folks on our boards of trustees. All winter the west side of our campus stinks from burning coal.
kathleenchgriffin - April 28, 2011 at 2:14 pm
It is not at all clear what your discipline is, but in freshman and sophomore composition I can’t let students just write happily about themselves. There are standards to meet in objective, analytical writing if they are to succeed in all their other classes. I can leave the floor open for questions and remarks; break up the class into lively seqments; use Internet and films for everything from costume of a period to dramatizations, essay outlines, and group reading on-screen. But I have to focus all this on teach them the tools of composition. They’re not in high school anymore, and I can’t treat them as such.
I completed my own BA as an adult with a full-time job, FT night and weekend classes, and unexpectedly over half a dozen student activities from literary magazine to honor societies. I profoundly sympathize with my students, and I’m flexible about deadlines. I have a portfolio with revisions, and a reading journal to pre-write essays, rather than pop quizzes, midterms or finals. Students tell me they feel more confident; I see a greatly increased comfort level in writing.
reinking - May 15, 2011 at 10:55 am
A step in the right direction. The winning record of the coaches who have promoted this idea should be noted by other universities and coaches. However, that these instances are newsworthy suggests that the money-making machine that defines division one athletics remains far removed from the academic mission and culture to which it claims to be part.
Huijia Phua - August 29, 2011 at 11:41 am
Completely agree. That’s why a couple of us international students studying in the US set up a community site to reach out and help our fellow prospective students learn about studying and life here in general. In time, we hope to facilitate communications between college officials and students on our platform. Appreciate everyone’s kind support for our student-driven initiative here: unicq.net