$91 Million in Stimulus Grants Go to Three Colorado Companies for Clean Coal Research

feature photo
Print

Send to a Friend:










Email Larger Smaller

Three “clean coal” grants have been awarded to Colorado businesses, totaling $91.4 million, from the U.S. Department of Energy for work on advanced techniques to capture and store carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion.

By David A.Hill

By far the largest share of the stimulus dollars went to Eltron Research and Development Inc. of Boulder, which was awarded a $71,377,413 stimulus grant. It is also the largest award to a Colorado company to date under the federal Recovery Act, according to Ritter’s announcement on Tuesday. 

His office released these details of the three stimulus grants:

• $71,377,413 to Eltron Research and Development — “The Recovery Act grant will decrease development time by about three years of a hydrogen transport membrane technology to cost-effectively separate hydrogen from shifted coal-derived syngas.”

• $15 million to ADA Environmental Solutions (NASDAQ: ADES) in Littleton — “The grant will fund the design, construct and operation of a 1 megawatt-equivalent gas flow pilot-scale test unit to evaluate the performance and cost of an advanced solid sorbent CO2 capture technology.”

• $5 million to North American Power Group in Greenwood Village — “The grant will pay for the Two Elk Energy Park Carbon Site Characterization Project, which will involve drilling a series of shallow wells and one deep well in Wyoming.”

Nationwide, 22 Energy Department awards under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to companies in 15 states totaling $575 million were announced Tuesday.

“The Recovery Act is accelerating the advancement of cutting-edge, clean coal technologies by Colorado companies to create a cleaner environment for our country and our children,” Ritter said in a statement.

This month representatives with an industry group advocating for clean coal technology has been making the rounds of states with coal stakeholders. “We want to educate people of the advantages of clean coal technology and how to have a comprehensive energy plan,” said Scott Howard of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.

Six teams with the organization plan to visit with communities in 12 states, with the tour intended to promote clean coal technology projects within the states and how coal is an abundant, domestic fuel source in supplying reliable and affordable electricity. Supporters say clean coal technology can reduce air emissions from coal-fueled plants. And a study put forth by the coal coalition showed that the technology would create or support significant job growth in more than 30 states. 

Contrarians would argue two points: First, there is no such thing as “clean coal” and that a more appropriate phrase would be “cleaner coal.” Another camp, such as represented by Denver VC specialist, David Gold, would argue that once again the federal government is picking winners and losers with its funding policy, and not relying on the marketplace and competition to sort it out. Backers of the stimulus-led grants counter by asking ”where early stage development companies would get the financing to move forward if not from the government, since they are a long way from the commercialization stage.’

Get Colorado Energy News and alerts as they happen:
Enter Email:

There Are 3 Responses So Far. »

  1. I hate to bring it up again, but why can’t the companies involved (coal producers and electrical generators) fund this research instead of me, and the rest of the taxpayers? With a realistic mandate on emissions and a timeline, let them roll their research expenses into their business and pass it on to consumers. I think they can do it a lot cheaper than a government sponsored study. $575 million dollars should be saved, not spent, during these dour economic times. We are allowing our elected officials to spend our money on champagne when we can hardly afford a beer.

  2. You bring up a very sound question, and pose a logical plan forward for the industry for the clean coal R&D.

  3. Even if we did develop carbon sequestration, it will not happen fast enough to prevent global warming… AND burning coal will still kill people! According to Physicians for Social Responsibility, it kills 20,000 Americans each year!

    In a recently-released report, “The Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use,” the NRC explores the “externalities” of energy use, costs that are not factored into its market price. The report monetizes these unseen energy costs at $120 billion annually by tracing the full cycle of our energy use—extraction, development, deployment, and waste.

    We should, instead, be heavily investing in renewable energy sources!

Post a Response