Should We Go Back to Coal?
UNTIL 1940, coal was the world’s chief commercial source of energy. Since then the amount of coal mined has changed but little, but the use of petroleum and natural gas has grown so fast that coal now supplies only 30 percent of the world’s energy. This has not been because of any problem of supplying coal, but basically because petroleum was cheaper. If oil comes to be too expensive and finally runs out, can we not switch back to coal?
There is certainly plenty of coal. There is enough in known deposits to supply all the energy needed for at least 150 years. Many new mines would have to be opened, and transportation facilities by railroad and steamship would have to be expanded to match, but the coal is there.
For generating electricity and for manufacturing, coal is a practical substitute for oil. But to heat the home, it has obvious drawbacks.
Heating Our Homes
Many of our older readers will recall the daily wintertime chore of shoveling coal into the furnace out of a black, dusty bin, and later shoveling the even dustier ashes into barrels to be taken to the dump. And some skill and patience were needed to kindle a bed of coals after the fire had gone out. When these onerous chores are compared with the convenience of simply adjusting a thermostat that automatically turns on the gas or oil-injection device and ignites it from the pilot light, few would relish a return to the “coal age.”
Remember, too, how in towns or cities where everyone heated with coal, a freshly fallen blanket of snow was quickly darkened by the soot falling from hundreds of chimneys. A generation accustomed to the cleanliness and convenience of petroleum fuels will be reluctant to make room again for a coal bin in the house.
What About Automobiles?
When it comes to running our automobiles without gasoline, coal is out of the question. Only liquid or gaseous fuels will work in an internal-combustion engine. But, as mentioned above, coal differs from petroleum largely in its hydrogen content. Coal can be hydrogenated to convert it to a liquid or gaseous fuel. This was done on a large scale to supply Germany’s need for gasoline in World War II, and the process is used in South Africa today. However, it will require a major mobilization of the petroleum and chemical industries, probably with government subsidies, to produce synthetic fuels on the scale needed to replace oil. In the near future, such fuels will be available only in small quantities and at very high prices.
A more immediate possibility is to power automobiles with electric storage batteries. The electric automobile is already fairly common in some cities, providing local transportation for individuals or families. The batteries are kept charged by plugging them into a utility outlet in the garage. However, the speed, range, and capacity of such cars are much less than today’s average motorist demands.
Larger electric-powered cars or trains are well suited to mass transportation. Electric trolley cars, drawing power from an overhead wire, were common in city and interurban travel before automobiles and buses displaced them. High-speed electric trains are still common in Europe and Japan, as well as in metropolitan subways. All of this is compatible with power generated in central plants from coal, but it implies a shift from the individual motorcar back to mass transportation.
Pollution Problems Continue
By a change from oil to coal, air pollution will be changed, but not eliminated. One of the principal contributors to smog, the partially burned hydrocarbons from automobile exhausts, will cease to be a problem, but the oxides of nitrogen and sulfur may be as bad or worse with coal. More efficient combustion will have to be achieved to avoid a return to the smoke-laden atmosphere of industrial cities of 50 years ago.
Another kind of pollution is unavoidable and irreversible as long as any kind of fossil fuel is burned. This is the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, we have taken so much carbon out of the earth and put it into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide that its global concentration has increased by 5 percent. Some scientists believe that the climate may be delicately balanced at the normal concentration, and if this is disturbed too much the whole earth may be warmed enough to melt the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps. There is even concern that it could get too hot to support life.
While other sources of energy may ultimately supply the bulk of man’s needs, it appears that none of them can be developed soon enough to compensate for the rapidly vanishing reserves of petroleum. The only energy source that can be exploited soon enough to fill the gap is coal.
But could the use of coal, then, really be the “solution” to the energy problem? The Bible shows that God’s purpose is for all this earth to become a paradise. Dependence on an energy source that pollutes the environment is not consistent with that. Furthermore, the Scriptures state that God made the earth to be inhabited forever, with God-fearing people enjoying eternal life on it. (Isa. 45:18; Ps. 96:10-13; John 17:3) Surely, then, he must have made available stores of suitable energy that would last beyond the 1980’s—yes, beyond the next 150 years.
What energy sources fit such a description? How can they be utilized? Future issues of Awake! will consider these questions, as well as what men are doing to cope with their immediate problem.