United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Research and Development
EPA-600/S7-82-046 Oct. 1982
Project Summary
Prospects for Increasing the
Direct Use of Coal in
Industrial Boilers
Michael K. Bergman and Robert M. Dykes
The report gives a comprehensive
evaluation of factors (environmental,
technical, economic, and institutional)
influencing solid coal use in industrial
boilers. Trends in coal use, recent
legislative warrants, and technical and
logistic problems in coal use at
industrial plants are reviewed. Demo-
graphic aspects of the existing indus-
trial boiler population are examined,
and regional patterns in fuel consump-
tion, boiler deployment, and the
location of major energy consuming
industries are identified. Six technol-
ogies and five alternate groups of the
technologies are compared to the year
2000 on the basis of resource require-
ments and emissions. Technologies
considered are conventional combus-
tion in both a spreader-stoker boiler
and with flue-gas desulfurization,
fluidized-bed combustion, low-Btu
gasification, and physical coal cleaning
(alone and combined with the above
technologies). Air emissions are fur-
ther assessed from the perspective of
existing air quality problems in indus-
trial areas. Capital and annual costs
for each technology are also compared.
Sensitivity analysis is included to
detail the extent to which varying
operating parameters affect steam
cost. Fuel choices are evaluated on
industry- and region-specific bases.
Finally, results of analyses are inter-
preted from the perspective of achiev-
ing environmental and energy goals.
This Project Summary was devel-
oped by EPA's Industrial Environmen-
tal Research Laboratory, Research
Triangle Park, NC, to announce key
findings of the research project that is
fully documented in a separate report
of the same title (see Project Report
ordering information at back).
Introduction
Over 35 percent of the total U.S.
energy budget is consumed in the
industrial sector, an amount equivalent
to 220* in 1978. Of that amount, 40
percent is devoted to producing process
steam. Process steam is used to power
machinery, heat chemical reactors,
cook foods, distill liquids, provide
reducing atmospheres, and so on.
Process steam is the largest prime
mover in the Nation's multifaceted
industries. However, the use of process
steam both in quantity and as a
percentage of total energy use varies
markedly between industries. For
example, equipment manufacturing
and the stone, clay, and glass industries
use precious little steam; whereas the
food and paper industries are among the
largest users. Over 500,000 boilers
produce steam for U.S. industries,
ranging in size from small prefabricated
"package" units to units large enough
to rival those turning turbines in electric
utilities. Boilers are deployed in every
*1Q= 1 quad - 1 quadrillion (1015) British thermal
units (Btu). One Q is roughly equivalent to over
170 million barrels of crude oil, or about 42 million
short tons of bituminous coal, or about 1 trillion
cubic feet of natural gas
-------
state and every industry, and they can
be run with all types of energy carriers
solid, liquid, gas, and electric and
all fuels coal, petroleum, natural gas,
uranium, solar, wood, and waste. Thus
the fuels and energy carriers used to
raise steam in boilers represent a signif-
icant opportunity for substituting more
plentiful energy supplies for those of
increasing scarcity. Yet exercising such
opportunities entails a host of consider-
ations and impacts to the industries
themselves, to the workers employed by
them, to the populations living near the
industries, and ultimately to the entire
Nation.
As part of the national Coal Technology
Assessment (CTA) program an
ongoing comprehensive assessment of
the use of coal over the next several
decades a study of industrial boilers
has been undertaken to examine possi-
bilities for using a plentiful resource,
coal, as a substitute for oil and natural
gas supplies as a boiler fuel. The need to
understand the potential for an increased
use of coal comes naturally as a result
of increasingly tight energy supplies
and from the desire to reduce national
dependence on imported supplies of
energy.
Objectives of the Study
Four major objectives have gu ided the
analysis of this study:
To investigate any potential con-
flicts between a greatly expanded
use of coal in industrial boilers and
existing air quality standards.
To assess regional differences in
the consequences of coal use in
industrial boilers.
To identify and analyze, where
appropriate, other constraints to
the use of solid coal in industrial
boilers, including such factors as
space requirements, economics,
convenience, industry attitudes,
solid waste production, and re-
source requirements.
To compare alternative coal-fired
boiler technologies within these
contexts.
Scope of the Study and Some
Significant Findings
The conclusions of the CTA's study
are based on a comparison of five
technologies in terms of assumed coal
use to the year 2000. The technologies
were selected, after consultation with
appropriate experts, as being likely
candidates for burning coal in industrial
boilers. Deployment rates were based
on market penetration estimates. The
technologies are: conventional combus-
tion in a spreader-stoker boiler (CC|;
conventional combustion with a flue-
gas desulfurization (FGD) system;
fluidized-bed combustion (FBC); low-
Btu gasification; and physical coal
cleaning (PCC), alone and in combination
with the above technologies. In view of
the move to increase the use of coal, as
exemplified by the Fuel Use Act of 1978,
we assume 6Q as the energy content of
coal used for industrial boilers in the
year 2000. The increase in coal use
involves both (1) additions to the total
inventory of boilers, and (2) conversion
and replacement of existing boilers that
use other fuels.
Figure 1 displays the regional config-
uration used throughout the CTA
program, including this report. Different
in many respects from more familiar
regional breakdowns such as those
used by the Bureau of the Census, the
Department of Energy, and the Environ-
mental Protection Agency the CTA
configuration is an attempt to present
regional breakdowns that are consistent
in terms of energy usage. Such consis-
tency highlights differences in impacts
from the use of coal.
Historical Overview of
Industrial Use of Coal
Many of the factors that now constrain
coal use in industry have precedents.
The literature of the late 19th and early
20th centuries testifies to the difficulties
in supplying coal to industrial users.
While coal had become the predominant
fuel in the U.S. in the early 20th century,
its decline was precipitous when
alternative fuels became available. For
example, coal use in industry (excluding
coking coal) has fallen from about 40 to
6 percent of total industrial use of
energy within the last 30 years. The fall
cannot be attributed strictly to lower
fuel prices for oil and natural gas;
rather, factors such as efficiency,
convenience, reliability of supply,
increased productivity from electrifica-
tion, and certainly, cleanliness, were
important variables. Furthermore, his-
torical records attest to the fact that the
concern over air pollution from the
burning of coal is not a recent phenome-
non. Air quality concerns date back for
centuries. We note that periods of
improving air quality are accompanied
by public reluctance to accept additional
pollution. The importance of such a
reluctance should not be overlooked
when a return to the inherently dirtier
fuel of coal is being widely advocated.
National Policies Affecting
the Use of Coal in Industrial
Boilers
Major environmental acts including
the Clean Air Act and Amendments of
1977 and the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act of 1976 are sum-
Figure 1. Coal technology assessment (CTA) regions.
-------
marized, as well as the energy policy
legislation of the Industrial and Power
Plant Fuel Use Act and National Gas
Policy Act of 1978. The latter two acts,
both part of the National Energy Act,
represent two different approaches to
increasing coal use in industry and, as
such, are critical backdrops to under-
standing present legislative thinking on
how industry may be a vehicle to help
steer the Nation through its current
energy dilemma. And in the nexus
between the four pieces of legislation,
we begin to see the difficulties in
balancing energy and environmental
imperatives. Clearly, achieving the
intent of the Fuel Use Act will be
severely compromised because of
exemptions granted from converting to
coal where environmental regulations
would be violated.
Technical and Logistical
Factors Affecting the
Industrial Use of Coal
The proportion of total industrial
boiler capacity in the year 2000that will
be installed in manufacturing plants
constructed after 1980 is expected to be
quite small relative to existing boiler
capacity. Thus, any substantial near-
term increase in the use of coal for
raising industrial steam will have to be
accomplished through conversion or
replacement of existing boilers fired by
natural gas or oil. Conversion or replace-
ment programs, however, may be impe-
ded by a host of technical and logistical
constraints. A comprehensive survey of
the literature on these problems was
undertaken.
A fundamental restriction upon the
rapid substitution of coal for gas and oil
in industry is the fact that coal cannot be
burned in boilers that were originally
designed to fire liquid or gaseous fuels.
A switch to coal, therefore, involves the
replacement of existing gas/oil units
with new boilers capable of burning
coal. Replacement, however, entails
numerous changes in overall steam
plant design, operation, and mainte-
nance.
The municipal nature of industry
means that space is at a premium. The
land requirements for coal storage,
handling, pollution control equipment,
and waste disposal place coal at an
immediate disadvantage to oil or natural
gas; in many cases, the land needed to
accommodate coal use may simply not
exist. Another logistical aspect that must
be accounted for by firms considering a
switch to coal is transportation. Besides
costs and reliability, deteriorating
rolling stock and road beds are signifi-
cant items for concern. Other features
of coal supply are cause for concern as
well.
Most industrial users will have
difficulty in obtaining long-term supply
contracts. The supply of spot market
coal, which has traditionally been the
source of coal for smaller users, may
decline sharply over the next few
decades. Coal enters the spot market
from two sources: the smaller compa-
nies that produce specifically for it, and
the surplus production from larger
mines. Inflation, slack demand, capital
availability, and competition from
larger, mechanized strip mining oper-
tions, as well as the mounting complexi-
ties in planning, permitting, and meeting
worker health and safety and reclama-
tion requirements, have combined to re-
duce the number of small operators. At
the same time, large mines are increas-
ingly becoming captive or dedicated
operations in order to prevent the costly
production surpluses that in the past
resulted from faulty projections of
demand. For these reasons, industry
tends to view the future supply and price
of coal as being no more reliable than
that of natural gas or oil. Until the
general infrastructural organization has
time to evolve in a fashion commensu-
rate with the demands of industrial coal
use, technical and logistical obstacles
may severely constrain a widespread
shift to coal by manufacturing industries.
The Current Role of Boilers
in the Industrial Sector
Included are the most recent estimates
of how energy is used by various
industries, with which fuels, and with
what technologies. Regional distribu-
tion of boilers and energy use is
presented. Such detail is required to
reflect the very heterogeneous picture
that industry presents in terms of
energy usage. We discover that aggre-
gate national figures may be both mis-
leading and an insufficient basis for
the formulation of policies. For example,
slightly over 60 percent of total industrial
energy consumption in the U.S. occurs
in 10 states. Figure 2 documents
regional fuel use patterns, as well as
changes that have historically occurred
between 1963 and 1978. Further, four
key industry groups account for 60
percent of industrial energy consump-
tion; the same industries account for
over 70 percent of the fuel burned in
industrial boilers. The regional distribu-
tion of key industrial groups is displayed
in Table 1. Not only are industries
concentrated regionally, but 60 percent
on the basis of fuel use are also located
in municipal areas. Moreover, existing
industries rely predominantly on natural
gas (67 percent by fuel use), though
regionally the percentages vary from 85
to 3 percent. Some regions still remain
heavy users of coal in industry over
50 percent in some cases. Finally, a little
more than 1 percent of the large boilers
in industry account for over 40 percent
of capacity, again unevenly distributed
on region- or industry-specific bases.
Sensitivity to such factors is essential to
assess the impacts of increasing the use
of coal in industrial boilers. But data for
a complete picture are lacking, particu-
larly for the small boiler which are
uneconomical for most coal use.
Boiler Technologies and the
Framework for Their Analysis
The technologies investigated were
noted previously. Units delivering
100,000 Ib of steam per hour, roughly
the current average size of industrial
units based on energy consumed, were
used as the standard for comparison.
"Typical" Eastern and Western coals
were also assigned. The level of demand
thai is assumed in the year 2000 is 6Q*,
a high but justifiable assumption in the
sense that it represents the intent of the
Fuel Use Act. The consideration of coal
use is restricted to the large boiler
(>100,000 Ib steam/hr) size range. This
restriction is made for a number of
reasons. First, adequate data for the
present distribution of boilers only exist
for the large boilers. Second, only larger
boilers are subject to provisions of the
Clean Air Act. Third, the larger boilers
are the most cost-effective size for using
coal. Our assumptions do, however,
account for a slight reduction in capacity
in smaller boilers «100,000 Ib steam/
hr), consistent with a scenario that
emphasizes a greater role for coal in
large boilers.
Figure 3 summarizes the assumed
year 2000 energy demand in industrial
boilers. Between now and the year
2000, 75 percent of new capacity in
large boilers (or roughly 3.5Q) is
assumed to be fired by coal. It was
assumed that 90 percent of present oil-
fired capacity in large boilers will be
*6Q would come to about 252 million tons of coal,
or about 5 5 times current industrial use of coal in
boilers, representing a 7 2 percent increase per
year in the growth of coal use.
-------
7363
1978
1963: 476
1978: 678
1963: 1.234
1978: 1,693
1963: 5.234
1978: 5.661
1963: 1,386
1978: 1,259
1963
1963: 412
1978: 506
1978
Rocky Mountain (VIII) Great Plains fVIIJ
Great Lakes fill) Upper Atlantic (II) New Enjland (I)
Key
Coal
Natural gas
Petroleum
I I Electricity
1963: Total industrial
1978: energy consumption
in region, by year
U.S. Total 1963 U.S. Total 1978
1963
1978
1963: 362
1978: 582
1963: 1,274
1978: 1.593
1963: 4.356
1978: 6,432
1963: 1.614
1978: 1.950
Pacific Northwest (X) Pacific Southwest (IX) Gulf Coast (VI)
1963
1963: 858
1978: 1,401
1978
Appalachia (IV)
Southeast (V)
Figure 2. Regional fuel use patterns (1963 and 1978, JO'2 BTU).
Table 1. Regional Shares of Industrial Energy Use (1977)
Chemicals Primary metals Petroleum/coal
Paper
Stone/clay/glass Food
Region Nation Region Nation Region Nation Region Nation Region Nation Region Nation
New England
Upper Atlantic
Great Lakes
Appalachia
Southeast
Gulf Coast
Great Plains
Rocky Mountain
Pacific Southwest
Pacific Northwest
8
21
10
30
15
52
16
3
12
7
<1
6
10
11
4
59
3
<1
3
<1
6
30
49
29
2
5
9
51
15
27
<1
9
57
12
<1
6
2
4
4
4
1
12
10
3
<1
27
6
26
35
9
<1
6
19
2
<1
52
2
3
13
2
34
6
4
17
45
6
16
<1
6
37
7
4
10
15
25
16
7
<1
3
12
7
10
8
6
6
3
12
9
10
3
3
12
33
10
6
14
9
3
9
2
5
6
3
3
5
2
17
7
9
6
3
10
20
6
7
11
17
3
9
5
-------
converted to, or replaced by, coal by the
year 2000; though site-specific factors
are also assumed to allow 10 percent of
new capacity to be fired by oil. For
natural gas, it was assumed that 50
percent of existing capacity in large
boilers will be converted to coal, with 15
percent of new capacity being satisfied
by natural gas. A minimum of roughly
3.5Q of coal-fired capacity in the year
2000 takes place at existing industrial
sites. Of the approximately 2.5Q of new
growth which is coal-fired, much of the
amount may also occur at existing
facilities, since capacity additions may
be expected in many industries. Region-
al assignments of energy use are based
on industry-specific growth projections.
Further, the two "typical" coals used in
the analysis were not uniformly applied
to each region, since not all regions
would have equal access to the two coal
types.
Discharges to the environment and
resource requirements were determined
for all operations from mining through
steam production. To compare tech-
nologies, a trajectory, or sequence of
operations, was defined for each
technology. Figure 4 presents the
results of comparing S02 emissions,
total solid waste production, and water
requirements for four of the technologies
considered. In addition to comparisons
among technologies that provide the
same level of steam output, discharge
and resource comparisons are made
among several "technology mixes,"
each of which in the aggregate would
require 6 Q of coal in the year 2000. The
technology mixes are as follows:
Industrial Boilers in Year 2000. This
is the "reference mix" for year
2000 because the level of applica-
tion of each technology is that
which is assumed to be achievable
according to market penetration
estimates that were provided by
the sources of the study. In this and
the subsequent technologies, the
steam production is taken to be
4.8Q/yr; and the coal required,
nominally 6Q/yr, varies with the
technology mix.
Clean All Eastern Coal Year
2000. All Eastern coal, except that
which is used in low-Btu gasifica-
tion, is cleaned physically.
High-Level FGD Year 2000. All
coal from conventional combustion
of uncleaned coal is shiftedto FGD.
High Level of Low-Btu Gasification
Year 2000. All conventional
combustion of uncleaned coal is
replaced by low-Btu gasification.
High Level of FBC. All combustion
of uncleaned coal is replaced by
FBC.
Results from comparing four of the
five technology mixes for total SC»2
emissions, solid waste production, and
water requirements are displayed in
Figure 5.
Overall, energy use in all industrial
boilers is assumed to increase at a rate
of 1.5 percent per year between 1978
and 2000; energy use in large boilers is
assumed to increase at a rate of 3.5
percent per year. The use of coal in large
boilers increases at 8.4 percent per
year. Whether U.S. industry can, in fact,
increase coal use to such an extent is
Small
boilers
Large
boilers
1
All fuels
-Natural gas
15Q
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1978
New growth
in large
boilers
(grassroots and
capacity
additions)
I Conversion to
large
coal boilers
Existing
large boilers
and
coal
replacement/
conversion
2000
Figure 3. Summary of assumptions for industrial boilers.
Conventional
u combustion fee) cc/fgd/pcc fbc/pcc low-Btu gas 12
^ 75 1ft 7*" u
o
£
-------
Reference
technology
mix 2000
High level of
scrubbing 2000
High level
of FBC 2000
High level of
low Bw
gas 2000
I*
CO
* 60
CO
C
O
0 45
0)
| 30
^
* 15
a
£
0
8
.
(Q
$
- ^ 6
Si
S
(0
.5 4
0
2
0
_
-
__
-
-
-
H
^
I
-
_
-
-
_
I
-
_
-
-
i~
V
//
^
I
250
200
150
to
§1
CO
O)
8
ID
.2
5
t>
-------
TSP
1978
2000
SO2
1978
2000
1978
NOx
2000
Key
I I < '/2 of 1978 National Average
'/2-1 of National Average
1 -2 of National Average
2-3 of National Average
HB >'3 of 1978 National Average
Figure 7. Regional coal. oil. and NG industrial boiler emissions/m2, 1978 basis.
variations in boiler's size or operating
parameters affect the cost of steam.
Second, the modes by which economic
factors external to steam costs influence
boiler/fuel choice are described gener-
ally. Finally, fuel choice decisions are
evaluated on an industry- and region-
specific basis.
Comparative capital and steam costs
for conventional and advanced coal
technologies are depicted in Table 2.
The use of cleaned coal increases the
cost of steam only marginally above that
for an uncontrolled conventional water-
tube boiler. Furthermore, when all the
benefits of using cleaned coal are
accounted for lower waste disposal,
transportation, and maintenance costs
the net cost of steam produced by a
boiler equipped with FGD is the same
whether cleaned or uncleaned coal is
used; the same observation applies to
FBC. For Eastern coals, FBC appears to
be slightly less costly than FGD, while for
Western coals the differential is greater.
Capital costs for low-Btu gasification
systems are 25 percent higher than any
technology studied. Only at extremely
high rates of capacity utilization could
onsite low-Btu gasification become
cost-effective for generating industrial
process steam.
The much higher capital costs associ-
ated with coal-fired boilers place them
at a substantial cost disadvantage
compared to units designed to fire
natural gas. Additionally, coal-based
energy technologies exhibit severe
economies of scale. The combined
effect of these factors is to make coal-
firing cost-effective only in large boilers
that operate at high load factors where
economies of scale can be reached and
where capital costs can be spread over a
maximum amount of steam production.
The industrial sector, however, is
characterized by a large number of small
boilers operating at a fraction of rated
capacity.
High capital costs are a significant
disincentive for firms considering a
switch to coal. For many industrial
firms, steam costs constitute only a very
small fraction of total plant-operating
costs. As a result, investing limited
capital resources in capital-intensive
boiler systems cannot be economically
justified even when such an investment
would reduce annual energy costs. For
those firms where the cost of steam
represents a greater share of total
operating costs, large capital invest-
ments to reduce annual energy expen-
ditures will be viewed more favorably. In
all industries, however, boiler system
replacement or expansion projects must
compete for capital with other business
activities. Finally, the manifest incon-
veniences of using solid coal at manu-
facturing plants have at least the
potential to raise substantially the
effective costs of using coal compared to
using other fuels.
Clearly then, the decision to burn coal
as a boiler fuel can be influenced by a
number of economic, technical, and
institutional considerations. In order to
gain some perspective on how these
considerations may affect different
industrial firms, an industry- and
region-specific analysis of fuel/tech-
nology decisions was undertaken. In
each case, it was assumed that an
existing gas- or oil-fired boiler required
replacement. The existing unit was
assumed to have totally depreciated in
value.
Six industries were considered:
chemicals, petroleum, aluminum, steel,
equipment manufacturing, and food
processing. The analysis took into
account industrial differences by em-
ploying industry-specific data on average
boiler size, load factor, and expected
-------
-T-5000
- -4000
--3000
Key
I I Tar
I 1 Sludge
I I Tailings
CU Spent bed
Figure 8. Year 2000 SW discharges, annual basis. 103 tons, reference mix.
Table 2. Summary of Approximate Costs3
Technology
Conventional
combustion (CC)
CC with cleaned coal
CC with FGD
CC/FGD with
cleaned coal
FBC
FBC with
cleaned coal
Low-Btu gasification
plus boiler
Eastern
Total
capital
investment.
10e$
8.80
8.96"
10.12
10.20"
9.83
9.99b
12.80
coal
Cost of
steam,
S/106 Btu
7.43
7.71
9.79
9.79
9.29
9.29
12.57
Western
Total
capital
investment,
10e$
10.57
11.82
10.05
11.77
coal
Cost of
steam,
$/106Btu
7.77
9.21
7.55
10.74
"Basis: boiler with a capacity of 100,000 Ib/hr steam (approximately 125x 10eBtu/hr
fuel input) with a load factor of 45 percent.
^Includes proportional share of the capital cost of a large coal-cleaning plant supplying
fifty 100,000-lb/hr steam plants.
returns on invested capital, all of which
influence the traditional analysis of
capital, operating, maintenance, and
fuel costs. In addition, regional dif-
ferences were reflected in fuel costs
and availability, as well as in the
subjective probabilities that specific
leveIs of price andfuel availability would
occur. Probability functions were derived,
for the most part, from interviews and
thus were only intended to represent
intra-industry perceptions. Eight pos-
sible outcomes, or scenarios, were
constructed in terms of variations in fuel
prices and expected levels of supply. For
each scenario and for each industry/
region grouping, the cost of steam from
a gas-fired system was calculated as a
percentage of an equivalent capacity
coal-fired system.
A summary of the results is presented
in Figure 9. The shaded portion incorpo-
rates the range of values calculated for
each industry among eight scenarios.
Under the assumptions employed in this
analysis, only in the steel industry and
in the petroleum refining industry in the
Upper Atlantic Region does coal appear
to represent a clearly cost-effective
alternative. The steel industry, however,
currently faces significant capital
constraints and is located primarily in
areas of poor air quality. Petroleum
refineries are often sited in congested
areas. For these industries, then, the
apparent economic incentives to use
coal may be overridden by other con-
straints. Large energy-intensive firms
located along the Gulf Coast generally
perceive only a marginal incentive to
convert to coal due to the high cost of
transporting coal to that region.
Conclusions
The historical imperatives that shaped
the Nation's industrial development
have given rise to a configuration of
technical systems that is not amenable
to a rapid shift to coal. Industries, for the
most part, are concentrated in a few
geographical areas. Such concentration
has led to restrictions on the amount of
space available to individual manufac-
turing plants and resulted in a close
proximity between industries and areas
of high population density. The concen-
tration of industries and populations,
with the concomitant concentration of
transportation and commercial support
systems, has caused the quality of the
air in these areas to deteriorate serious-
ly. Only recently has a public commit-
ment to restore the quality of the
environment in heavily industrialized
and urbanized regions been made and
translated into specific policy actions. In
the last 25 years, much of the progress
that has been made has arisen from a
shift away from coal to cleaner fuels.
Thus, a return to the widespread
utilization of coal raises a potential
contradiction between environmental
and energy goals.
Other constraints to an increased use
of coal in industrial boilers can be traced
to historical factors as well. The
progressive movement to small, pack-
aged, and low-capital-cost boilers
8
-------
restricts the technical capability of
existing equipment to use alternative
fuels, especially coal. Changes in
mining technology, policy initiatives
designed to protect the health and
safety of miners and to minimize
environmental damage from mining
operations, gradual changes in coal
marketing and management practices,
as well as deficiencies in existing
transportation systems, cast serious
doubts on the adequacy of the supply
infrastructure to support a widespread
shift to coal in industrial boilers.
All of the factors mentioned combine
to levy a substantial cost penalty on coal
users. Costs of control technology,
waste disposal, land, boiler replace-
ment, and transportation are often more
than enough to offset the rapid increases
in the price of natural gas and oil. More
importantly, the capital intensivenessof
coal technologies can raise an array of
financial problems for industrial firms.
Each of these constraints appears to
be rather intractable. To the degree that
they arise from long-term historical
trends, from conflicts with other public
goals, and from imperatives of our
economic system, the policy initiatives
that are designed to provide a near-term
and widespread shift to coal in industrial
boilers will be severely compromised. A
high level of coal use in industrial
boilers does not appear to be technically,
environmentally, economically, or poli-
tically feasible.
TOU
+70
+60
+50
10
<3'C +40
to eg
8
-------
o.
5'
0)
O
A
a\
K>
o>
oo
C!
rn
?
o
m > TJ m
0*1 3 a
>« |<
wS S 3
Cn)< S. 3
§|
i
------- |