The Editor, Sir:

After reading Winston Hay's piece "The case for coal-burning power stations", I believe that the time is ripe for healthy debate on the matter.

Speaking from the experience of being a power plant mechanical engineer, I know of the good and bad of coal. I would suggest a few perspectives for consideration and propose some fundamental questions to both the proponents and opponents of coal as a source of energy production in Jamaica.

Is Jamaica equipped to handle the poisoning of the ground water that will result from run-offs, and the poisoning of the air from acid rain?

Those who would outright dismiss Hay's argument would be wrong. He brought a keen eye to the advantages of the use of coal as a source of energy. Yes, he is right that the rail system is already in place from the ports to all the bauxite plants. These are the places that use the most power. Yes, his insight is right that coal is abundant and cheaper than liquefied natural gas (LNG), and hence, should ultimately result in gross reduction in electricity rate, to all, including the bauxite industry, in the long run.

Has Hay thought about the initial costs for a conversion to coal?

Any conversion from LNG, #2 or #6 oil would require the plants to be twice as large in size, with twice the expenditure.

Consider for example, the Old Harbour Bay plant needing a coal conveyor system to transport coal, pulverisers to crush coal, catalytic converters to clean the coal, air-heaters and economisers to pre-heat the coal, cyclones to pre-burn the coal, new furnaces/boilers, extended stacks, fly and bottom ash-handling systems and scrubbers, to name a few. This one plant would require at least US$2 billion to get up and running.

Does Hay think that after spending on these capital costs, the long-suffering people of Jamaica would see any rate reduction anytime soon?

Power interruptions

It is possible, however, that if the Government were so inclined, enabling each of the major bauxite refineries to own its own small coal-fired electricity plant may be just what the doctor ordered. This would free the Jamaica Public Service grid to serve the rest of Jamaica, with much fewer power interruptions.

This, too, begs the question: Where will the capital costs come from?

My biggest issue with coal-fired plants in Jamaica would be their locations.

Where would these plants be located? Who would want them in their communities? Remember now that, like all power plants, coal plants, too, need an adequate and abundant source of water - and they also produce a whole lot of toxic slags and ashes.

The bottom line is that although coal would be a cheaper alternative to electricity, in the long run, its presence in a community would make the bauxite mud lake look quite tame.

I am, etc.,

EVERTON EASTWOOD

evertoneastwood@hotmail.com