20

of strip mining list such arguments as: air quality degradation; regional climatic change; water shortages; aquifer disruption; ecosystem impacts; "booms" and "busts"; and, scientific and cultural resource destruction.

A moratorium on leasing exists on all Federally held land which, in effect, totally freezes all types of coal leasing for an indefinite period of time.

Congress and the Department of the Interior want to change the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 so that coal leases would be issued to competitive bidding only.

Without prospecting permits and preferential rights leases, no mining company can afford to make substantial investments in coal lands or facilities until it has sufficient factual information as to the quantity, quality and mining conditions of the reserve.

The Department of the Interior has not issued any prospecting permits or preferential rights leases in the past five years.

Until a workable coal leasing plan emerges and an acceptable strip mining bill passes, western coal development will continue to be problematical.

c - Transportation

Rail transportation; over 60 percent of all U S coal production is loaded on rail cars at the mine. Unit trains now move more than 20 percent of total coal output. Rail transportation would probably be the primary means of

delivery of coal supply to Texas.

Coal-slurry pipelines: in the past 4 years there has been a fourfold increase in the ton-mile capacity of commercial slurry pipeline systems. The most dramatic application in the coal industry is the successful operation of the 273 mile Black Mesa pipeline in Arizona. A 1000-mile coal-slurry pipeline to carry between 30-40 million tons per year from the Colorado Plateau to the lower Mississippi Valley is planned. Also under study is an 800-mile coalslurry pipeline from the coal producing areas of Montana, Utah, Wyoming and Colorado to the Pacific Northwest. A great deal of opposition is beginning to develop against these pipelines, particularly from railroad interests.

21

Waterways: transportation by water is the least expensive way to ship coal; however, no coal supplies in the western group are connected by waterways to Texas.

Overland conveyor belts: belt conveyor offer a versatile means of conveying coal from the mine to the power plant when they are located in close proximity, i.e. mine-mouth. This would be the case for plants in Texas located near in-state bituminous or lignite sources.

I THE USE OF NATURAL GAS AS BOILER FUEL

Statements have been made that the use of gas as a boiler fuel results in a loss of roughly two-thirds of the heating value of the gas used and, hence, is an inferior use of a natural resource.

The above statement, while technically correct, creates an erroneous impression. The statement implies that, if gas is used directly in an appliance rather than through conversion to electricity, a saving of 2/3 of the energy in gas could be achieved. This neglects the loss of efficiency of burning gas in an appliance.

The burning of gas in an appliance, particularly for space heating, is accomplished with efficiency losses, some of which are as follows:

1 - The burning of gas produces water vapor. The inability to regain the heat of vaporization results in a loss of efficiency.

2 - The heat in the combustion gases leaving the flue is not recoverable and hence produces a loss in efficiency.

3

Burner maladjustments over the years reduce efficiency of combustion from the values which would be obtained under test conditions.

4

The use of air for combustion results in additional outside air entering the space increasing the heating load.

5

The use of pilot lights and losses associated with intermittent operation result in additional losses from ideal conditions.

The use of gas for heating or air conditioning is accompanied with the use of electricity for pumps or fans. The electric energy is normally not considered when studies are made between gas and electricity for these services.

22

The conversion of energy in fossil fuel to electricity results in a transformation to a more usable form of energy. This conversion is achieved

at a relatively low efficiency varying from 30 to 40 percent. This efficiency loss occurs whether the fossil fuel is coal, oil or gas. A similar efficiency loss occurs with the use of nuclear energy. Hence, the conversion of a power boiler to burn coal or oil instead of gas does not result in an energy saving. The low efficiency of a modern power plant is not unique. For example, the efficiency of an automobile engine is approximately 20 percent.

With present day techniques, there is no substitute for the use of electricity for lighting, television, refrigeration, etc. Gas or electricity can be used for cooking, space heating, water heating and clothes drying. While gas summer air conditioning is available, the large majority of installations are electric.

There are differences of opinion as to the overall energy requirements for homes using gas or electricity for space heating and water heating. The climatic conditions of the area, type construction of the homes, number and living habits of the residents all have an influence on the comparison. A number of studies have been made to determine the difference in energy use between electric homes and combination homes using gas for space and water heating. Several of these studies have been made by utilities in Texas and will be discussed by the individual utilities.

Several years ago surveys made by Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company and Louisiana Power & Light Company were reviewed. The climatic conditions of the area serviced by these utilities is somewhat similar to Texas. These studies compared the overall energy requirements in Btu/year and Btu/sq ft per year for homes of comparable age with alternative methods of space heating, water heating, cooking and cooling. The energy requirements for the all-electric homes considered the conversion of the energy in gas to electricity at the power plant. Distribution losses were not included for either the gas or electric system. It was considered that these losses would be comparable for both systems and would not materially affect the results of the study.

(1) Homes in Study No. 1 using gas and electricity used gas for heating, cooking and water heating. Combination homes in Study No. 2 used gas for heating and water heating.

24

The results of these studies are presented not with the thought of determining whether gas or electric space and water heating is the more economical but to indicate that the overall energy use is comparable and not in the ratio of 3 to 1 as inferred by some statements.

The studies were not made under controlled conditions and there are many differences in living habits and, in some cases, home construction among the samples. The number of samples would tend to minimize differences in living habits. It is interesting to note the reasonably close comparison in the energy used per sq ft of area, if the extremes, on the low side with the use of a heat pump in the all-electric home and on the high side with gas summer air conditioning, are not considered.

In the specific case concerning abandonment of gas for use in power boilers in Texas, space heating is not as large a consumer of energy as summer air conditioning. The argument for the statement that, the use of gas under a power boiler is an inferior use of a natural resource as compared with burning the gas directly in the home, generally relates to space heating. The overall energy use is reasonably comparable whether gas or electricity is used for heating in this area of the country. In addition, such a minor portion of the generation of electricity in Texas is used for heating, a potential saving of energy in this area would have no visible impact on the utilitization of energy in the nation.