Coal fired power stations produce pollutants as well as green house gases. They are not the same.
Surely it is dust and sand which is the primary 'pollutant' in Cairo and cars and trucks: but wouldn't they be a secondary source?
Is there proof of health problems from long term exposure to the sand/dust storms? Are there warnings? If the Japanese or Chinese lived in Cairo they would have masks on all the time.
Brian Yare - there is a lot wrong with coal fired power stations beginning with greenhouse gases which are much higher that for burning gas.
Glyphdoctor refers to visual pollution and this can be a threat to health as Beijing residents know well from experience this year. Children stayed home and lung and eye treatment went through the roof. Admittedly China has an enormous number of coal fired power stations and Egypt very few but its a slippery slope with coal prices dropping as China moves quickly away from coal reliance (for visual pollution and green house) and gas prices about to increase.
Egypt might get addicted to cheap coal and the companies mentioned in the press report are unlikely to be the last to get government approval to give them reliability of electricity. What I don't understand is why the two companies preferred coal over gas.
Chocolate Eclair I think the filters to reduce visual pollution might not be as good as you suggest but I don't know, but whether they are good or poor, no filter will capture invisible green house gases. Australia has been trying for years but the technology doesn't exist. Agree with you about the water vapor. Agree with you about the by-products of coal which is also true, but to a greater extent, of oil. The products you mention do not rely on burning coal, or if they do, not in the volumes of a power station.
Can anyone explain why coal is the answer? It's an import like gas so that there is a financial problem for Egypt (the private imports will have to be paid for in hard currency from Egypt - maybe not). Wouldn't ports have to be modified, 100's of trucks changed or new ones purchased or train rolling stock adapted. Given the volumes, my betting is trucks because they can deliver to the point of use without double handling but they will add to traffic and auto pollution.
Where is gas in all this? Why not increase gas imports? Maybe because this coal is being imported and used by the companies with no government subsidy compared with the present where government subsidizes the gas for their factories.The government wins because it doesn't have to pay a subsidy to them - or does it? Never heard of a firm giving up a government subsidy.
Hard political decisions, which would require the government to do something rather than sit back and give way to companies, would be to reduce demand to avoid the blackouts by removing or reducing the government subsidy on gas. The current situation of subsidized gas encourages waste and adds to the import bill. No politician or aspiring president will do this for fear of disturbance or loss of votes but at the end of the day why should the taxpayer pay for the energy use by a cement factory owned by a foreign company? Why should frugal working class Egyptians reliant on bottled gas pay for well off Cairenes with piped gas and their long hot showers and gas to run super dooper large gas stoves/ranges The well of and companies should pay more than they do.
The future gas situation has the Government with a few problems including expanding supply after years of clear signs that wells were failing. The companies that can help them with exploration and increased production are a bit wary of the Government because Egypt doesn't pay her bills to them and takes their share of supply.
I've been trying to understand gas and Egypt for a year - my latest attempt is at:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3425
Is it possible to stare for that long without blinking. 