Comments on: “I have always supported clean coal”

By: Clean R. Coal

Clean R. Coal — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 22:08:40 +0000

I have followed Geotec Inc. from the R & D stage through the feasibility study and I believe many will hear about this bio-chemistry breakthrough in the coming weeks. Many have claimed “Clean Coal” is an oxymoron but this technology should knock the socks off many naysayers in the fossil fuel industry. Congressman Rick Boucher is writing the cap and trade draft which will stress the coal industry to its limits…….I believe the Geotec technology will solve many of the issues facing the fossil fuel industry solids, liquids or gas.

By: vandy

vandy — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 00:47:07 +0000

Have you heard about GEO-Tec, Inc.? A green company that has the technology to clean coal, and produce diesel from it, as well as grow crops where the coal used to be by utilizing enzymes? We are so rich with coal in this country; why don’t we invest in this ‘GETC’ and renew our independence from foreign purchases? Check out their patent pending with the US Gov.!

By: R Margolis

R Margolis — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 11:19:53 +0000

China and India will grow energy use for their own needs as well. I agree with Matt W that this should NOT be an excuse for the US to do nothing. I also agree with Teryn that CCS and nuclear should be kept on the table as an all renewable grid will likely take a long time to demonstrate and establish.

By: matt w

matt w — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:09:35 +0000

Teryn, the “What about China” argument is a very convenient one to argue if you don’t want to have to make meaningful change on energy issues. It seems to go like this. China is building an enormous fleet of power plants. The US and other wealthy nations say there is no point in cutting emissions because of what China is doing (all the while building their own massive fleet of carbon intensive plants). China says they won’t do anything until rich nations take the first step because rich nations gained their wealth by industrialization via carbon intensive energy production.

This argument is thus used to say that rich nations shouldn’t do anything. But look, all it would take would be for rich nations to DO something and the developing nations including China have said that they would be willing to go along. Quite frankly they do have some moral authority to say “we have the right to pollute in order to attain your quality of life, because that is what you did.” And until rich nations actually do this, poor nations will continue to use this position.

It is clear that it is the rich nations, who are best poised to cut emissions, need to step up and do it, so that it is possible for poor nations to do it. I am not saying that it is justifiable for China to say “fuck you world” and build a thousand coal plants. But it is understandable that they would have that attitude while rich nations drag their feet.

Some more food for thought. China’s emissions are by and large outsourced emissions of the US and other countries that import from them. We buy massive amounts of commodities from them because it is cheaper (thanks to nonexistant labor and environmental laws) to produce it there than it is domestically. To act like its all China’s fault is simply creating a scapegoat. We created the market, we give them the money, those are our emissions too.

And yes we need to cut nukes and CCS completely out of the picture. Too expensive. Too dangerous. Too toxic

By: Hamid

Hamid — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:19:09 +0000

It actually doesn’t mater, which one selects for The Office. The question is if they have any plan at all for educating people to find their way towards a better and cleaner climate?

We, my colleagues and I from Sweden, are taking the action in our own hands.

//Hamid

By: R Margolis

R Margolis — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 16:35:00 +0000

If the CCS and nuclear are the cheaper way to generate baseload (with renewables supplying peak and swing loads) then it will be difficult to convince the public and the regulators to go with a higher expense technology (i.e., an all renewable grid).

By: Alexander M. Tinker

Alexander M. Tinker — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 02:32:40 +0000

There is an important distinction to be drawn between new coal generation and new nuclear power plants and coal and nukes in general. We have to deal with what we have, but it is recklessly irresponsible to put any resources into building old energy infrastructure when new energy technology is here.

By: Teryn Norris

Teryn Norris — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:54:55 +0000

I understand opposition to nuclear and CCS as a strategy to ensure they aren’t overbearing in our portfolio of clean energy solutions. But do you think we should work to eliminate them entirely? What about the massive amount of coal China is building?

By: Joshua Kahn Russell

Joshua Kahn Russell — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:22:52 +0000

Right on Alexander.