Clean coal conundrum

Here’s an interesting take on “clean coal” technology.

Even if you could capture all the carbon from coal, the cost involved in doing so would make nuclear, natural gas or even renewable sources the more economical choice. Coal should only be used as a transition fuel as we move into a new energy system and then as an emergency fuel after that. A special emphasis should be put on replacing the coal mining jobs around the country with new energy jobs. The biofuel industry alone could provide more jobs in northern Minnesota than the boondoggle “clean coal” Mesaba Energy Project ever could. Clearly, local leaders and journalists never bothered to “open” that door depicted in this video.

h/t A Siegel

Comments

  1. Coal is one of our most abundant natural resources; only a fool would want to bankrupt the coal industry at a time when energy independence is so important to our national security.

    There is zero proof that coal is a leading cause of global warming. Zero, zilch, nada. Your coal boogie man just won’t hunt.

    Ethanol has been shown to be quite the boondoggle/fraud/scam; clean coal has more promise than burning food.

    Carter was wrong to ban breeder reactors. Nuclear has the most potential today, ask France.
    Why are people so scared of nuclear power, do they believe too much in what hollywood says? Do they really think it will melt a hole to China? Nuclear power has been proven to be extremely safe, just look at how many meltdowns the navy has had.

    Wind and solar are good diversity and have a little potential; I would rather see them get a welfare check instead of quiz bowl ethanol.

    Real Americans don’t say “can’t be done” when it comes to technology. We put a man on the moon! This great country can accomplish amazing things when we put our minds and resources to it!

    In your heart you know I am right.

Speak Your Mind

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.