Officials Pick Site for Carbon-Free Coal Plant

Excellent!! America can lead the world in doing great things when we set our minds to it.

"She said the department had yet to issue a formal Record of Decision related to the environmental reviews that were formally issued Nov. 16, triggering a 30-day public comment period."

Record of Decision? No wonder it's already double the estimated $900M. I'll bet there'll be a few hundred (thousand?) meetings set up to get that going.

Great idea, but typically horrible gov't execution.

Sort of like the war in Iraq.

How about coming up with an alternative to the more that 100-year-old internal combustion engine?

"Carbon-Free Coal Plant"

The answer to: "What's dumber than hybrids and windmills?"

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHA

Right up there with turning food into Diesel fuel.

No ...

At least that actually works, even if it's insane.

Carbon free coal plant? What's next? A hydrogen free ocean?

Carbon free coal plant? What's next? A hydrogen free ocean?

Posted by goatman at 2007-12-18 07:37 PM | Reply |

Clean dirt...

"Carbon free coal plant? What's next? A hydrogen free ocean?

Posted by goatman at 2007-12-18 07:37 PM | Reply |

Clean dirt..."

Posted by KnightHawk

hybrids
windmills
lunatics

I just passed 140,000 miles on my Durango. Don't need a new one.
Think I'll use the Carrera the rest of the week, it gets 30 MPG if I keep my foot out of it.

It hit 74 today, the pool just dropped below 60 for the first time.

That's degrees F.

"Carbon free coal plant? What's next? A hydrogen free ocean?

Honest Politicans?

WHAT HAPPEN TO CLEAN NUCLEAR POWER? FRANCE GETS 70-80% OF ITS ELECTRICAL POWER FROM NUCLEAR REACTORS

You mean "nucular".

Mentioned nowhere in the great USAToday article is the $32 Million in grants and sales tax rebates that will be shifted to other taxpayers in favor of this apparently necessary project.

Illinois taxpayers, that is.

The science-challenged staff at USA Today came up with an unfortunate title for the article and most of the above posters either didn't bother reading the whole article or just engaged ditto-mode.

The plant is situated in an area geologically right for deep burial of the carbon dioxide. I don't know how sound the science behind this is but there is a lot of money to be made doing is and that explains the alcoholic ex-cheerleaders enthusiasm for it.

Global Warming(tm) Is High Holy Bullshit for the Crackpot Left(tm) but electricity without CO-2 has been easy for decades: In the U.S. it stopped in Seabrook, N.H.

Ethanol from corn is a last resort. There is not much gain. If there were no other fuel, it might be a last recourse to power vehicles.

Now corn is up from $2 to $4 per bushel, and the highly subsidized ethanol producers have their lobbyists cojointly with the greens promoting this idiocy.

In the meantime, the pollution from the heavy use of fertilizer is demonstrating that there are unanticipated undesirable consequences. The pollution is quite a problem, and threatening species. The fertilizer outflow ... The delta ... The delta ...

Isn't it remarkable that every "green" initiative seems to be costly to society but beneficial to some groups pushing the "good" agenda.

Al Gore has a carbon exchange company and stands to earn a profit in billions by brokering the carbon exchange. What's the net reduction in carbon emissions? Well, er ... none. But there is an extra level of unproductive activity, and a rip-off process with the beneficiary "Al Gore," exploiter extraordinary.

Hey, its' the family business. Remember Senator "Dad" Gore, the father of Senator Al, Dad who was in bed with Armand Hammer? It's generational and institutionalized corruption.

Psst. Wanna buy some protection. See a politician. Naive Bill Gates did not. And he suffered greatly. But he's a quick study, and now he has enlisted more politicians including the black caucus by his judicious distribution of alms, than almost everyone else.

Posted by Dreadnaught at 2007-12-18 08:49 PM

WHAT HAPPEN TO CLEAN NUCLEAR POWER? FRANCE GETS 70-80% OF ITS ELECTRICAL POWER FROM NUCLEAR REACTORS

Where are you going to store the "waste?" And unfortunately, the "nuclear fuel" reserve is only sufficient to last some 100 years.

Ted Turner, noted liberal, has the solution. Kill off sufficient numbers of humans burdening the planet so that the population will be reduced to some 385 million. That's some 6 billion people to be offed, either through attrition or some apocalyptic process.

There are, however, "problems," such as the fallout from China's one-child program, which has destabilized the country with so many unmatched, and consequently restless, males. But then, this may make an apocalypse a more feasible solution. People will be motivated.

And after "the reduction," the planet will be able to sustain the population at the level indicated.

Someday. Somehow. We're going to need to bite the bullet. Or else. Or else, the bullet will be bitten for us and "the reduction" will be less controlled.

Well, let's have designated populations targeted for elimination. Let's see. Religion. Islam. Now that's a good precursor to extinction - religion. Suicide bombers thrive in that milieu. Maybe they can off each other.

Next? Africa? South America? Remember, large population groups need to be eliminated, nt small ones. Well. We would be halfway there. Homo sapiens sapiens isn't so sapient. In some 70 years, the population of the world has soared despite all of our efforts at war, pestilence, etc.

What's man to do?

Gotta spread the word. If you believe, you get an expedited ticket to Paradise. Just line up. Stop shoving each other for the opportunity to make "the transition."

Just convince a sufficient number of Islamics of "the truth," and co-opt their clerics so that they'll induce young people to sign up - before they reproduce, of course.

There was the "Marshall Plan." Now there's "The Turner Plan." Ted Turner, one man who is not an ostrich turning away from the unpleasant truth.

Increase in solar power available.

A new material, nano flakes, may revolutionise the transformation of solar energy to electricity. If so, even ordinary households can benefit from solar electricity and save money in the future.

If researcher Martin Aagesen's future solar cells meet the expectations, both your economy and the environment will benefit from the research. Less than 1 per cent of the world's electricity comes from the sun because it is difficult to transform solar energy to electricity. But Martin Aagesen's discovery may be a huge step towards boosting the exploitation of solar energy.

We believe that the nano flakes have the potential to convert up to 30 per cent of the solar energy into electricity and that is twice the amount that we convert today, says Martin Aagesen who is a PhD from the Nano-Science Centre and the Niels Bohr Institute at University of Copenhagen. During his work on his PhD thesis, Martin found a new and untried material. I discovered a perfect crystalline structure. That is a very rare sight. While being a perfect crystalline structure we could see that it also absorbed all light. It could become the perfect solar cell, says Martin Aagesen. The discovery of the new material has sparked a lot of attention internationally and has led to an article in Nature Nanotechnology.

The potential is unmistakable. We can reduce the solar cell production costs because we use less of the expensive semiconducting silicon in the process due to the use of nanotechnology. At the same time, the future solar cells will exploit the solar energy better as the distance of energy transportation in the solar cell will be shorter and thus lessen the loss of energy, says Martin Aagesen who is also director of the company SunFlake Inc. that pursues development of the new solar cell.

Nano Flakes would make a great name for a breakfast cereal. Get Your Nano Flakes and Milk Kids.

Larry Mohr

Just a pinch of nanoflakes between my cheeck and gum keeps me fresh all day long.

I live in souther IL and go to SIUC. I heard about his caol plant a long time ago. They are not even gunna break ground till 2010!!!! By that time our great Lord Blagoavich(who WILL be indited) will try to tack so many fee's and taxes on this plant that it will NEVER be built. Has anyone here heard that Lord Blogoavich wants the New Chicago Casino to be under the review/control/administration of the City of Chicago not the IL gaming board? That sound like a really bad idea to anyone else??

I suggest everyone here at the RETORT go to this site and sample the fare of a local talkshow host at http://
www.theworkingmanshow.com He is a fairly entertaining guy.

Oh on the Nuclear power. Why cant we just blast all the used fuel rods into the infinite void of deep space?>

Man i need to slow down my typing. I have been making alot of simple typos.

Why do they not build power plants where the fuel is located? Last time I looked,Illinois wasn't too far up the list of coal-producing states....

Put coal-fired power plants in the middle of a coalfield....

It's cheaper to send electricity on a wire than coal in a train....

I couldnt agree more johnson but there was a story on the news here in houston about some enginneers who took some turbin driven power producers built in 1964 and GE told them that it couldnt be done.....those turbins are about to put a small city online for electricity here and its all being driven by biofuels......
its a section of 'the woodlands'........they did show some nasty looking black couds emitting from the area, but they said even though it looked bad, it was burning clean......is this one of our first..."back to the future two" solutions?
or as you say.......a costly answer that benefits the producer more than the world???
which by the way....seems to me to be something that leftists in particular just happen to forget all the while they are calling us ignorant rubes for being skeptical at all of gore and his bunch.
with another by the way has already made MULTIPLE MILLIONS off of this and he has just been talking about it, not making us buy this and buy that.........

And after "the reduction," the planet will be able to sustain the population at the level indicated.

Johnson.

You go first.

It's cheaper to send electricity on a wire than coal in a train....

Is it? I'm not doubting you, I've often wondered that very thing myself.

"Carbon free coal plant? What's next? A hydrogen free ocean?

Honest Politicans?

Posted by STIRSUMUP

You should live so long as to see either one.

"Why cant we just blast all the used fuel rods into the infinite void of deep space?"

Posted by GotTruth

That's would be okay fine (into the sun would be better) except what happens when there is a launch failure? Spent fuel rods raining down on some city would Not Be A Good Thing.

Remember the protests when Cassini was launched with it plutonium power pack. In the 70s, a Soviet spy sat de-orbited, only partially burned-up, and spread nuclear fuel over 1,000s of kilometers of Northern Canada.

Now if they could figure out something for all the CO2 they are storing, that would be nice.

Then we could have more plug in hybrids powered by various sourced electricity and reduce our dependency on the Middle East. How nice would that be?

Oxyfuel technology with carbon sequestration...
www.adecos.de

The Europeans are big on it...
www.platts.com

my guess, another Bush Folly:
It is supposed to be virtually pollution-free and produce both electricity and hydrogen while its carbon dioxide, a leading greenhouse gas, is to be captured and stored deep underground.

The project, three-fourths of which is taxpayer-funded, has been questioned by some lawmakers in Congress over its soaring cost nearly double the $950 million originally projected and its long delays.

IMO i think we should get rid of all carbon based species on this planet.

/sarcasm