I saw a documentary recently where they were hyping cleam coal, but when asked how many successful tests they've conducted, the answer was none. When asked how many tests at all....same answer.

The problem is mostly legal and regulatory at this point. If they pump all this carbon dioxide into an old mine (as an example) and it percolates up through homes and kills people, who will be responsible?

Clean Coal may not be dead though. The new fuels being created using algae require large amounts of carbon dioxide (which don't need to be discarded as the fuel absorbs them). Perhaps if the coal companies get together with these 'Algae Fuel' companies and allow the algae farms to be built next to or near the Coal Plants, there can be an outcome that's safer and more economical for all. The coal company loses nothing because it's used for electricity and the 'Algae Fuel' co. loses nothing because it's used for powering gasoline engine.

Another example of how self-regulating business works in the capitalist system. Much like letting politicians self-regulate or rightwingers self-medicate.

Well I guess the psychological operations department is going to have to work overtime on this turd.

Hey!

They could blame it on the environmentalists!

The Myth of Clean Coal

The adjective "clean" as applied to coal has always referred to the sulfur content.

It has nothing to do with "the ability to sequester carbon"---or any other "solution" to some stupid-ass leftwing boogeyman.

Complete fucking ignorance and/or dishonesty on the part of the sniveling little J-School faggot that wrote the article.

Jesus Fucking Christ what a joke Time has become.

The accident released 100 times more waste than the Exxon Valdez disaster.

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?

The Valdez didn't release a "waste".

It released crude oil---which is a product, not a waste.

This guy is absurd.

Okay Jak, let's release even one hundred gallons of crude on your lawn and see how you consider it then. But then, you're an idiot. Context, fuckwit.

It released crude oil---which is a product, not a waste.

~(Don't know) Jak Shiat Mao

Tell that to all the wildlife that got wasted by it.

Be Well.

It doesn't have anything to do with "context", you stupid shit.

And nobody's making the case that any release of a regulated substance into the environment is OK.

If the point went over your head, so be it---maybe you could try again.

Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

Tell that to all the wildlife that got wasted by it.

Same goes for you, kiddie fiddler.

MAO

It's amazing how you wake up in such a good mood every night.

The point is the sheer ignorance and emotionalism exhibited by professional "journalists" when attempting to inform the general public about environmental issues.

The accident released 100 times more waste than the Exxon Valdez disaster.

That's a ridiculous, meaningless analogy the author pulled from his ass to evoke the appropriate ideological conclusion from the reader via imagery.

It's amazing how you wake up in such a good mood every night.

Does the current state of journalism not bother you?

Clean coal LOL! The Flex Fuel myth is better!!!!

The point of semantics is not beyond me. That you choose to argue from such a stance is your call, pal.

So a product is a product no matter where it's located. That's what you're saying. The fact that some of it can be recovered does not erase the damage it has done, as waste. You're a moron. Of course, the eggs I've thrown at a car are still products of someone's industry, despite the damage I've done, simply because someone could scrape up the mess and make an omelet.

the health impacts of air and water pollution from coal remain external, paid for not by utilities

That's bullshit, too.

You can't fart anymore without paying permitting and emission fees---especially if you're a Title V facility, as this one undoubtedly was.

The failure of the dike and the resultant release will constitute a massive violation of the Clean Water Act. They will take it in the ass (as they should) with fines, restitution, and clean-up costs.

So a product is a product no matter where it's located.

A product is something produced for sale.

The fact that some of it can be recovered does not erase the damage it has done, as waste.

The fact that some of it can be recovered has nothing to do with much of anything.

You do realize that "waste" in the context used by the author has a definition?

You're a moron.

Not really.

You just don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Of course, the eggs I've thrown at a car are still products of someone's industry, despite the damage I've done, simply because someone could scrape up the mess and make an omelet.

That's quite possibly the stupidest, out-of-left field comment I've ever read on this blog.

You have a fairly irrational, scatter-brained methodology to your argumentation.

Like arguing with an angry, emotional woman who just picks up a handful of rocks and flings them wildly---hoping one hits.

You seem familiar to me....

Your lack of reading comprehension immediately strips you of your ability to critique journalism, or anything written for that matter.

Die of cancer Jak. Keep on defending people who care very little besides making a dollar behind your continued protest, and you hopefully will.

Of course, you're not unintelligent, you know what you're saying and doing. You're committing deliberate and focused intellectual treason. Thousands of examples exist of industry profiting blindly while hurting millions, and you persist in your stupidity. Why? I can think of no other reason than that you want to continue what others have started, for personal profit.

Go drink some crude. Go consume some fly ash. See what good it does you. Then realize that a forty acre pond of fly ash is not a product, nor are miles of polluted coastline.

Is this Pinche_Mao under a different name? Because I've been here for quite some time, under only this name, and I know your strident idiocy to waste my time any longer.

I know your strident idiocy too well, that is.

the health impacts of air and water pollution from coal remain external, paid for not by utilities

That's bullshit, too.

No, it's the truth. Fees and permit costs do not come close to covering health impacts, especially when they can be written off as business expenses. If those fees did cover those external costs, the EPA would be showing a profit, not a cost.

Go drink some crude. Go consume some fly ash. See what good it does you.

The sure-fire indicator of a dumbass is the complete fabrication of points of contention via rant when he has nothing better to say.

Fees and permit costs do not come close to covering health impacts

You can't say that until you quantify specific "health impacts" associated with a certain industry.

And nor can you quantify the beneficial impacts to society provided by a given industry.

If those fees did cover those external costs, the EPA would be showing a profit

The EPA is a federal agency.

Federal agencies don't operate for profit, and aren't designed to do so.

I think the dumbtards in the big cities need to pay 100 times as much for their electricity than we in the country do...just so they feel good about theirselves, ya know...

Keep on defending people who care very little besides making a dollar

I'm not "defending" anybody.

You just made that up postions you're comfortable defending and/or attacking.

Thousands of examples exist of industry profiting blindly while hurting millions

Industries create and distribute products that make your life better---including the computer your goofy little ass is currently using.

An unfortunate by-product of many of those industries is pollution.

Because I've been here for quite some time, under only this name

Now you and I both know that's bullshit, Tinkerbell. :)

(You just can't help yourself, can you?)

Now you and I both know that's bullshit, Tinkerbell. :)

So who else is this person?

I'll admit you had me there for a second.

But you can't fool me for long. :)

Time to build more Nuke plants.

Sorry. Not me, sweetheart.

Of course not.

LOL. I recall when every new right winger was "tadowe". You've fallen into the same level of paranoia, mao.

I've got two names. Incog was the other one for a short time to avoid a stalker.

6654321 aint me.

'K

*pinch yer rosy little cherub cheek*

rofl.

I love how often you're dead wrong but cocksure, Just like the other dumbfuck from texas.

The stalkers on DR right now (LEEATWATER, WISGOD, JOE, 101ST) are preoccupied with gay sex. They're always talking about it. I never think about what the other team is doing. Whatever floats their boat.

The sure-fire indicator of a dumbass is the complete fabrication of points of contention via rant when he has nothing better to say.

#21 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao at 2009-01-10 10:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Excuse me, but didn't you just say this:

You can't fart anymore without paying permitting and emission fees---

#15 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao at 2009-01-10 09:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Something about a "complete fabrication of points"?

West Virginia children breath this shit every day. Mud flooded towns creeks and farms are just a cost of doing business, like all the lungs they destroy.

West Virginia children breath this shit every day. Mud flooded towns creeks and farms are just a cost of doing business, like all the lungs they destroy.

#36 | Posted by nutcase at 2009-01-11 02:56 AM | Reply

But that's OK, because West Virginia is a red state. And we hate everyone who disagrees with us.

--The Left

I get it, let's try to replace a baseline energy (coal, oil, nuclear) with supplemental energy (wind and solar). It ain't happening nor can it for decades.

The hard core left, as funded by Pew and soros want you to think it can be accomplished, like yesterday

Just like the other dumbfuck from texas.

Speaking of which... where IS Zatoichi? Haven't seen him around in a while.

The point of the article..."coal can be cheap, or it can be clean, but it can't be both"

What a huge pile of horseshit. They tell us CO2 is dangerous. Must be because they tell us so. Say it a few thousand times and the sheeple will believe it. I know many idiots here believe it.

Get ready, the new dem heads of epa and enviro's are about to declare c02 a dangerous, hazardous gas. The costs to the US will be astronomical.....

How about this one??

THE MYTH OF ALT GREEN ENERGY

Did anybody tell us the t boone pickens stopped all work on alt energy when oil dropped below 80 bucks/barrel.

Every fuckin commercial now tells us how green, or energy eff. companies are. That's there way to say they fired their staff, stopped paper mailers and turned into junk emailers, and outsourced to india!

Davethewave,

Ever been to India? If they had to give the world an enima that is where they would put the seringe.

Ground is polluted, water is polluted, air is polluted and that is why the companies are moving to india, china, indonesia, malasia because they can throw all their hazardous waste out the door like it is bath water.

It will all come back to get us in the end, we will be cleaning up those shit holes 20 years from now because we did it.

The adjective "clean" as applied to coal has always referred to the sulfur content.

It has nothing to do with "the ability to sequester carbon"---or any other "solution" to some stupid-ass leftwing boogeyman.

Complete fucking ignorance and/or dishonesty on the part of the sniveling little J-School faggot that wrote the article.

Jesus Fucking Christ what a joke Time has become.

#4 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao at

That is the honesty in which they report everything. The earth has not gotten any warmer this century. Only 8 years but.... It took 100 years for them to show one degree increase and It seems that much of that has been done by cooking the books.

algore is running the world's biggest scam and it is making him rich beyond belief.

That is the honesty in which they report everything.

Pinche makes up something and you buy into it. Just like those e-mails you get.

The early program, however, was focused on the environmental challenges of the time - primarily concerns over the impact of acid rain on forests and watersheds. In the 21st century, additional environmental concerns have emerged - the potential health impacts of trace emissions of mercury, the effects of microscopic particles on people with respiratory problems, and the potential global climate-altering impact of greenhouse

Pinche doesn't live in the 21st Century.

. . .A third round CCPI solicitation is underway and is focused on developing projects that utilize carbon sequestration technologies and/or beneficial reuse of carbon dioxide.

I totally agree MW, and china is worse. But it doesn't count what is truth anymore, just what your pretend "facade" you portray. Ask al gore

Advertise that you are green, then it must be so.

Say something is bad, it must be so.

Tell us you can cure recession, unemployment, education, social security, and health care...IN 3 WEEKS...it must be so.

When chicken little has the bull horn there will never be an end to environmental concerns. You can talk about the POTENTIAL impacts of greenhouse until you freeze in the dark.

Wouldn't it be sweet if there was a conection between the amount of energy you could use and the amount of bitching you did about poluting the world with potential stuff.

There is even a push to re-name fish so you won't eat the little bastards. Give me a break assholes.

I guess if you pay someone to kill your fruit, vegies and meat you realy don't see the reality of it all. Hell, foods come ftom the supermarket and electricity comes out of the wall socket. Hell, I don't even want to see thoes ugly power lines. Lets spend a whole bunch more and burry the damn things.

Let's outsource all our baseline energy supplies overseas. Like why develop oil here when we can import it??

We will let them pollute earth with any means necessary, but we won't allow the US companies to do so...with the most stringent guidelines..

BTW Isn't the TVA a Gov run company?

These are the same people that want you to stop emitting CO2 or better yet live like some of the Chinese that still live in caves.

Also, just exactly how do they plan to heat homes and have electricity, oh that's right we are going to convert over to solar that is so much more efficiency and cheaper. At some point these dumb asses will wake up and smell the coffee. I forgot that is bad for you as well due to the hypertension that it causes.

We need more nuke plants.

due to recent the increased awareness of the "carbon impact" of the internet industry there will soon be accessed a word tax for posting replies here.

I'm gonna take it upon myself to collect them so do your patriotic duty and remit them promptly. details available soon.

also as a convenience, I can deduct that tax directly from your checking/savings. I do ask your patience tho, as my deduction software has had "decimal point" issues.

btw, this thread has consumed about .18 ton of coal power (Europe equiv = 6 split atoms)

thank you,

BTW Isn't the TVA a Gov run company?

#47 | Posted by DavetheWave

Yes.

2 years ago, i was on the design team that designed a retrofitted scrubber for some TVA coal fired power plants. For those of you that think based on emotions, and not science, coal fired power plants are those thingeys that provide power to your outlets, a majority of it anyway. it simply doesn't work to say you live in this state or that state, because the power is all interconnected on the grid.

anyway, this project reduced the emissions to about the level of what one fireplace puts out. this is happening on all coal fired power plants by mandate of the epa.

there was another side effect. the scrubbers sprayed a water/chemical soution in the untreated exhaust and pure clean gypsum fell out. the other part of the project, which was financed by the owners, not the government, was that we added a drywall plant that made new drywall from the pure clean gypsum, all they had to do was dry it in the sun. the stuff coming out of the drywall plant was almost all profit.

now this ideal is based on simple science and there are lots of other ideals available. until peoples attitudes change about energy usage, those ideals will lay on the shelf, due to lack of interest.

A good starting point would be for everyone to realize the electricity doesn't magically appear in your sockets and gasoline doesn't magically appear and then disappear when you burn it.

The second thing to realize is that manufacturing and energy are dirty businesses. Garbage is a dirty business. But they are part of our modern society. This stuff has to dealt with in a mature fashion that uses the best science we have today. And none of that is available in the bible or in your emotions.

So, either we smaten up or it's back to the cave.

smaten = smarten lol

I do wish we could get beyond our usual bunker mentalities here. The right says any effort to be environmentally conscious is an Al Gore-driven fraud, and the left says virtually every energy source is hopelessly dirty.

I want neither to pollute the world to death nor to freeze the world to death or stop commerce from operating. Surely there's a middle ground.

If you want to know more about the algae research piece, the University of Kentucky has a very interesting project under way that would not only use algae to soak up CO2 but would also convert the scum into fuel. Promising stuff.

US electric power plants burn approximately 600,000,000 tons of coal per year creating some 60,000,000 tons of ash. Where does the ash go? It's strewn around in mounds on the ground (perhaps even underground) and then rain leaches lotsa unsavory raw chemicals into our water tables. On the other hand, "if all of the US power capacity were nuclear, the total amount of wastes per person per year would amount to one aspirin tablet, and that could easily be disposed of deep in the earth....". This comes from Professor Petr Beckmann's book "The Health Hazards of NOT going Nuclear." And to boot we already have that super "deep hole" in the ground in Nevada. Years ago it cost taxpayer's years ago $Billions to construct. However, do you think Dingy Harry (D-NV) would be for using that hole? I don't think so; and his reasoning would not be technical, but rather ignorant and emotional equivalent to Senator Barbara Boxer and others. Anyone seriously wanting to know about nuclear power should read Professor Beckmann's book that is understandbly written for the average literate guy or gal. At least you should Google the facts. Forget "clean coal"; It's an oxymoron description.

Right on Truth.

Also, the next time we hear about a group of fellas in West Virginia getting trapped in a coal mine (and it should be any day now), we should all thank the anti nuke wackos for their wonderful contribution to society.

Thanks for keeping us in the coal age you morons.

Coal is going to be used, period. This country has an abundance of it and the power plants are already built and new ones are being built every day.

I don't disagree with the nuke crowd, it is a technology that needs to be used. at present there are 27 (not sure about the exact number) nuclear plant permits signed and waiting to be built. it is so specialized that you can't hire just anyone to build them, so we wait.

The other thing we need to do immediately is start developing natural gas for cars and trucks. america also has an abundance of natural gas.

Each year our population is larger and there are more and more electrical products drawing on the grid; nuclear power is a must for our future electrical demands.

Each year our population is larger and there are more and more electrical products drawing on the grid; nuclear power is a must for our future electrical demands.

#57 | Posted by MSgt

AGREED

Vernon, you ignorant dipshit.

Diversity is critical to stable energy prices.
That means we keep the nukes we have, just to keep technology alive, but don't build anymore, they're too fucking expensive the US litigous, rule printing way.

Coal too, must be part of our energy supply, but like nukes, we should resist building more capacity because the pollution problems escalate rapidly as they dominate our mix. A little bit is OK.

Natural gas is king Stateside, and the other technologies must be developed to protect us against oil cartel blackmail.

This is the third time attempting to post in this thread - so I'll cut it down to this:

Burning coal is releasing mercury into the oceans, and nearly all fishing can prove this has destroyed the ecosystem.

This isn't a new study, but a long-known truth that pro-coal has utterly slurred as "tree-hugger propaganda". This world is losing it's diversity mainly due to big energy profiteers.

I like the comments above except #59 Nutcase who resorts fuck as a symbol of ignance. For example, natural gas is not the long term solution to replace coal. It is finite like oil and can perhaps be better used as fuel for transport that Boon Pickens thinks is the gas future (although I think his wind mill solution doesn't seem to be viable nor economical). Wind mills will always require nuclear powered plants sitting around as backups.

Nuclear energy emits zero Co2 and in the longterm it is cheaper than coal and natural gas if they run full out 24/7.

I recognize there are many coal mining jobs on the line. Although I am no expert on gasoline from coal it seems to me it would be vastly superior to the ethanol production scam which is probably one of the more corrupt endeavors the taxpayers have had to subsidize including the increase in food costs as high priced corn helps bring price incresases for all sorts of farm foods, that affects animal fodder and so on along the food chain. Besides didn't Germany run their transport on a lot of coal gasoline in WWII?

It would take a long time to convert from coal and ethanol. That means we should start right away in bringing about the change. Our leaders should show some common sense just once in a vital area of our economy: Construct nuclear plants apace, turn current coal firing plants into gasoline from coal production, stop pouring billions of our tax dollars into ethanol, enact sensible laws for the change, keep bureaucracy to a minimum and figure out planning schedules and sensible milestones for task completion. Above all beware of corruption: we do not want anotheer Boston "Big Dig" fiasco.

The hard core left, as funded by Pew and soros want you to think it can be accomplished, like yesterday

#38 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2009-01-11 08:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

Another 'Soros' conspiracy theory. Good stuff!

Nobody is saying it can be accomplished 'like yesterday' but that is hardly a reason not to be looking for other options in the meantime.

Hell, even that hardcore right-wing attack dog, T. Boone Pickens (he's the one that gave $3,000,000 to fund the 'Swift Boat Shit-stains For Bush) is saying we need to act now. Not yesterday, but now.

Also, some more T Boone Pickens facts:

T. Boone Pickens boasted that he would give $1 million to anyone who can disprove "even a single charge" leveled by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, who he funded to the tune of $3 milion. Kerry offered to meet with Pickens and do so, with the million dollars going to veterans' charities.

But now Pickens is reneging:

Pickens, who provided $3 million to bankroll the group during Kerry's race against President Bush, responded by saying he won't consider giving Kerry the reward unless he surrenders his combat films, additional military records and wartime journal.

In other words, Pickens was full of bravado when he made the offer in a keynote address in front of a bunch of friendly right wingers at an American Spectator dinner, but when Kerry took him up on it, he was a bit too cowardly to back it up:

"While I am prepared to show they lied on allegation after allegation, you have generously offered to pay one million dollars for just one thing that can be proven false," Kerry wrote to Pickens. "I am prepared to prove the lie beyond any reasonable doubt."

"Just one thing" has turned into more records than George Bush has willingly surrendered under government subpoena:

In his response, Pickens wrote: "I am certainly open to your challenge," but he said he would not pay Kerry unless the senator first provided him with copies of his wartime journals, as well as movies he shot while on patrol and his complete military records for 1971 to 1978.

Pickens said such documentation, which the group has previously sought, would be needed to disprove its ads.

"When you have done so, if you can then prove anything in the ads was materially untrue, I will gladly award $1 million. As you know, I have been a long and proud supporter of the American military and veterans' causes," Pickens wrote.

"A proud supporter of the American military" -- not to the point of actually, you know, enlisting or anything. More of the "yellow elephant" variety one would expect from a big Rudy Giuliani fundraiser.

He then goes for a Rovian jujitsu move: saying that if Kerry "cannot prove anything in the Swift Boat ads to be untrue," Kerry should agree to give a million dollars to the Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation.

I'm assuming Pickens would appoint himself arbiter of such a deal, and show as much integrity with regard to the decision as he did when he made his original offer. Kerry ought to keep his hands on his wallet, but he seems to be aware of that:

In his letter to Pickens, the senator challenged the billionaire's honor.

"I trust that you are a man of your word, having made a very public challenge at a major Washington dinner, and look forward to taking you up on this challenge," Kerry wrote.

Yeah, Pickens' word and a buck twenty-five will get you a bad cup of coffee at the 7-11.

Tough call on how to generate heat from fossil fuels in order to generate electricity.

Coal is plentiful but expensive to burn "clean". Oil and Nat Gas are inherently cleaner but better used for heating, transportation and similar applications.

My opinion, nuclear power to generate electricity is the best option. One day someone might develop a viable production-level solar cell but that is a long way off.

Not as far off as an electric Suburban, however.

In order for nuclear to be economically viable in the US our entire legal system and code writing bureacracy needs to be turned on its end AND a real economic waste storage technology must be implemented. How crazy is it that the storage problem has not been adequately addressed after fifty years of "research" and construction. Almost all of it remains piled up in the power plants. Hanford is destroying the Columbia River and all local aquifers. Any CEO that invests in nuclear today stock will fall. It is our most expensive electric power. Diablo doubled PG&E customer rates.

"In his response, Pickens wrote: "I am certainly open to your challenge," but he said he would not pay Kerry unless the senator first provided him with copies of his wartime journals, as well as movies he shot while on patrol and his complete military records for 1971 to 1978."

Why on earth would he not take Kerry at his word?
The audacity of requesting proof, now he was just being silly.

It would take a long time to convert from coal and ethanol. That means we should start right away in bringing about the change. Our leaders should show some common sense just once in a vital area of our economy: Construct nuclear plants apace, turn current coal firing plants into gasoline from coal production, stop pouring billions of our tax dollars into ethanol, enact sensible laws for the change, keep bureaucracy to a minimum and figure out planning schedules and sensible milestones for task completion. Above all beware of corruption: we do not want anotheer Boston "Big Dig" fiasco.

#61 | POSTED BY TRUTHISGOOD
--------

A well thought out strategy. Which is exactly why it will never happen.