Comments on: Like Detroit, the coal industry chooses (assisted) suicide

By: Clean Coal Energy

Clean Coal Energy — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:16:53 +0000

Fossil fuel energy corporations have been saying for years and years that they’re getting closer to developing clean coal technologies, but the truth is that there still isn’t any commercially viable clean coal technology. None.

By: JohnLucee

JohnLucee — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 07:49:40 +0000

The hope by the companies is a very well-funded effort to demonstrate and deploy carbon capture and storage…great hope from their side.To reduce carbon emissions this will come as soon.

By: cleancoaltech123

cleancoaltech123 — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 06:42:36 +0000

There is a planning to invest for carbon capture and sequestration.What they actually feel to develop the technology to clean the coal.ACCCE, and coal and utility companies, is an effort to convince the public that “clean coal” is the solution to global warming…nice convince by ACCCE.

By: msn nickleri

msn nickleri — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:17:01 +0000

Does that mean that ACCCE spent $45M, and the utilities spent another $80M?

[I have yet read the full report yet, will do, but it would be nice to get the numbers really clear so that we can point ohters here and not have them get confused.]

By: Your industry information guide

Your industry information guide — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 04:39:27 +0000

Coal industry is one of the most important industries worldwide and steps have to be taken to ensure that it is well protected. At least till the time, we come up with a better alternative sources of energy

By: Clean coal companies

Clean coal companies — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 04:57:15 +0000

I dont think that would happen due to climate changes. I And this gradual changes which may not be expected.

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 22:16:10 +0000

Asteroid Miner — The chemistry for actually done and proposed CCS is a bit complicated, but yes, for one method there is essentially no chance of leak and for another, absolutely no chance, not ever.

By: Asteroid Miner

Asteroid Miner — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 05:35:53 +0000

I have 2 problems with CCS if it is actually done:

1. WHY should those CO2 sinks be used for CO2 from power plants when we need them for other industrial processes? We HAVE other ways to make electricity, such as nuclear. We DON’T have other ways to do all of the industrial processes that are the second largest source of CO2. The first step in making concrete, for example, is to drive CO2 out of limestone to make calcium oxide.

2. HOW do we know that the stored CO2 won’t leak out and suffocate people or cause global warming later? Lake Nyos in Cameroon outgassed CO2 and suffocated thousands. Are those reactions between CO2 and whatever holds the CO2 irreversible?

By: John Mashey

John Mashey — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:36:23 +0000

Thanks.
This is very useful for identifying “watch what I do, not what I say” category of misdirection arguments, I.e. Like Lomborg’s current approach.

Maybe there’s a simple compelling graphic that puts this together, as those tend to get copied widely.

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:14:44 +0000

John:

Here is your answer.

The $45 million was spent by ACCCE on ads

The $125 m was spent by coal and utilities on lobbying that includes both ACCCE and nonACCCE companies.