Dirty Coal is Winning

News flash : the planet is on a distinctly downward trend in temperature . The main effect of the fraction of CO2 released by man is that plants , which are CO2 + H2O + ash , thrive with a bit more . On the other hand , the CO2 spectrum , which is pretty skinny in any case , is already nearly saturated at levels too low for plants to survive . Yet another piece of propaganda by lawyers , not physicists .

And we will never put a man on the moon either!

Oh, puh-leeeze, it isn't just that it's too costly, which it IS. It's that it doesn't deliver, it's a pipedream. The emissions are not that much better than a new coal plant, as we found with the MPCA analysis in the Excelsior Energy Mesaba Project docket. It was too expensive, not significantly better emissions wise, and not in the public interest! Add to it that carbon capture is possible but sequestration is not happening anytime soon -- so says the DOE in the various EIS, including Gilberton coal-to-liquids and Mesaba Project. Impossible to build a coal plant? GOOD! Give it up, no new coal. Coal is not clean. (and is everyone forgetting the WSJ article recently that electric consumption has tanked and that utilities will have to rethink infrastructure projects?)