--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jul 5, 2006, at 9:53 AM, new.morning wrote: > > > > Actually, as the article points out, and has been the trend for 20 > > years, coal is much cleaner than it used to be for traditioanl > > pollutants: SO2, CO, ozone, No2, PM10 etc. The article says the > > current [scrubbing] technology makes coal burning cleaner than natural > > gas -- which if true -- is phenomenal. NG has long been the > > quite-clean burning fuel of choice for new plants coming on line. And > > is the by far largest generation fuel in areas like California. > > > > But CO2 (not CO) is not a traditional pollutant and is not eliminated > > / greatly reduced by these modern scubbers. But, again as the article > > points out, as has been the trend, carbon sequestration technology is > > advancing. There are experimental plants that pump all CO2 into the > > ground. So the generation is CO2 neutral. And quite low in traditional > > pollutants. > > > > Some areas, as the article points out cannot pump the CO2 into the > > ground, but can pipeline it to industrial areas. The latter needs more > > pipeline infrastructure to be truly viable. > > > > Sequestration of carbon is as or more important than i) > > energy-efficiency -- getting same power out of less energy input, and > > ii) conservation (consuming less, substituting energy intensive > > consumption for products and services with lower input. Both would be > > greatly enhanced, and "solved" by the market if fuels were priced > > efficiently and not laden with huge subsidies (direct and indirect -- > > that is, not including all costs incurred on society. > > Welfare-energy-consumers are of course resistant to efficient market > > solutions. > > > > Sequestration can be direct, like the coal plant pumping CO2 > > underground, or indirect, such as reforestation. 95% of CO2 produced > > on earth (not the same as that escaping to atmosphere) is 95% or so > > from natural sources. But nature has an abundance of carbom "sinks" > > which traditionally have kept CO2 in balance. The 5% man-made carbon > > had tipped the balance, thus causing a 30% or so increase in > > atmospheric carbon. By increasing, or even re-establishing, natural > > carbon sinks -- such as forests -- the greenhouse gas problem looming > > for future generations could be substantially mitigated. > > > > If energy were price to reflect its full costs, and thus sending the > > correct price signal in all markets -- hugely important to market > > economies -- large scale sequestration projects could be funded with > > no increase on regular taxes. Then those who want to drive a lot, > > and/or drive SUVs, can do so to their hearts content, pay the full > > cost of such consumption, send the corrrect price signal for energy, > > and provide for more forests (recretion lands) which could keep CO2 in > > (or greatly towatds) balance. > > > > Drive and create forest recreation lands! Who doesn't love that.
> > Sounds like spin to me. I'd expect to see sequestration used to sell > the idea and then some backpedalling as the industry moves to cut costs. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. To you, I suppose it would sound like spin. Something just made up last month by right-wing spinsters, right? If that is your view, it is totally uniformed. I dealt professionally with CO2 sequestration and its pricing 15 years ago. And even then, it was an old, established approach to GCC. Perhaps read a bit on this "new" concept, obviously (to you and the guys on the grassy knoll) manufactured just for spin. http://www.google.com/search?q=carbon+sequestration&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/TISQkA/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
