where would we store all of it? We've already got enough waste to store that we don't quite no what to do with -- plastics, nuclear waste, etc.

And say we did find a good place to store it. How would we make sure it didn't escape back into the atmosphere?

Do we really want to keep relying on technologies that create so much waste? I admit that technologies such as wind and solar have a long way to go before they could be seen as viable alternatives to suit all our energy needs. However, so does coal, and it is so, so devastating to the earth and its inhabitants in so many ways.

Also, as mentioned in the article, the carbon sequestration technology doesn't even exist yet. Clean coal: there really is no such thing. Sorry, but it's nothing more than a fantasy. New idea, please.

I rarely post in comments sections, but this "clean coal" business really makes my blood boil. It makes me angry and frustrated beyond words that no major U.S. politician -- including both our main presidential nominees -- will call the coal lobbyists out. Why will no one admit that what they are selling is no more honest a product than diet pills or cellulite cream?

amandajones:

where would we store all of it? We've already got enough waste to store that we don't quite no what to do with -- plastics, nuclear waste, etc.

...

Pipe it to Coca Cola so they can use it in their soft drinks? :D:D

Those are the biggest coal producing swing states I can think of... There might be some coal production in OH, I can't recall.

No-one wants to piss off a major industry in a swing state right now... Period.

That's not the only issue though. One reason that the politicians don't want to call out coal... We don't have a viable alternative.

At least Obama is trying to fund alternatives in the hope of finding one (we haven't yet gotten the attention of Obama's energy experts... they're busy right now).

Oh, I know it's true: Obama, has to lie to get elected. And trust me, I want him to get elected over McCain. But isn't it just a little sad?

The fact is that many American people now believe that there is technology in place by which coal can be used as a carbon neutral energy. Most top climate scientists say if we turn to coal now, it could very well be the end of us. I know there are people out there who don't believe the scientists, and even I know that they can't predict the future. But is completely devastating our planet something we really want to risk?

P.S. I have heard top NASA climate scientist James Hansen speak, and speak ademently against turning to coal as a climate solution.Hansen has almost been fired from NASA for speaking the truth about climate science, has been threatened by the U.S. govt. to keep his mouth shut, and has gotten voluminous hate mail from US citizens. He is known to be a rather quiet man; he has no political or monetary interests in trying to convince people of global warming. And you know what? Many of the predictions he made decades ago have come true. I'd say it might be a good idea to heed his warnings.

There IS a genuine way to make coal carbon neutral... at least as an interim step.

www.WindFuels.com

You might find it interesting. If you do, pass it on to other people you know that are looking for answers.

Right now, we're having a tough time getting funding. Our last grant submission to the DOE came with this curious response: "This project does not align with the goals of the DOE".

If you don't want to follow the link, the project is to recycle CO2 exhaust from power stations to make alcohol fuels for transportation. It's perfectly legit chemical engineering, and can be done competitively using wind energy.