There is no such thing like "clean coal". If a politician is promising that, then that person and people who listen and believe him are total idiots. (Not surprised, it is WV). See what all that crossbreeding does to people!
...bring back jobs in the coal industry. In related news, Trump will also sign an executive order in order to help bring jobs back to the buggy whip industry.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/28/trump-takes-aim-at-obamas-efforts-to-curb-global-warming-2/
the world uses a shit ton of coal don't you get. That coal is going to get dug and processed by someone. Why not us?
While we may not use a lot of coal or have a huge need for it the world does.
Do you think that the rest of the world, much of it 3rd world can use some other energy source now? That they should just sink back into the stone age?
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/28/trump-takes-aim-at-obamas-efforts-to-curb-global-warming-2/
-- Modified on 3/28/2017 4:17:24 PM
...the word "fossil." Coal was formed around 300 million years ago. Once it's gone, it's gone. GOP rightards are following the example of the whaling industry in the 1800s that killed whales to the brink of extinction before they tried to find alternative sources of the products derived from whales. Instead of looking to the future and trying to find alternative sources of RENEWABLE energy, rightards will wait until we're down to our last lump of coal. But the effect to the environment from using coal will be a lot more devastating than killing whales.
Yep. 3rd world nations, the 4 billion people living on 2 bucks or less a day, can just plug their generator into their field on solar collectors... They can just erect wind farms...
The future will come. It will happen. It isn't ready now. NOW is when they need energy. When it's ready and cost effective for people they will adopt it.
You sound like an elitist snob.
Think beyond yourself. Deal with realities.
No all of those jobs aren't coming back, but many will. That's money added to those families coffers. Then then help support their community and the country. Or would you rather they just sit on welfare?
So you think research into finding "alternative sources of RENEWABLE energy" will stop? Perhaps if it only survived from government grants, but I suspect universities will keep that going. The issue here is that the U.S. was getting ahead of the rest of the world in using more expensive RENEWABLE energy.
If we are willing to use it, we have a LOT of coal.
Sad to say a lot of the RENEWABLE energy we use today is corn based ethanol, which really is not a great net benefit in terms of reducing fossil fuel use.
BTW, the Keystone Pipeline will reduce crude oil transportation by trains and ships, both of which burn fossil fuel.
When we need more coal we'll just send Kirk and company to fix the problem.
I'm more interested in getting rid of the TSA now. What a joke that crap is.
He offered a cheaper way to light everyone's homes and factories.
So you're saying that it will be renewables that will keep coal from going extinct. According to the Department of Energy, in 2015 our consumption and exports was about 900 million tons per year and there was 1.7 trillion tons of identified reserves. Given those numbers we have about 1800 years remaining. More than twice that if the estimated reserves are included.
Cleaner air I get.
"Save the coal"? . . . Not so much.
The need to reduce carbon emissions don’t you get? Even China gets this concept (although, not before they polluted the air so badly people needed to wear respirators to walk outside in Bejing---and LA is nearly, if not already, there).
Bejing shut down the last of its coal-fired plants and replaced that energy production with gas-fired plants…less filling, tastes great!!
And while gas is cleaner burning this should not be the end-goal, and certainly does not mean that we should stop research and development of alternative fuel sources; which is exactly the direction the idjit in charge wants to take us. If he succeeds he could put the US in the stone age as compared to other countries that live in reality, and are committed to alternative energy R & D.
I feel badly for the folks that bought that line of BS from T and got their hopes up. But, the coal jobs ‘aint comin’ back.
While we may not use a lot of coal or have a huge need for it the world does.
Do you think that the rest of the world, much of it 3rd world can use some other energy source now? That they should just sink back into the stone age?
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/28/trump-takes-aim-at-obamas-efforts-to-curb-global-warming-2/
Okay, stop all coal production. It'll certainly lower carbon emissions. It'll also kill a few billion people. Happy now?
Bejing shut down the last of its coal-fired plants and replaced that energy production with gas-fired plants…less filling, tastes great!!
And while gas is cleaner burning this should not be the end-goal, and certainly does not mean that we should stop research and development of alternative fuel sources; which is exactly the direction the idjit in charge wants to take us. If he succeeds he could put the US in the stone age as compared to other countries that live in reality, and are committed to alternative energy R & D.
I feel badly for the folks that bought that line of BS from T and got their hopes up. But, the coal jobs ‘aint comin’ back.
While we may not use a lot of coal or have a huge need for it the world does.
Do you think that the rest of the world, much of it 3rd world can use some other energy source now? That they should just sink back into the stone age?
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/28/trump-takes-aim-at-obamas-efforts-to-curb-global-warming-2/
the issue do you not get that it is CO2 not carbon that is emitted, and that China's air quality problems are not due to CO2 but to other pollutants such as NOX, SOX.
BTW their are a number of gasses that are worse greenhouse gasses than CO2, water vapor (H2O) among them. So are we going to call that Hydrogen pollution?
Clean coal technology captures the emissions of the other pollutants, and in the extreme sequesters the CO2.
Whether it's Co2, NOX, SOX, or any other nasty component of carbon emission, the shit coming out of coal-fired plants can pollute the air we breath to the point that we can't breath that air any more, without getting sick.
And clean coal? Really? Sure, the science is there. But the pragmatic execution of that science is not. And even if it was accomplished in the US---which it has not been, after many yeas of trying---the cost benefit is not there.
How about, as sane human beings, we look at the science and consider our own health and survivability within that equation, instead of denying there is a problem?
BTW their are a number of gasses that are worse greenhouse gasses than CO2, water vapor (H2O) among them. So are we going to call that Hydrogen pollution?
Clean coal technology captures the emissions of the other pollutants, and in the extreme sequesters the CO2.
These are the same hypocrites like Al Gore that take jets to global warming conferences! "Live as I tell you, not as I live" is his mantra. What a fraud.
Even when we have a safe AND green technology, like nuclear energy, they use bogus "science" to try and scare people away from it.
If leftists are pissed off, it means something good is about to happen for the "little guy." Any wonder why so many switched and voted Trump?
And if the snowflakes just cant deal with the much needed changes at EPA, they are free to buy all the carbon credits they wish. LOL
Fewer and fewer places want to burn it. The industry today has only 70,000 workers, while the solar industry has 209,000. So that's where the jobs are.
So he brings back jobs and you bitch, he does this or that and you bitch.
The man could defeat ISIS, come up with a perfect health care plan and repeal fed taxes completely and you would still bitch.
you dems must be overdosing on CNN and MSNBC.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/28/trump-takes-aim-at-obamas-efforts-to-curb-global-warming-2/
...according to Robert Murray, founder and CEO of Murray Energy, the largest privately held coal mining company in the US. He said many mining jobs have been lost due to technology and competition rather than regulation. But you know more than he does about coal mining jobs, right?
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-cant-bring-back-mining-jobs-574766
Even 'hwy2heaven' knows more than you. He posted the number of jobs in coal mining and renewable energy:
I know why your handle is SoleSurvivor'. You named yourself after your one remaining brain cell.
...mentioned clean coal, he was excoriated by TER rightards. Yet not a word about Trump's promise. Hypocrites!!
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/really-clean-coal-donald-trump-10117678
There is no such thing like "clean coal". If a politician is promising that, then that person and people who listen and believe him are total idiots. (Not surprised, it is WV). See what all that crossbreeding does to people!
it is the cost effectiveness that is under development
Coal = 75,000
Clean Renewable Energy = 650,000
Next, how about doing away with all the catalytic converters and let mufflers silently emit all the carbon monoxide in to our airways. Your cars will cost less right, more profits for the auto makers. Forget the dead bodies.
Clean Renewable Energy = 650,000
Clean renewable electricity broke down like this:
Hydro = 6%
Wind = 5%
Solar = 1%
Geo, etc. = less than 1%
Total clean renewable = 13%
Coal = 33%
Expressed in kilowatt hours for the year, the total for the country was 4 Trillion KW hours
Total clean renewable = 520 Billion KW hours
Coal = 1,320 Billion KW hours
So what's the energy production per worker?
Total clean renewable = 800 KW hours per worker
Coal = 17,600 KW hours
That means the average coal worker produced 22 TIMES more energy than the average clean renewable worker.
Now, I don't trust their numbers in the first place so things aren't quite that bad. I'm sure they didn't include non-miners that are part of the energy production from coal, but hey, it's THEIR numbers.
Since both sources of electricity sells at about the same rate, 10 cents per KW hour give or take, who do you think is making up all the extra cost?