|
Edited on Thu Feb-03-05 05:08 PM by LiberalEsto
It's utter nonsense. I happen to know a bit about this so-called energy of the future. Burning coal will create immense quantities of carbon dixoide- CO2 - one of the key greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.
Implementing "Clean" Coal requires that ways be found to dispose of this CO2 without releasing it into the atmosphere.
One of the plans being seriously considered is pumping liquified CO2 to the bottom of the oceans, in very deep areas, and hoping that the weight of the water will keep it from bubbling up like a giant, deadly burp. Or a slow trickle of CO2 into the atmosphere. Greenpeace conducted a study a couple of years ago and reported this deep-water disposal method is unfeasible and extremely risky to ships, marine life, and the atmosphere.
Also, is it cost-effective to burn coal for energy and then use more energy to capture, liquefy and ship the resulting CO2 over the oceans to selected disposal sites? I don't think so.
All that on top of the mining damage to the environment, and the mercury emissions, and everything else others have mentioned.
|