Skip to main content

View Diary: The Keystone XL Pipeline: “Game Over”? (21 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Capturing carbon dioxide from coal (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eyesbright, enemy of the people

    and natural gas fired power plants and other systems is well proven with decades of working experience.

     It is just very, very danged expensive, and undermines the whole economics of burning coal, unless you have a carbon dioxide customer handy.

    Orly, it isn't evidence just because you downloaded it from the internet.

    by 6412093 on Thu Mar 21, 2013 at 08:48:37 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  That's rich. "proven is not the same as "required" (0+ / 0-)

      If it's required after the plant is built, yeah, it's expensive. Isn't the whole idea to make it prohibitively expensive?

      If I wanted to convert my gasoline car to electric, that would be expensive too, so I wouldn't do it, unless the government said "do it or we'll take your car away".

      •  Impeccable liberal (0+ / 0-)

        said carbon capture from coal is still in the science fiction stage.  I demurred that it is not in the science fiction stage, it is already underway.

        In fact carbon capture is essentially required on new coal plants.

        Thank you, Lisa Jackson.

        But the existing 1000 or so operational plants in the US, and the countless thousands worldwide, with no retrofits required, are still a huge problem.

        Orly, it isn't evidence just because you downloaded it from the internet.

        by 6412093 on Thu Mar 21, 2013 at 09:46:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So the next step is to close existing coal plants (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          6412093

          in favor of NG combined cycle plants and wind just as Japan and Germany are phasing out nuclear. This is where
          activism is needed today.
          We should have gotten something real in exchange for XL pipeline, maybe forcing refineries to sequester their CO2
          (not bogus 'jobs' or 'growth'). There are probably 600
          operational coal plants in the country. China is building coal plants  every week 50 per week, if we closed two per month they would be gone in 25 years.
          We could build maybe 100 IGCC-CCS coal plants as baseload and make due with
          existing nukes, solar, wind and natural gas(given the fracking boom). It is also possible to cut emissions by co-firing wood, waste and coal.

          •  I agree 1000% (0+ / 0-)

            with everything you said, except I'd like to see a few more nukes, too.

            The breathtaking scope of a 180 degree turnaround in national, and worldwide energy production methods, means we have to tolerate some fossil and nuclear fuel use for a long, long time.

            China has their own shale gas, too. When they start fracking, cut down on their coal use, and burn gas in their power plants, the climate change battle has a fighting chance.

            Orly, it isn't evidence just because you downloaded it from the internet.

            by 6412093 on Fri Mar 22, 2013 at 02:52:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  And what do they do with the captured carbon (0+ / 0-)

      dioxide?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site