Comments davidACCCE has made

  •  

    Regarding your headline that calls this ad "deceptive," I'm curious what you find deceptive about this ad. After all, it’s a fact that energy costs are second only to labor costs when it comes to determining the success of a business in a given location. Are you denying that America needs affordable electricity?

    On The latest deceptive ad from the 'clean' coal front posted 8 months ago 1 Response

  • We're excited!

    Both conventions will be historic in their own way, and we're excited to be on the ground in both Denver and the Twin Cities to participate!

    For those bloggers who will be there too... we'd love to meet you in person to discuss America's energy policy.

    Here is the contact information for the folks on our media team:
    http://www.americaspower.org/Election/Contact-UsOn Group to spend nearly $2 million to promote clean coal at the conventions posted 1 year, 3 months ago 2 Responses

  • A few things to remember

    Over the last 30 years, producing electricity from coal is 70 percent cleaner per unit of energy produced:
    http://www.americaspower.org/The-Facts/70-Percent-Cleaner ...

    A new power plant built today removes about 98 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions, more than 95 percent of nitrogen oxides and 90 percent of mercury emissions.

    The key challenge is carbon dioxide, and we are moving to the point for technology to help capture 100 percent of those emissions. On Umbra on clean coal posted 1 year, 4 months ago 17 Responses

  • Brokaw's documentary

    As I recall, Brokaw didn't flak Gore's movie. In fact, I seem to remember people thinking that he was trying to compete or one-up Gore's movie. The article you link to quotes him as saying of An Inconvenient Truth: "I thought there was too much of Gore, but that's not my call."On Questions for Gore's energy plan? posted 1 year, 4 months ago 11 Responses

  • I agree with this line...

    "You bet coal's going to be part of our future."

    After all, it is America's most abundant fuel source. And thanks to technology, it is cleaner than ever before. Tackling the CO2 issue is the next hurdle, but there's no reason to think investments in technology won't point us to the solution.
    http://www.americaspower.org/The-Facts/70-Percent-Cleaner ...On Gov. Kathleen Sebelius talks to Grist about her fight against coal and her VP potential posted 1 year, 4 months ago 11 Responses

  • According to the article...

    "The draft legislation says energy projects such as a plant that produces ultraclean fuels from coal would be eligible for funding."

    No more details were given in the story, but I'll bet we'll be hearing more about this soon.On Alaska state legislature proposes fund to support alternative energy including coal posted 1 year, 4 months ago 12 Responses

  • To the question about FutureGen...

    We still believe that the government should honor its initial commitment to build a FutureGen demonstration plant in Mattoon, Ill. That is... the Mattoon project should not have been scrapped to pursue other projects. If we're serious about meeting CO2 reduction goals, we should be doing MORE, not LESS.

    But despite what you may have heard or read, the FutureGen project has not been canceled. Even though President Bush decided not to include FutureGen in his budget proposal, Congress has the final say on funding. The discussion on FutureGen simply moves to Capitol Hill.

    Here's the latest news on that:
    http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2008/07/09/futureg ...On Poll shows 86 percent of public wants a five-year halt on new coal plants posted 1 year, 4 months ago 14 Responses

  • Clean coal is here today (some of it)

    There have already been technology demonstrations of greenhouse gas emissions control for existing power plants. For example, American Electric Power has already announced the commercial deployment of these technologies at two of their larger older units.

    But for widespread deployment, it will take time. The widespread deployment of ANY new technology takes time -- just ask the folks in the wind and solar industries.

    Hundreds of clean coal research and demonstration projects across the country have created a whole new range of white-collar coal jobs.

    In fact, there is over $6 billion in clean coal research underway right now in 41 states -- even ones not normally associated with coal production.

    And coal is already 70 percent cleaner, per unit of energy produced, than in 1970:
    http://www.americaspower.org/The-Facts/70-Percent-Cleaner ...
    On Poll shows 86 percent of public wants a five-year halt on new coal plants posted 1 year, 4 months ago 14 Responses

  • One more thing

    In case you're wondering why is it a bad idea to advocate banning new coal-fired power plants...

    If we had abandoned the use of lamps in this country 30 years ago, we never would have developed the compact fluorescent light bulb. The only way that you can develop technology is if there's a need for it, and if we're not building coal plants here in the United States, where's the drive to develop clean carbon-capture technology? There has to be the marketplace for the technology in order to drive development of the technology.  

    Developers planning new power plants know they'll have to operate the facility for about 30 years to pay off the costs. Developers know that sometime within that timeframe, there is going to be a regulatory requirement for plants to capture and store carbon. They are planning for that technology to come about, and current plans for new power plant make sure that the schematics leave room for the carbon-capture control of the future to be installed.On Poll shows 86 percent of public wants a five-year halt on new coal plants posted 1 year, 4 months ago 14 Responses

  • Wait a minute!

    Look at the full question asked! It was much more leading than simply inquiring whether Americans want a moratorium on coal-fired plants. It clearly was intended to lead the respondents toward the conclusion they wanted.

    Here's the question in its entirety:

    "Please tell me how much you agree or disagree with the following statement: A national energy strategy based on phasing in of new technologies
    and phasing out of carbon based energy sources would require specific actions. America should commit to a five year moratorium on new coal-fired
    plants and instead, focus on aggressive expansion of wind, solar and other renewable energy sources. Tax and other incentives should be provided for
    all new construction to help reduce energy consumption. Homeowners should get incentives to make their homes more energy efficient and to help
    reduce energy demands."
    http://behindtheplug.americaspower.org/On Poll shows 86 percent of public wants a five-year halt on new coal plants posted 1 year, 4 months ago 14 Responses