<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for They’re still common, but they make no sense]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/coal-myths/ Mon, 20 Aug 2007 01:56:06 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/coal-myths/1 Well said, David

You are honing your arguments to perfection. The cost argument nails it shut. Put a price on carbon's head. I also like the way you beat them about the head and shoulders with their own "future technology" argument.  

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> Well said, David

You are honing your arguments to perfection. The cost argument nails it shut. Put a price on carbon's head. I also like the way you beat them about the head and shoulders with their own "future technology" argument.  

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> Comment #2 by GreyFlcn http://www.grist.org/article/coal-myths/ Mon, 20 Aug 2007 02:11:18 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/coal-myths/2 Even better

The cost argument nails it shut. Put a price on carbon's head.

Well thats the best part.
It's not neccisarily putting a cost on carbon.
It's putting a cost on Clean Air Act compliance.

So accounting for the whole hubris surrounding carbon pricing is moot since coal is already too expensive before you even deal with the CO2 aspect.

___

That said, it'd be interesting to compare the incremental costs of wind+storage versus coal+ccs

]]> Even better

The cost argument nails it shut. Put a price on carbon's head.

Well thats the best part.
It's not neccisarily putting a cost on carbon.
It's putting a cost on Clean Air Act compliance.

So accounting for the whole hubris surrounding carbon pricing is moot since coal is already too expensive before you even deal with the CO2 aspect.

___

That said, it'd be interesting to compare the incremental costs of wind+storage versus coal+ccs

]]>