Do da woids "BLACK LUNG DISEASE" mean anything to ya?????

Funny, I've purchased some stock in FuelCell Energy (NASDAQ:FCEL) -- a company, BTW, angelled by one of your favorites, Richard Branson.

Anyway, I received their annual report yesterday and it sez:

This past year we were selected by U.S. Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory to re-direct its Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA) program to coal-based solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) power plant devleopment.   The objective of this new 3-phase $85-million, ten-year program is to develop multi-MW class SOFC power plans operating on coal-based syngas.

So, some of the brighter bulbs are making coal work....cleanly!

Solid Oxide Fuel Cell
Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell
Direct Carbon Fuel Cell

Whatever you call it.

_

However it would be even better if they scrapped the Coal entirely.

And use Algae biomass as both the fuel, and the emmisions control device.
And then use the heat from the fuel cell to dry the Algae.

Got a nice little perpetual motion machine running off the fusion generator in the sky :)

I had no idea that so much electricity was still produced by coal. I certainly did, however, appreciate the impact it had on the environment - has no one learnt from the Industrial Revolution and the effect on London of having everything run by coal? 'Clean coal' sounds like a bit of an oxymoron, to be honest.

Technically it can be very clean at the smokestack.
(Even if it leaves a toxic mess where it was dug up)

But thats just because technically carbon dioxide isn't considered as a bad thing.

Because of that, you will never hear the GOP use the word "Renewable" energy.  Since that explicitly removes all the fossil fuel sources.  Instead they will always use "Alternative" energy instead.

At best, you will hear them use the word "Sustainable" when talking about Nuclear.

_

Pretty much it's all semantic dodgeball.

So get used to hearing how "clean" technologies like Coal to Liquid and Tar Sands are the best thing in the world.

Even if they both leave mountains of mercury and sulfur in their wake.

Is that Oxygenblown IGCC, or Airblown IGCC ?

Even so-called "Clean" Coal just looks at one stage of the lifecycle of coal - the burning of it. Yes, it may be possible to sequester the emissions from coal, but as this article points out, that doesn't stop the toxic waste from being created - it just diverts it to a new waste stream. A waste stream akin to the nuclear.

But we need to recognize the damage coal causes on every step of it's use - from strip mining and mountain-top removal to the transportation (over 70% of US rail traffic is coal) to the burning and storage issues. The real costs of coal are externalized - and not factored in when people talk "cheap" coal. Respiratory illness, asthma, flooding, deforestation, valley-fill, toxic extraction processes and explosives, toxic slurries, sludge dams, the millions of gallons of water used daily between refinement and burning, flooding and erosion, mine collapses, C02 burned in transport - none of this is "clean" - with or without IGCC.

-Matt

Try checking out the CHEMTRAILS in the skies. Days and weeks and months that should be sunny are masked by these chemicals spewed out by unmarked white jets.

The news media has not reported on the ongoing spraying since its inception.

Could this be the real problem in the environment?

Weather modification should not be used for $$$$$$$, but for the benefit of mankind.