 |
Yep, all we need is some of that magic pixie dust politicians like to sprinkle around and the laws of chemistry are altered, right?
Author: BOB2
Date: 01-17-2020 - 14:03
So where is your magic "technology" to miraculously make coal into a low carbon fuel? And, where did you come up with this new pixie dust to make coal "clean"? Clean compared to what? And, at what cost?
There are some carbon capture technologies that look promising, but thus far, have limited capacity to absorb the kind of volumes of CO2 necessary from the volume of coal the world is burning, and are still very costly.
And, in an efficient free market economy, why would anyone burn any coal for electrical production, if they can spend less than half as much money on natural gas, for the same amount of electricity produced?
Gas is just naturally cleaner, because it produces 2/3rd's less CO2.
As you may know from the your high school chemistry class, in coal you are oxidizing more carbon to produce the energy, and less hydrogen, and in natural gas, you are oxidizing a lot more hydrogen to produce the energy.
But, as long as you "believe" really hard, I'm sure that everything your favorite brand politician promises you will come true...
And, you're okay with being dependent on China for our solar panels?
While I'm not a fan of "company specific" corporate welfare and have little good to say about the Solyndra deal, Obama didn't run the company, and it was Congress that provided the money. So what I'd really like to see more incentives like for research and development so America can still lead in these emergent technologies, and more incentives for US domestic investment in plant, equipment, and jobs, to produce them.
Unfortunately, we just had one of the largest corporate (or any) tax cuts in history, that neither gave much incentive to real R&D, nor to capital investment, and we have actually, over the last year seen a fall in manufacturing jobs, and the lowest investment in new plant and equipment since the "great recession" ended. Heckuva job, as they say....
As to coal trains and coal traffic, the topic of this thread, Richmond's loss is "maybe", Stockton's short term gain, that's all...
And, if the folks who own that land, can make more money in the free capitalist economic system by building condos looking out at the bridge, in a tight housing market, than they can loading coal on ships, why wouldn't they?
People who look to a "great leader", any "great leader" (regardless of the "brand" that "great leader" goes by...), who promises them miracle cures and easy answers for all of these difficult and often complex problems, are truly sheep.
There are some carbon capture technologies that look promising, but thus far, have limited capacity to absorb the kind of volumes of CO2 necessary from the volume of coal the world is burning, and are still very costly.
And, in an efficient free market economy, why would anyone burn any coal for electrical production, if they can spend less than half as much money on natural gas, for the same amount of electricity produced?
Gas is just naturally cleaner, because it produces 2/3rd's less CO2.
As you may know from the your high school chemistry class, in coal you are oxidizing more carbon to produce the energy, and less hydrogen, and in natural gas, you are oxidizing a lot more hydrogen to produce the energy.
But, as long as you "believe" really hard, I'm sure that everything your favorite brand politician promises you will come true...
And, you're okay with being dependent on China for our solar panels?
While I'm not a fan of "company specific" corporate welfare and have little good to say about the Solyndra deal, Obama didn't run the company, and it was Congress that provided the money. So what I'd really like to see more incentives like for research and development so America can still lead in these emergent technologies, and more incentives for US domestic investment in plant, equipment, and jobs, to produce them.
Unfortunately, we just had one of the largest corporate (or any) tax cuts in history, that neither gave much incentive to real R&D, nor to capital investment, and we have actually, over the last year seen a fall in manufacturing jobs, and the lowest investment in new plant and equipment since the "great recession" ended. Heckuva job, as they say....
As to coal trains and coal traffic, the topic of this thread, Richmond's loss is "maybe", Stockton's short term gain, that's all...
And, if the folks who own that land, can make more money in the free capitalist economic system by building condos looking out at the bridge, in a tight housing market, than they can loading coal on ships, why wouldn't they?
People who look to a "great leader", any "great leader" (regardless of the "brand" that "great leader" goes by...), who promises them miracle cures and easy answers for all of these difficult and often complex problems, are truly sheep.
