Montana DUers: Is Schweitzer pushing 'clean coal'?

[gateley]

I love the guy, but find this worrisome. I know he's got degrees in chemical engineering or soils or something like that, so shouldn't he know better?

I understand it would be a big help for employment in Montana -- has he convinced himself it's okay because of that?

I only caught a snip of him today on MSNBC, but I think that's basically what he was talking about (he was on w/Bev Perdue, Gov of NC).

Thanks for any boots on the ground insight. As I said I REALLY like him a lot, but this makes me sad.

[EFerrari]

1. I didn't see what you saw but how could he, he was on Amy's show not too long ago

criticizing Obama for even using the term? Maybe I'm confused.

[gateley]

2. I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

I'll see what I can find out -- I'd hate to put that out there if it's untrue. I'm glad you heard that w/Amy -- gives me hope.

[gateley]

4. Found this on his website:

Montana is actively pursuing development of ultra-clean coal technology in the areas of our major coal deposits in central and eastern Montana. The technology to convert coal into synthetic petroleum products or natural gas has existed for almost a century, and modern versions of this technology offers great promise for reducing American dependence on foreign oil and developing Montana’s natural resources in a responsible manner. Below are answers to some basic questions about coal gasification and coal liquefaction. /snip

Why is Montana suited for a clean coal industry?

With a demonstrated reserve base of 120 billion tons, Montana's coal is, in liquid terms, over one quarter the size of the entire Middle East oil reserve--enough fuel to power every American car for decades. In Montana and across the West, if even a fraction of our reserves were developed and converted to liquid fuel, we could greatly reduce the oil we now import from unfriendly and unstable countries. Or, if we moved toward a gasification program for generating electric power with IGCC plants, we could substantially reduce emissions from the utility industry. /snip

I admit I don't understand this technology at all (gee, really, gateley? :eyes but just glancing through, I think it's still a pig, lipstick or no. Again, hope I'm wrong.

http://governor.mt.gov/hottopics/faqsynthetic.asp

[EFerrari]

5. Oh Lord, the Pod People got Brian.

[Hippo_Tron]

3. I think he's a realist who knows we're stuck with fossil fuels for the next half century or so

And that at the end of the day we're not going to change our consumption habits and we're not going to get serious about renewable energy. Instead we'll keep doing what we're doing and suffer and accept the consequences of global climate change. So in the meantime we might as well use coal since we're sitting on a ton of it.

Is he full of shit about "clean coal"? - absolutely. But I'm starting to think any politician who claims they can seriously do something to reverse climate change is full of shit as well.

[gateley]

6. You have a good point -- we are a long way from becoming really

fossil-fuel-free. Well, if they can do something that's less harmful than some of the alternatives, I guess that's hopeful.

[Hippo_Tron]

7. Fact of the matter is that we pissed away our opportunity to change all of this on 9/11

When Americans collectively want to do something, we do it. That's how we put a man on the moon in a decade. Imagine if the President had gone on television in the days after 9/11 and said...

"In the wake of this tragedy, it has become abundantly clear that America can no longer continue its current course. It is not only detrimental to our planet but to our national security as well. Therefore I am asking all Americans to do their part to help put this country on a path to achieve energy independence by the end of the decade and the complete elimination of all fossil fuels by the end of the next."

Instead we got... "Go shopping!"

[gateley]

8. You're right -- that would have been the PERFECT time to begin a new

path..