Gore fans and Obama fans - please help get Gore's message about coal liquification to Obama

[Czolgosz]

President Gore says S.154 (a bill promoting coal liquification) is "a horrible mistake."

Here's a video link of Gore's interview on The Early Show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbNImXTEkNA&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Edailykos%2Ecom%2Fstoryonly%2F2007%2F6%2F2%2F222114%2F7934

Obama is co-sponsoring this legislation but it's not too late to fix that.



More discussion here: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/6/2/222114/7934

[burrowowl]

1. I doubt Obama would listen

I am disappointed by his health care plan as well and his stance on Iran.
Is it inexperience or DLCism?

[Czolgosz]

2. Obama actually has a very good record on the environment. He MIGHT listen and it can't hurt to try.

[Colobo]

3. I'll try to contact his people through his website

[Czolgosz]

4. Thanks!

[Tellurian]

13. Liquid Coal is a dangerous alternative to oil..

Currently, all the testing they claim is the answer to sequestering CO2 underground in played out coal mines, or buried beneath ocean beds haven't been tested long enough for safety and side effects. They still don't know if the underground sequestering of massive amounts of CO2 will contaminate subterranean aquifers eventually contaminating our entire water supply. And they do not possess the technology for testing for leaks. If they did, they still don't have a plan in place of how to fix a CO2 leak neither underground or beneath the our oceans. Forests are a natural at capturing CO2 but the same people who bring you liquid coal are clear cutting our forests.

The only thing I'm sure of about this plan is; if there is money involved, the people making it are willing to poison the planet as long as they get theirs and let someone else worry about how to fix their mistakes.


Another Iraq, with no exit strategy!

[flpoljunkie]

15. Money--and jobs, as well.

[Tellurian]

17. Jobs are a major selling point..

as well as millions in government research grants. The Repukes have been at this since the 1940's. It's always failed no matter how they promote and sell it, it fails miserably. Hopefully, when a Dem takes the WH, the Veto Pen will be used to curtail this reoccurring Republican scam and the surplus money better spent on our citizens.

8 billion spent and climbing with no end in sight to the quest for "Liquid Coal" except a government contract with a 25yr guarantee of buying product with the (Leahman owned )Peabody Coal mine Industry.

I bet it's never occurred to the beasts. If your having such a hard time getting the job done, isn't it apparent, it's not meant to be done because it's hazardous to your health and every other living thing on the planet!?!

[calteacherguy]

5. 4% is a pretty insignificant change.

Not that any degree of increase in carbon emissions is acceptable, but I could see the argument made a 4% increase trumps staying dependent on mideast oil. It's a reasonable argument.

What we really need is more wind, solar, and nuclear energy to seriously address global warming. Liquid coal isn't going to make a significant difference one way or the other (with carbon capture and storage).

[Dead_Parrot]

9. CCS is pure snake oil

Even if anyone was prepared to run with it (unlikely - big coal and oil co's aren't famed for their environmental stewardship), there is not much chance that the CO₂ would stay sequestered for long: The carbon reacts with water to form carbonic acid - in a concentrated version of the reaction killing the oceans already - which promptly starts to dissolve the rock layers holding the gas in place. This has already been seen in the small pilot sequestration schemes that have been done in the last couple of years.

The figure you need to look at is the +119%, which would seriously fuck everything.

[Solon]

10. Problem is that it isn't a long term solution...

Coal has the same problem as oil, its non-renewable, and frankly, we have enough for electric generation to last maybe another century. End up diverting some of it to replace oil, and you cut that timescale down drastically.

[madrchsod]

6. politics...illinois has more coal than god

well not that much but a lot that can`t be used because it`s high sulfur

[Tellurian]

7. Peabody Coal is now owned by a Leahman Bros subsidiary

Black Mesa Peabody Coal debate

"The Black Mesa plateau lies in the arid Four Corners region of the United States, overlapping the reservations of the Navajo and Hopi tribes. The debate over the Black Mesa coal mine arises from coal company Peabody Energy's use of a potable source of water to transport coal it extracts from the southwestern tip of Black Mesa. Peabody Energy pumps water from the underground Navajo Aquifer in a slurry pipeline operation to transport extracted coal to the Mohave Generating Station in Laughlin, NV. The Navajo Aquifer (N-aquifer) is also a main source of potable water for the Navajo and Hopi tribes which use the water for farming and livestock maintenance as well as drinking and other domestic uses. The tribes have alleged that the pumping of water by Peabody Energy has caused a severe decline in potable N-aquifer water and contamination of water sources.

In 1964 Peabody Energy (then Peabody Western Coal), a British owned energy company signed a contract with the Navajo tribe and two years later with the Hopi, enabling company use of the water source. The Peabody mine, a coal strip mine, uses the slurry to pump its coal through pipes 273 miles away where the coal will be filtered and used for energy in the Mohave Generating Station in Laughlin, Nevada. The generating station produces energy for the southern parts of California and Nevada. This is/was the only "coal slurry" operation in the country and only plant that uses groundwater in such a way.

The Black Mesa Mine's last day of operation was December 31, 2005. One of the power plants served by the coal mined at the location had the highest emission levels in the Western United States.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mesa_Peabody_Coal_debate

[burrowowl]

19. In New Mexico

all fuel exploitation uses water we don't have!

[Tellurian]

8. Sponsor and Cosponsors of " Coal to liquid fuel"

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:SN00155:@@@P

H.R.370

Title: To promote coal-to-liquid fuel activities.

Sponsor: Rep Davis, Geoff (introduced 1/10/2007) Cosponsors (30)

Related Bills: S.155

Latest Major Action: 2/2/2007 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality. COSPONSORS(30), ALPHABETICAL :
(Sort: by date)


Rep Bachus, Spencer - 1/10/2007
Rep Boucher, Rick - 1/10/2007
Rep Boustany, Charles W., Jr. - 1/10/2007
Rep Cannon, Chris - 1/10/2007
Rep Capito, Shelley Moore - 1/24/2007
Rep Costello, Jerry F. - 1/12/2007
Rep Cubin, Barbara - 1/10/2007
Rep Davis, David - 5/15/2007
Rep Davis, Lincoln - 1/10/2007
Rep Drake, Thelma D. - 1/10/2007
Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. - 1/10/2007
Rep English, Phil - 1/12/2007
Rep Everett, Terry - 1/10/2007
Rep Hastert, J. Dennis - 1/10/2007
Rep LaHood, Ray - 1/10/2007
Rep Lewis, Ron - 1/10/2007
Rep Murphy, Tim - 2/27/2007
Rep Pickering, Charles W. "Chip" - 1/10/2007
Rep Rahall, Nick J., II - 1/10/2007
Rep Rehberg, Dennis R. - 1/10/2007
Rep Rogers, Harold - 1/10/2007
Rep Rogers, Mike D. - 1/10/2007
Rep Rush, Bobby L. - 4/25/2007
Rep Shimkus, John - 1/10/2007
Rep Shuster, Bill - 1/24/2007
Rep Souder, Mark E. - 1/31/2007
Rep Tancredo, Thomas G. - 2/27/2007
Rep Whitfield, Ed - 1/10/2007
Rep Wilson, Charles A. - 2/7/2007
Rep Yarmuth, John A. - 1/10/2007

S.154

Title: A bill to promote coal-to-liquid fuel activities.

Sponsor: Sen Bunning, Jim (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (12)

Related Bills: S.155

Latest Major Action: 1/4/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. COSPONSORS(12), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)


Sen Bond, Christopher S. - 1/4/2007
Sen Byrd, Robert C. - 5/2/2007
Sen Craig, Larry E. - 1/4/2007
Sen Dorgan, Byron L. - 1/11/2007
Sen Enzi, Michael B. - 1/4/2007
Sen Landrieu, Mary L. - 1/4/2007
Sen Lugar, Richard G. - 1/4/2007
Sen Martinez, Mel - 1/4/2007
Sen Murkowski, Lisa - 1/4/2007
Sen Obama, Barack - 1/4/2007
Sen Pryor, Mark L. - 1/4/2007
Sen Thomas, Craig - 1/4/2007

S.155

Title: A bill to promote coal-to-liquid fuel activities.

Sponsor: Sen Bunning, Jim (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (12)

Related Bills: H.R.370, S.154

Latest Major Action: 1/4/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. COSPONSORS(12), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)

Sen Bond, Christopher S. - 1/4/2007
Sen Byrd, Robert C. - 5/2/2007
Sen Craig, Larry E. - 1/4/2007
Sen Dorgan, Byron L. - 1/11/2007
Sen Enzi, Michael B. - 1/4/2007
Sen Landrieu, Mary L. - 1/4/2007
Sen Lugar, Richard G. - 1/4/2007
Sen Martinez, Mel - 1/4/2007
Sen Murkowski, Lisa - 1/4/2007
Sen Obama, Barack - 1/4/2007
Sen Pryor, Mark L. - 1/4/2007
Sen Thomas, Craig - 1/4/2007

[Ethelk2044]

11. Hillary Sponsoring Bill on Clean Coal

Edited on Sat Jun-02-07 05:06 PM by Ethelk2044
Hillary

http://global-warming-awareness.org/2007/02/27/hillary -... /
globalwarming, greenhouse gasses, 2008 presidential candidates & globalwarming, globalwarming awareness2007 advocates, globalwarming advocacy, politics of global warming2007, hillary clinton, alternative energy, big oil, energy conservation, climate change }

In her continuing efforts to be an environmentally attractive candidate for the globalwarming aware crowd, Hillary Clinton toured a clean-coal facility in upstate New York.

As part of her tour, she pledged to wean the US from foreign oil dependency, and as Senator will be introducing a bill in the near future — doubtless in as showy a fashion as possible.

She touts clean coal technology, among others, to combat globalwarming. The US has a lot of coal, although mining coal is frequently dangerous and has long-term health hazards for miners.

Clinton called for more efficient use of electricity and natural gas, expanded use of wind and solar energy, new biofuels, and expansion of technology such as that being refined at Huntley that removes and captures toxic emissions from coal.



http://books.google.com/books?id=lxtQyhfzfWUC&pg=PA4&ots=yDtpV9Nz8U&dq=hillary+clinton+coal&sig=sPbM_7s0-BZffY5cmd_MBC6TpgU

[Tellurian]

12. Find her name on any of the bills posted above, please!

Hillary said she will propose her own bill!

"and as Senator will be introducing a bill in the near future —"

[Kingstree]

14. Video of Clinton pushing Clean coal

http://www.clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=270002

[mckeown1128]

16. Wow.. another misleading thread on the same topic

Wow.. maybe it should say get Gore's message to Obama, Edwards, and Clinton... since they all support it. I love to see a repeat of the same posts making the same accusations.:boring:

[zulchzulu]

18. CTL technology is improving quickly...so the NYT report is a bit dated

The key factor to clean energy from coal is coal to liquid technology (CTL), which makes sure the CO2 is captured and then placed underground. Newer technologies like carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) are also greatly improving. New energy facilities merging the best of CTL and CSS are yet to be built on a commercial scale, so there is still time to get it all right.

http://web.mit.edu/coal/

Remember that coal-based energy generates almost 50% of US electrical needs at this time. Ignoring coal as an energy source is just plain stupid.