Biden says no to Coal

[winnar111]

Text

ABC News' Matthew Jaffe reports: A conflict over clean coal is brewing on the campaign trail after video surfaced of Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., telling an anti-pollution campaigner in Ohio that he does not support coal plants in America.

Approached following a rally in Maumee, Ohio, last Tuesday, Biden was asked by a campaigner for 1Sky, an organization against the development of new coal-fired power plants, why he supports clean coal at a time when ?wind and solar are flourishing here in Ohio.?

The animated, close-talking Biden then put his hands on the woman?s shoulders and launched into a passionate, finger-wagging argument that he and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., do not support clean coal.

?We're not supporting clean coal,? Biden said. ?Guess what? China is building two every week, two dirty coal plants. And it's polluting the United States, it's causing people to die.?

?So will you support wind and solar and alternate technologies?? the woman questioned.

?Absolutely, before anybody did,? came Biden?s reply. ?The first guy to introduce a global warming bill was me 22 years ago. The first guy to support solar energy was me 26 years ago. It came out of Delaware.?

?But guess what?,? he continued. ?China's gonna burn 300 years of bad coal unless we figure out how to clean their coal up because it's gonna ruin your lungs and there's nothing we can do about it.?

?No coal plants here in America!? pledged the Democratic vice-presidential nominee. ?Build 'em, if they're gonna build 'em, over there and make 'em clean because they're killing ya.?

No sooner had the video surfaced then Republicans pointed out that Biden?s answer conflicted with Obama?s speech at the Democratic National Convention last month when he proclaimed his ticket?s support for clean coal development.

?As president,? said Obama, ?I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology and find ways to safely harness nuclear power.?

And Biden?s remarks also stood in stark contrast to his own comments this weekend at the United Mine Workers of America annual fish fry in Castlewood, Virginia, when he told the miners that ?we have enough coal in the United States of America to meet our needs domestically for the better part of the next 100 to 200 years.?

The Obama-Biden ticket, however, denounced GOP claims that Biden?s Ohio remarks were evidence that the Democratic pair opposes clean coal as ?another ham-handed lying attack from the McCain campaign.?

?This is yet another false attack from a dishonorable campaign,? said Biden spokesman David Wade. ?Sen. McCain knows that Sen. Obama and Sen. Biden support clean coal technology. Sen. Biden?s point is that China is building coal plants with outdated technology every day, and the United States needs to lead by developing clean coal technologies.?

?If Senator McCain is so committed to clean coal,? Wade wondered, "then why hasn?t he joined Senators Obama and Biden in announcing their support for the bipartisan energy proposal before the Senate today that would invest billions in clean coal projects? He should explain why his support for tax breaks for big oil outweighs his support for clean coal.?

?You know we have enough coal in the United States of America to meet out needs domestically for the better part of the next hundred to 200 years,? Biden said before launching into a critique of McCain?s energy priorities, slamming his support for billions in tax breaks for oil companies as the industry rakes in record profits.

?Imagine ... what Barack and I can do taking that $4 billion ? and investing it in coal gasification, finding out what we can do with carbon sequestration, finding out how we can burn the coal that you dig that can free us from being dependent on foreign oil countries and at the same time not ruin the environment. That?s within our capacity to do it, if you give me $4 billion I promise you, I promise you we will find the answer,? Biden said.




The environuts win again. I wonder how well this is going to go over with PA and VA.

The Democrats continue to adhere to the Albus Dumbledore energy policy, waiting for a magic wand to somehow make ridiculously inefficient technologies commerically viable.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: winnar111'

The environuts win again. I wonder how well this is going to go over with PA and VA.

Did you stop to think Biden may be onto something? :Q

Clean Coal - Pipe Dream Or Next Big Thing?

(CBS)
.
.
But exactly what is the technology?

The cleanest coal plant in North America is operated by Tampa Electric, in the middle of rural Florida. They call it clean because they don't burn coal exactly - they mix it with water and oxygen and convert it into a gas.

According to company president John Ramil, gasifying coal allows the company to remove pollutants like sulphur, nitrogen and soot, which virtually eliminates acid rain.

"And you can do it much cleaner than with the conventional coal technology," says Ramil.

That's the good news. But here's the problem.

"There is no such thing as clean coal," says James Hansen, NASA's expert on global warming, who says all coal plants, even TECO's, still emit millions of tons of carbon dioxide - the most threatening greenhouse gas.

There is no coal plant that captures the carbon dioxide and that's the major long-term pollutant," says Hansen.

But if carbon dioxide pollution is the problem with clean coal, many scientists believe there is a solution. They believe it's possible to recover most of the carbon dioxide and store it underground.

The idea is called "capture and sequester," and a global race is on to learn how it should be done. One Norwegian firm is storing tons of carbon dioxide in rock caves beneath the North Sea. America's efforts to sequester carbon have stalled. The Department of Energy planned to fund a plant, but pulled all funding when the price grew too high.

"They took seven years just to decide where they were going to make a pilot plant - and then they decided to cancel it," says Hansen.

And now, the failure to solve the carbon dioxide problem is a threat to coal itself. In the last five years, at least 63 coal-fired power plants have been scrapped or defeated by public opposition.

Florida Governor Charlie Crist helped pull the plug on the two clean coal plants because he says without a carbon solution, clean coal is not an option.

"Until that time comes, we want to develop more solar, more nuclear, more wind," says Crist.

Which is why the industry needs an ad campaign. Until the federal government funds the research on carbon dioxide, America's reliance on coal is in long-term trouble.

Did you do your homework to find out how clean, let alone practical, so called "clean" coal is?

Didn't think so. :roll:

There's a lot to be considered and a lot of work to be done before coal can be considered a "clean," let alone an economical energy source. It may work, and it may happen, and if and when it does, it may still not be the best choice compared to renewable resources like wind, solar, geothermal and tidal power generation.

Obama has said he favors clean coal, but Biden may be right. I'm glad he's on Obama's team. No one knows it all, but at least, Obama's smart enough to listen to good input from qualified sources before committing to actions with far reaching consequenses.

Since you're into your cutsie names for those who are willing to think through serious problems before committing to questionable solutions, maybe we should we call you an environmental destructionut. :thumbsdown:

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Since you're into your cutsie names for those who are willing to think through serious problems before committing to questionable solutions, maybe we should we call you an environmental destructionut. :thumbsdown:

I'm quite proud of that, thank you!

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Harvey
Since you're into your cutsie names for those who are willing to think through serious problems before committing to questionable solutions, maybe we should we call you an environmental destructionut. :thumbsdown:

I'm quite proud of that, thank you!

Well, at least you're honest enough to own up to your own idiocy. :laugh:

 

[Dari]

Sounded to me like he was talking about dirty coal. But it's difficult without the video.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Dari
Sounded to me like he was talking about dirty coal. But it's difficult without the video.

No clean coal = dirty coal? Ok!

http://blog.mlive.com/getting_..._to_new_coal_plan.html

Video here.

 

[quest55720]

I don't know why this would suprise anyone. Obama/Biden are in the back pocket of the tree huggers. Unless the sierra club approves it Obama/Biden are against it.

 

[Moonbeam]

Clean coal is a tremendous source of CO2 and that is exactly what is needed for the production of gas via bio-tech. All sources of CO2 are soon to become tremendously valuable.

 

[uclaLabrat]

Originally posted by: quest55720
I don't know why this would suprise anyone. Obama/Biden are in the back pocket of the tree huggers. Unless the sierra club approves it Obama/Biden are against it.

You act like caring about the environment is a bad thing. You make being a liberal sound like a bad thing. You seem to think that being able to think for yourself is a bad thing as well.

 

[Kirby]

I believe coal provides over 50% of the US's electricity, and I don't imagine that it's going anywhere. At least in my lifetime, and probably my kids.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
Sounded to me like he was talking about dirty coal. But it's difficult without the video.

No clean coal = dirty coal? Ok!

http://blog.mlive.com/getting_..._to_new_coal_plan.html

Video here.

This is the third off-message message from Biden in a week. Somebody needs to have a sit down with him.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Dari
Sounded to me like he was talking about dirty coal. But it's difficult without the video.

No clean coal = dirty coal? Ok!

http://blog.mlive.com/getting_..._to_new_coal_plan.html

Video here.

This is the third off-message message from Biden in a week. Somebody needs to have a sit down with him.

I agree, is he manic or something?

 

[lupi]

It's growing evidence for the great October Surprise.

 

[alphatarget1]

We have plenty of coal and as long as the particulates are kept to the minimum from coal power plants, it shouldn't be so bad.

It's not coal plants like China. If you want to stop CO2 production, why don't you go after cement plants, idiots.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
We have plenty of coal and as long as the particulates are kept to the minimum, it shouldn't be so bad.

Read the article I quoted. Even "clean" coal produces tons of CO2, as does burning any hydrocarbon, including gassified coal. It would be clean, in terms of environmental damage, if the CO2 can be sequestered. It will be practical when that can be done at a competitive price.

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
We have plenty of coal and as long as the particulates are kept to the minimum, it shouldn't be so bad.

Read the article I quoted. Even "clean" coal produces tons of CO2, as does burning any hydrocarbon, including gassified coal. It would be clean, in terms of environmental damage, if the CO2 can be sequestered. It will be practical when that can be done at a competitive price.

Would you rather build nuke plants and store toxic wastes or try to capture carbon dioxide (non toxic) and store it somehow?

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Text

ABC News' Matthew Jaffe reports: A conflict over clean coal is brewing on the campaign trail after video surfaced of Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., telling an anti-pollution campaigner in Ohio that he does not support coal plants in America.

Approached following a rally in Maumee, Ohio, last Tuesday, Biden was asked by a campaigner for 1Sky, an organization against the development of new coal-fired power plants, why he supports clean coal at a time when ?wind and solar are flourishing here in Ohio.?

The animated, close-talking Biden then put his hands on the woman?s shoulders and launched into a passionate, finger-wagging argument that he and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., do not support clean coal.

?We're not supporting clean coal,? Biden said. ?Guess what? China is building two every week, two dirty coal plants. And it's polluting the United States, it's causing people to die.?

?So will you support wind and solar and alternate technologies?? the woman questioned.

?Absolutely, before anybody did,? came Biden?s reply. ?The first guy to introduce a global warming bill was me 22 years ago. The first guy to support solar energy was me 26 years ago. It came out of Delaware.?

?But guess what?,? he continued. ?China's gonna burn 300 years of bad coal unless we figure out how to clean their coal up because it's gonna ruin your lungs and there's nothing we can do about it.?

?No coal plants here in America!? pledged the Democratic vice-presidential nominee. ?Build 'em, if they're gonna build 'em, over there and make 'em clean because they're killing ya.?

No sooner had the video surfaced then Republicans pointed out that Biden?s answer conflicted with Obama?s speech at the Democratic National Convention last month when he proclaimed his ticket?s support for clean coal development.

?As president,? said Obama, ?I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology and find ways to safely harness nuclear power.?

And Biden?s remarks also stood in stark contrast to his own comments this weekend at the United Mine Workers of America annual fish fry in Castlewood, Virginia, when he told the miners that ?we have enough coal in the United States of America to meet our needs domestically for the better part of the next 100 to 200 years.?

The Obama-Biden ticket, however, denounced GOP claims that Biden?s Ohio remarks were evidence that the Democratic pair opposes clean coal as ?another ham-handed lying attack from the McCain campaign.?

?This is yet another false attack from a dishonorable campaign,? said Biden spokesman David Wade. ?Sen. McCain knows that Sen. Obama and Sen. Biden support clean coal technology. Sen. Biden?s point is that China is building coal plants with outdated technology every day, and the United States needs to lead by developing clean coal technologies.?

?If Senator McCain is so committed to clean coal,? Wade wondered, "then why hasn?t he joined Senators Obama and Biden in announcing their support for the bipartisan energy proposal before the Senate today that would invest billions in clean coal projects? He should explain why his support for tax breaks for big oil outweighs his support for clean coal.?

?You know we have enough coal in the United States of America to meet out needs domestically for the better part of the next hundred to 200 years,? Biden said before launching into a critique of McCain?s energy priorities, slamming his support for billions in tax breaks for oil companies as the industry rakes in record profits.

?Imagine ... what Barack and I can do taking that $4 billion ? and investing it in coal gasification, finding out what we can do with carbon sequestration, finding out how we can burn the coal that you dig that can free us from being dependent on foreign oil countries and at the same time not ruin the environment. That?s within our capacity to do it, if you give me $4 billion I promise you, I promise you we will find the answer,? Biden said.




The environuts win again. I wonder how well this is going to go over with PA and VA.

The Democrats continue to adhere to the Albus Dumbledore energy policy, waiting for a magic wand to somehow make ridiculously inefficient technologies commerically viable.

If the dems are dumbledore, then the repubs are voldemort. And we know the good guys win in the end.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
We have plenty of coal and as long as the particulates are kept to the minimum, it shouldn't be so bad.

Read the article I quoted. Even "clean" coal produces tons of CO2, as does burning any hydrocarbon, including gassified coal. It would be clean, in terms of environmental damage, if the CO2 can be sequestered. It will be practical when that can be done at a competitive price.

Would you rather build nuke plants and store toxic wastes or try to capture carbon dioxide (non toxic) and store it somehow?

They are for solar and wind......

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
We have plenty of coal and as long as the particulates are kept to the minimum, it shouldn't be so bad.

Read the article I quoted. Even "clean" coal produces tons of CO2, as does burning any hydrocarbon, including gassified coal. It would be clean, in terms of environmental damage, if the CO2 can be sequestered. It will be practical when that can be done at a competitive price.

Would you rather build nuke plants and store toxic wastes or try to capture carbon dioxide (non toxic) and store it somehow?

They are for solar and wind......

Obama obviously believes that using a footstock like corn to make ethanol for fuel is somehow environmentally better than burning coal for power.

 

[Duwelon]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
We have plenty of coal and as long as the particulates are kept to the minimum, it shouldn't be so bad.

Read the article I quoted. Even "clean" coal produces tons of CO2, as does burning any hydrocarbon, including gassified coal. It would be clean, in terms of environmental damage, if the CO2 can be sequestered. It will be practical when that can be done at a competitive price.

Would you rather build nuke plants and store toxic wastes or try to capture carbon dioxide (non toxic) and store it somehow?

They are for solar and wind......

Obama obviously believes that using a footstock like corn to make ethanol for fuel is somehow environmentally better than burning coal for power.

Don't forget, we don't really know what impact CO2 has on temperature. There are models that if they are true will enslave mankind to the ilk of Gore who considers the debate over, despite um... lots of debate and scientists of various fields admitting there needs to be a lot more studies done.

Beyond measure to prevent soot from raining down on our streets, I want all the coal burning that we possibly need.

 

[crisscross]

Not to hijack your thread but your comment about "environuts" coming in the way of development got me thinking. Bush has done everything he possibly can to screw the environment in the last 8 years undermining the EPA, global warming the list goes on and his reasoning has been that even thinking about the environment will kill the economy 8 years on look at where the economy is.

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: Duwelon

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
We have plenty of coal and as long as the particulates are kept to the minimum, it shouldn't be so bad.

Read the article I quoted. Even "clean" coal produces tons of CO2, as does burning any hydrocarbon, including gassified coal. It would be clean, in terms of environmental damage, if the CO2 can be sequestered. It will be practical when that can be done at a competitive price.

Would you rather build nuke plants and store toxic wastes or try to capture carbon dioxide (non toxic) and store it somehow?

They are for solar and wind......

Obama obviously believes that using a footstock like corn to make ethanol for fuel is somehow environmentally better than burning coal for power.

Don't forget, we don't really know what impact CO2 has on temperature. There are models that if they are true will enslave mankind to the ilk of Gore who considers the debate over, despite um... lots of debate and scientists of various fields admitting there needs to be a lot more studies done.

Beyond measure to prevent soot from raining down on our streets, I want all the coal burning that we possibly need.

I'm in engineering grad school doing models for concrete and those are hard enough. You'll have a hard time convincing me that any of the climate models involving very, VERY complicated fluid dynamics and all that is accurate. I don't even know how one could go about calibrating those models.

Before you leftist Obamabots start talking about me fvcking up the world by not subscribing to the Al Gore bandwagon, I ride my bike to school everyday, 5 days a week last year for 4 miles each way. I moved closer to campus and I rarely drive. I do my part to reduce consumption of resources. No, I don't think the science of global warming (carbon dioxide and stuff) is indisputable, but I do believe that overconsumption is a problem. If we could all make a conscious effort in conservation we'd be leaving the next generation a better world.

Fvck assholes like Al Gore who think they're making a difference flying in a fvcking private jet and live in a 10k sqft home. He'll probably have a bigger carbon footprint than all of us combined on ATPN.

 

[Thump553]

Part of my investing theme is to invest in "green" sectors on the theory that these are the growth industries. I researched the concept of clean coal earlier this year and was not able to turn up a single reputable expert who considered the concept anything more than a misnomer. The science just isn't there with no realistic possibilities even on the horizon.

A lot of us so-called eviornuts would seriously love clean coal to be a realistic possibility. The US certainly is a huge energy demander and it is also the Saudi Arabia of the world as far as coal reserves go.

Perhaps you should redirect your venom into less cursing and namecalling and more towards reporting actual facts which disprove Biden's position. That is, if you actually what to persuade anyone versus just venting your emotions.

 

[Mxylplyx]

I read a story a while back about one of the unreported benefits of higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Crops yields go up as CO2 go up. If you dont believe that, ask any seasoned weed farmer. I believe higher CO2 levels will just encourage plants to grow bigger and faster, offsetting much of the CO2 emissions. It seems like environuts would have us living in the dark rather than make incremental steps to clean power. The magic power source that gives us abundant, clean energy with no pollutants or hazardous waste is a long, long way off. Hell, they even complain about the birds being killed by the wind farms.

 

[lupi]

Finally got around to listening to the actual audio. Wow that is some good stuff there. If this was mccain palin there would be satellite trucks camping out to get did you hear what he said statements from them to run as headlines.