[_ Old Earth _] It's Ironic...

[Barbarian]

...but if new research findings are right, coal might just become one of the cleanest ways to use fossil fuels.

Although the processing of coal is an ancient problem and has been practiced for centuries, the constraints posed on today's coal conversion processes are unprecedented, and utmost innovations are required for finding the solution to the problem.

With a strong demand for an affordable energy supply which is compounded by the urgent need for a CO2 emission control, the clean and efficient utilization of coal presents both a challenge and an opportunity to the current global R&D efforts in this area. This paper provides a historical perspective on the utilization of coal as an energy source as well as describing the progress and challenges and the future prospect of clean coal conversion processes. It provides background on the historical utilization of coal as an energy source, along with particular emphasis on the constraints in current coal conversion technologies. It addresses the energy conversion efficiencies for current coal combustion and gasification processes and for the membrane and looping based novel processes which are currently under development at various stages of testing. The control technologies for pollutants including CO2 in flue gas or syngas are also discussed. The coal conversion process efficiencies under a CO2 constrained environment are illustrated based on data and ASPEN Plus® simulations. The challenges for future R&D efforts in novel coal conversion process development are also presented.
http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2008/ee/b809218b/unauth#!divAbstract

We have more BTUs in coal than Saudi Arabia has in oil. It makes sense. And pending the ongoing development of solar and wind, we need something to bridge the transition. Coal might be the way, if we can get the technology in place.

 

[Malachi]

...but if new research findings are right, coal might just become one of the cleanest ways to use fossil fuels.

You are absolutely right. The war on coal is another weapon in the arsenal to destroy America and shore up special interest groups.

 

[Corn Pop]

Go solar, or keep feeding the polluting corps.

 

[Barbarian]

If there's a "war on coal", why is Obama funding research to make it more viable as a fuel?

Republicans aren't united in their opposition to making coal a usable fuel for the future; indeed, some of them are supporting these efforts. And those opposed to it aren't ideologically opposed to coal (other than a certain senator who is funded primarily by big oil companies); they just don't want Obama to succeed at anything, even if it's good for America.

 

[Malachi]

If there's a "war on coal", why is Obama funding research to make it more viable as a fuel?

How is that possible when he is trying to destroy the coal industry?
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/11/...ected-to-cost-us-125800-jobs-and-650-billion/

 

[Barbarian]

How is that possible when he is trying to destroy the coal industry?

It wouldn't be possible that he was doing both, would it? If he was trying to destroy the coal industry, he certainly wouldn't be trying to make coal more attractive as an energy source. But as you saw, Obama is funding a number of different projects, designed to make coal more competitive as a clean, economical fuel.

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

... you know I wonder how Obama will be remembered. His presidency is comming to an end soon, and what he's known for now is wrapped in a population that loves what they think of him and see him do. As well as a population that hates what they think of him and see him do.

After the fact, 10 years down the road, twenty into the future, what will be taught about this time and about Obama? What will be in the books that we use to teah our kids about the past presidents of the USA?

 

[Barbarian]

I figure he'll be regarded as mediocre. In the long run, his health care reform will be a temporary fix, pending more basic reform. But it got the ball rolling, and now even the republicans, when they don't think anyone is listening, admit that there's no going back to the mess we had before.

His more aggressive handling of terrorism will be regarded more rationally in years to come, but his failure to reign in the intrusive oversight of government, dating from the Patriot Act will harm his reputation, as will his failure to bring the radical republicans in to line other than in the budget confrontations.

His steps to make coal more competitive as a viable energy source for the future will be judged depending on how well the technology developed under his watch actually works. Could be a huge thing, or it could fail economically.

 

[Jim Parker]

And pending the ongoing development of solar and wind, we need something to bridge the transition

Absolutely. We will need another resource but, technologically, we're not there yet.
Meanwhile, plentiful, cheap energy can help generate an economy that can fund the research.
As an aside, along with the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere over the past 30 years, there has been an increase of green foliage of between 25% and 50%. Plants really do love CO2 and the earth responds to use the C out of the CO2 and give back the O2.

 

[jasonc]

Go solar, or keep feeding the polluting corps.

Like solar is green.where does the sand come from?lakes,rivers,strip mining,and also the beach.not friendly to the environment