1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

House Hearing Explores Potential of Coal-to-Liquids Fuels

Discussion in 'Environmental Discussion' started by tripp, Sep 6, 2007.

  1. tripp

    tripp Which it's a 'ybrid, ain't it?

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    4,717
    79
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Full Article

    Interesting testimony from several points of view. I find Romm's arguments compelling.
     
    #1 tripp, Sep 6, 2007
  2. SSimon

    SSimon Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    1,426
    21
    0
    Location:
    N/W of Chicago
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    Not knowing much about this technology, it appears that the main benefit from transitioning our current energy use to that of coal to liquid would be less reliance on foreign fuel. Other than that, there appears to be a consensus that this transition would not serve to benefit us when considering human cause GHG's, in fact use of coal to liquid may serve to increase same. Additionally, they're already making noise about the need for federal support to bring this technology to market.

    What, in your opinion, is so favorable about this technology? I ask as there is only one benefit that I can see and maybe I'm missing something.
     
    #2 SSimon, Sep 7, 2007
  3. 4futrgens

    4futrgens New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    21
    0
    0
    I don't like or support this technology for three reasons:

    1. It stinks of politcians setting up to make more money by investing in this "quick fix" technology. <_<

    2. More demand of coal-based technologies will only increase pressure for mountain blasting and mining. Coal workers today are increasingly facing dangers by their employers who refuse to spend on items that would increase their work safety. Cutting corners here and there will put more money into the pockets of the owners and investors while mining accidents increase. :angry:

    3. It does not address climate issues. :(
     
    #3 4futrgens, Sep 7, 2007
  4. tripp

    tripp Which it's a 'ybrid, ain't it?

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    4,717
    79
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    I don't support this technology at all. I think it's a bad idea. It will basically double CO2 emission for the transportation sector. It's not even a quick fix. The only thing that this tech does is reduce our dependence on foreign oil. You could also make the argument that it creates a BTL infrastructure, but why not just use BTL from the get go? Cost, is the answer to that. No, CTL is horrifically bad. I posted the article because I think that the expert testimony was interesting. Even the proponents of the technology recognize the climate risks, which is a small silver lining.

    I do think that BTL (Biomass to liquids) could be worth pursuing... it's carbon negative, apparently. It could provide us with plastic and petrochemical feedstock. The char left over is a good fertilizer.
     
    #4 tripp, Sep 7, 2007
  5. 4futrgens

    4futrgens New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    21
    0
    0
    I'll be happy to invest in a BTL company!! We need more green investors. Aren't there increasingly more financial companies offering green portfolios?
     
    #5 4futrgens, Sep 8, 2007
  6. tripp

    tripp Which it's a 'ybrid, ain't it?

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    4,717
    79
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(4futrgens @ Sep 8 2007, 06:43 PM) [snapback]509278[/snapback]</div>
    Yes. Goldman & Sachs is one of them.
     
    #6 tripp, Sep 9, 2007
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)