Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Accelerating War on Coal

January 22, 2013

It should have come as no surprise that President Barack Obama used his inauguration address to whip up more support for his campaign against the coal industry....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(41)

WVUGEO

Jan-22-13 2:56 AM

Then, N-R Editor, since "climate change", and, thus, CO2 emitted by our use of Coal in the generation of abundant and truly affordable electric power, seem the rationale for, or the cutting edge of, the putative Obama War on Coal you so consistently decry, we say it again: You, personally, have been provided with ample documentation of the facts, that, not only can CO2 be recycled in the synthesis of conventional hydrocarbon fuels, of alcohols, and of widely-used plastics, such CO2 recycling is actually being done, right now, on an industrial basis, in the nations of Iceland, Germany and Japan. Further, as you know, our own United States Navy has complete, integrated technologies in hand that enable the efficient extraction of environmental CO2 and it's conversion into Gasoline, Diesel and Jet Fuel. Penn State University has technology in hand that uses solar energy to convert CO2 and H2O into Methane. Set your Coal Country readers free.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVUGEO

Jan-22-13 3:27 AM

Regarding our previous post, since "cost" will be the knee-jerk response among those of you who would rather automatically run your mouths in an attempt to come off as wise and knowing, rather than doing the work to actually win a little real knowledge, in a recent US Naval Research Laboratory release: "Fueling the Fleet, Navy Looks to the Seas; September 24, 2012; The U.S. Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) is developing the chemistry for producing jet fuel from renewable resources in theater. The process envisioned would catalytically convert CO2 and H2 directly to liquid hydrocarbon fuel used as JP-5", the Navy estimates that they can, in theater, while in action, produce jet fuel from Carbon Dioxide and Water at a cost perhaps as low as $3 per gallon. The N-R editor was sent a copy of that release when it issued.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Donaldo

Jan-22-13 10:54 AM

while we're "saving" the coal industry, wny not also try to "save' the buggy-whip industry?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

acousticportal

Jan-22-13 10:58 AM

NR, do you really advocate polluting our land and environment so that mine owners can greatly benefit? Your party, and this approach is steadily dying. The GOP adherance to outdated ideals, prejudice, money above all...has caused the once great institution, the Grand Old Party, to appear as tattered and insignificant as the Dixie Flag...the symbol of white power and prejudice...very sad...very disturbing...very wrong.

GOP...you have cancer and you keep smoking...wow.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dolphin3111

Jan-22-13 11:22 AM

WVUGEO, your rants about CO2 sequestration may be technically correct but are not impressive to me. Are you working on a government funded project? No one but the government has any interest in CO2 sequestration. AEP has given up on it.

Apparently you are totally out of touch about the relationship between CO2 and climate change and have failed to realize that the “war on coal” is just a political scam perpetrated on the American public by political entities hiding behind the un-proven pseudo scientific premise that CO2 causes global warming.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dolphin3111

Jan-22-13 11:22 AM

There is no relationship between CO2 and global warming. Despite continuous increases in CO2 levels, there has been no global warming for the last 16 years. The propaganda being spread by government funded entities like NOAA and NASA have totally brainwashed many Americans, who now think that CO2 sequestration is necessary to protect the planet. Hogwash.

Current increases in CO2 are very good for the planet. Plant life and our food supply is thriving more now with increased CO2 levels.

Please cite a physical experiment that demonstrates that a change in CO2 concentration by 100 ppmv would cause any measurable increase in temperature.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-22-13 11:23 AM

WVUGEO, your CO2 to fuel scheme is simply unbelievable to anyone who understands the laws of physics and economics. If this new version of the perpetual motion machine were even close to feasible, private companies would be tripping over one another to make a fortune from it. There are simple reasons this process is only done on Government subsidies or makes some sense in very special circumstances (on isolated aircraft carriers).

I’m sure you can get a few politicians to throw you a few million dollars if you kick back a little in campaign contributions, though. I understand that part of the laws of economics, too.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

promo61

Jan-22-13 11:48 AM

There you go again Acoustic, using cancer as a lighthearted reference. Be careful what you sow.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-22-13 12:01 PM

acousticracebaiter “The GOP adherance... prejudice... white power and prejudice... very sad...”

acousticracebaiter plays the racist card like a toddler ***** its thumb. Reflex and juvenile. Typical Democrit... very sad...

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

impact

Jan-22-13 3:24 PM

It's like I've been telling you Mike, your war on coal is a figment of your deranged imagination. This editorial backs me up. Thanks.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WaterBuffaloRider

Jan-22-13 3:46 PM

The weak and pathetic editor accelerates his "War on Expectant Moms" in AEP's drift and his "War on Earth."

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-22-13 5:27 PM

WaterBuffalo, your War on Unborn Children racked up a body count of 1.1 MILLION babies last year. I don’t know how many casualties there were in our War on Expectant Moms, but I suspect you’re winning.

As for the War on Earth, I hope you’re not using coal-fired electricity to post that crap. Because that would be aiding the enemy.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-22-13 8:03 PM

WVEGO, it is shame you don't understand the first law of Thermodynamics OR how to make a cost-benefit analysis.

You can make GOLD from LEAD if you own the CERN particle physics lab, but since it cost BILLIONS, it is not cost effective.

Neither is any of the BULLSH** you constantly babble about.

Did Apple gets billions of Gov $$ to develop the Iphone?

Did Microsoft get Billions to develop the Xbox??

Toyota get BILLIONS to develop the Prius??

NO, they are all SUPERIOR PRODUCTS that people BUY because they offer real VALUE to the buyer.

Not subsidized pie in the sky that NEVER will break even.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FreeWheeling

Jan-22-13 10:32 PM

Acid rain is caused when air emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, generated predominately by coal-fired power plants, interact in the atmosphere to form acid compounds that fall back to earth as acid rain. The Adirondacks of NY State are particularly sensitive to acid rain. When acid rain falls on the Adirondacks, it acidifies forest soils, which reduce growth and survival of tree species. It also acidifies lakes and other water bodies, which can kill fish and water organisms or affect their growth.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-22-13 10:57 PM

FreeWheeling, thanks for that wonderfully plagiarized paragraph. Now tell us how much acid is getting through those modern scrubbers and get back to us. Don’t use coal-fired electricity to send that post, though, because that would make you a hypocrite. Try smoke signals. LOL

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

uglyassmf

Jan-23-13 1:46 AM

I'm no scientist. for what ever reason global warming is obvious. the scientist say it's from burning to much fossil fuels. I would bet on that. being that we haven't had a real winter around here in quite some time some one is correct. I'm not complaining about my heating bill but i fear there could be serous consequences down the road for the next generation.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LogHog

Jan-23-13 7:34 AM

Global warming? Is this really anything new? What caused global warming after the last Ice Age? Couldn't have been mankinds co2. If so, how? Here's an idea about as crazy as Al gore's..Why not use the space program to launch giant shields into orbit. To block out the suns rays from coming to earth. try regulation of these rays by a computer in Washington DC. this way our Govt. can be in complete controlof everything. If one area of the country doesn't comply to the wishes of DC, they just pull the shield and let them burn up...the liberal agenda will be complete...I'm thinking someone being paid by our Govt taxes is already thinking up crap like this...costs of any liberal agenda doesn't matter..we can just print mo money

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LogHog

Jan-23-13 7:38 AM

Gee. What could be the biggest heat source for the earth? Couldn't be the Sun could it? Is there ever any changes to the Sun?

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LogHog

Jan-23-13 7:43 AM

under the ice north Greenland was found the remains of plant life that grew before the Vikings lived there..Gee how did that growth happen? maybe the coal fired power plants caused some global warming thousands of yrs ago? oops..no coal burning then?

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FreeWheeling

Jan-23-13 9:09 AM

Troll: Enough is getting through so that NYS must take actions to reduce acidity levels in the Adirondak Lakes. Since I read this in a Leader Herald editorial, also owned by Ogden Nwspapers, it must be true.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-23-13 9:48 AM

FreeWheeling, I did find it amusing you were quoting an Ogden source. Must have been quite difficult for you. LOL

I also noticed you missed the following sentence from that article: “[Adirondack Council spokesman John Sheehan] said pollution is decreasing because of federal regulations on coal plants...” So the coal industry is cleaning up their act, yet you loons continue in your efforts to “bankrupt them.”

Another interesting statement from the article: “Sheehan said although acid rain won't hurt people swimming, it can contaminate fish with mercury...” I’d be interested in the unique chemistry that creates mercury from acid. Apparently the “acid rain” argument wasn’t scary enough to make the point, so the REALLY scary although technically unrelated “mercury” argument was muddled in to raise the hype level. Dishonest and unprofessional at best.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

promo61

Jan-23-13 11:43 AM

Look up Newsweek article from 1972. Scientists concerned about global cooling and a new ice age.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dolphin3111

Jan-23-13 12:01 PM

Troll, I agree. Power companies are already spending billions of dollars on power plant upgrades to get rid of real pollutants like SOx, NOx, and Hg and they are doing a great job of it.

CO2 must NOT be lumped in with real "pollutants". The science is absolutely NOT settled. CO2 is necessary for life.

Climate is always changing. There is nothing we can or should do to try and stop it. We are just too ignorant. I would rather live in a period of warming rather than cooling.

Warm = good.

Cold = death.

More CO2 = More green and more food.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FreeWheeling

Jan-23-13 12:22 PM

Troll: From THE NY TIMES..."Mercury is a toxin that has been found in increasingly high concentrations in fish and poses human health risks, including neurological disorders in children. The nation’s coal-fired power plants produce 48 tons of it a year, a little more than 40 percent of the total mercury emitted in the United States." However, since you have turned your back on science, believe what you want. If your neighbor's septic system drained onto your property would you be concerned? LOL

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-23-13 12:43 PM

Ugly****:"being that we haven't had a real winter around here in quite some time some one is correct"

Uuuh hey dummy this is the coldest week since Feb. 2009.

WTF Global Warming? China has had the coldest winter in 28 years.

Even Phil Jones, the guru of global warming data fraud, admitted there has NOT BEEN any evidence of it in the past 15 years.

Just a Fraud to make money for the Al Gores of the world, and money come from dumb ****s like you.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 41 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: