Denialism in Review: the Associated Press

the one down here (~20mi) built in 1940 and 1/3 emission producer in metropolitan area got re-fitted a few years back. From what I understand they tightened rules you can't do much today w/o loosing grandfather status.

Agree on paper natural gas looks alot cleaner, in reality not sure. The methane leaks are never accounted in GHG comparisons.

 

There is a pilot IGCC CCS that will begin construction soon in Odessa. The CO2 initially will be used to produce oil, then later sequestered in the used up oil field. The plant will also recycle the SO2 to sulfuric acid and NOx to urea to sell The plan only makes sense with extra DOE sweeteners. But IGCC and gas CC plants should be the game that can easily add sequestration if externalities are priced in.

A new IGGC plant is likely to produce 50% more power for the same CO2 and coal than your 1940s plant. It would also produce less than 10% of the dangerous pollutants NOx, SO2, and mercury and SO2 and NOx would apply to the cap. That grandfathering was meant to help utilities not lose there investment. There are some old plants that have made modifications such as TVA that have been stripped of grandfathering by lawsuit. Many of the others just haven't been caught and sued yet. These plants are being closed down because cost to reduce the pollution to epa requirements is higher than building a new plant. Congress can and should close the loophole. It will reduce dangerous pollution and will not leave these violators to wait to be caught in court. In TVAs case it was the federal government violating the laws.

 

I absolutely agree that CCS technology should be developed, and if the sulfur and nitrogen trapping can improve the economics, so much the better.

My point is simply that there will not be very many CCS operations anywhere in the world unless/until emitted CO2 has a price. At that time, plant-construction employment will dramatically increase, and companies holding the technology patents will get very rich.

I would not begrudge them that; quite the opposite in fact. Water-cleaning and soil-cleaning companies are *already* rich, due in large part that mandated their technologies. US industries are leaders there. CCS could develop the same way.

But if and only if...

 

here we came all way around to hear it again: AGW is a myth, IPCC and CO2 caps is global conspiracy to make some companies rich. If you disagree there is a pub by Spencer which tells it all.

 

Do you mean the book "Climate Confusion: How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians and Misguided Policies That Hurt the Poor"?

I admit, I've never seen a hardbound book offered (used) on amazon for a penny before.

Amazon.com: Used and New: Climate Confusion: How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians and Misguided Policies That Hurt the Poor

Add $3.99 for shipping but still...

I offer no opinion on whether this price reflects on the quality of the contents.

An interesting publishing house though...