Energy Secretary Chu Endorses "Clean Coal"

DesScorp writes "The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Energy Secretary Steven Chu is endorsing 'clean coal' technology and research, and is taking a pragmatic approach to coal as an energy supply. '"It absolutely is worthwhile to invest in carbon capture and storage because we are not in a vacuum," Mr. Chu told reporters Tuesday following an appearance at an Energy Information Administration conference. "Even if the United States or Europe turns its back on coal, India and China will not," he said. Mr. Chu added that "quite frankly I doubt if the United States will turn its back on coal. We are generating over 50% of our electrical energy from coal."' The United States has the world's largest reserves of coal. Secretary Chu has reversed his positions on coal and nuclear power, previously opposing them, and once calling coal 'My worst nightmare.'"

Comments

More Like Kike Koal

[Anonymous Coward]

amirite?

Re:"Clean Coal"

[the_humeister]

Somewhat like "Clean diesel."

Re:Global warming

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Yeah, if you go to the anti clean coal websites, that seems to be their only legitimate complaint. They seem to think because burning coal produces C02, that it can never be "clean". When I think of something being "clean", I do not immediatly think of a substance being free of C02. With that definition, showers don't "clean" your skin and nothing can really ever clean your mouth.

Grammar

[SirGarlon]

From TFA:

"When you gasify it, you can capture the carbon and sequestrate the carbon..." Mr. Chu said.

I don't know about the merits of clean coal, but anyone who spouts made-up verbs like those must have his head up his ass.

Education Pays

[DynaSoar]

"'"It absolutely is worthwhile to invest in carbon capture and storage because we are not in a vacuum,"

How gratifying to know that the top of the energy [industry] food chain is educated enough to be aware we have an atmosphere.

As for carbon capture and *storage*, perhaps we can have Mr. Chu's address so we can use his backyard for storage. He's the first d00d of energy, he should get the first load of carbon.

Proof of Ignorance

[N8F8]

Ask yourself why the press let this crap slide during the election. Obama and his surrogates made lots of dumbass assertions that went uncalled because the press had a lovefest.

Re:I'll believe it when I see it..

[DigiShaman]

What proof is there that they were right last time?

We are discussing what we know today looking back. There are lessons to be learned in life you know.

What's that old saying? "Fool me once. Shame on you. Fool me twice. Shame on me."

Re:Cooling towers

[dbIII]

Now at least the readers must understand why I took your first statement as so much bullshit that I mistook you for an economist. Anywhere means Dryasfark Nevada as well as Marshyfen-on-sea. I do not understand why the simplistic dumbing down involved in the nuclear debate makes otherwise intelligent people act like complete idiots.

You can't put these things anywhere and I wish nuclear advocates would stop pretending that you can. At least you didn't say "quick" or "clean" - but the towers you showed ARE evaporative cooling towers as pictured in the link! We are talking about quite a few megalitres of water on hand here Sir so please do not try to blind those that already have a clue with science. With respect Sir you are attempting to bullshit the readers here to push your views, I suppose it's a common PR tactic but I suspect it is somewhat beneath your normal behaviour.