PDA

View Full Version : Elections Biden: No Clean Coal Plants In US (Build 'em in China!)


RINGLEADER
09-23-2008, 09:30 AM
Why should we use the resources we have. I particularly like how exorcised he gets at the idea that anyone could think he would ever support the building of coal plants in the US.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJ55UzAsp6M

Some great rope line video from Joe Biden's recent Ohio swing, where he was asked by an anti-pollution campaigner about clean coal -- a controversial approach in Democratic circles for which Obama has voiced support, particularly during the Kentucky primary.

Biden's apparent answer: He supports clean coal for China, but not for the United States.

"No coal plants here in America," he said. "Build them, if they're going to build them, over there. Make them clean."

"We’re not supporting clean coal," he said of himself and Obama. They do, on paper, support clean coal.

The answer seems to play into John McCain's case that Obama has been saying "no" to new sources of energy.

In the primary, Biden opposed Obama's push for clean coal, which is seen as a way of maintaining or expanding America's coal-burning power plants -- many of which are in rust belt swing states.

"I don't think there's much of a role for clean coal in energy independence, but I do think there's a significant role for clean coal in the bigger picture of climate change," he told Grist last year. "Clean-coal technology is not the route to go in the United States, because we have other, cleaner alternatives," he said, but added that America should push for a "fundamental change in technology" to clean up China's plants.

Biden also was not shy on his own clean energy credentials.

"The first guy to introduce a global warming bill was me 22 years ago. The first guy to support solar energy was me 20 years ago," he said, apparently referring to the 1986 Global Climate Protection.

Think Progress has some more context, and Jake Tapper reports that Obama this morning rebuked Biden on a separate issue, his quick opposition to a federal bailout.

Biden's remarks, and his apparent return to his primary position Tuesday, were striking because just three days ago, he praised the possibilities of coal to a crowd at the United Mine Workers of America annual fish fry in Castlewood, Va.

“You know we have enough coal in the United States of America to meet out needs domestically for the better part of the next hundred to 200 years,” Biden said before launching into a critique of McCain’s energy priorities, slamming his support for billions in tax breaks for oil companies as the industry rakes in record profits.

“Imagine ... what Barack and I can do taking that $4 billion … and investing it in coal gasification, finding out what we can do with carbon sequestration, finding out how we can burn the coal that you dig that can free us from being dependent on foreign oil countries and at the same time not ruin the environment. That’s within our capacity to do it, if you give me $4 billion I promise you, I promise you we will find the answer,” Biden said.

He linked the ticket’s support for coal with their call to have U.S. automakers produce plug-in electric cars. “Where’s that [electricity] come from? That comes from a utility. What do utilities burn? They burn coal mostly.”

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Biden_No_coal_plants_here_in_America.html?showall

tiptap
09-23-2008, 09:40 AM
Do I think Biden is sophisticated in his understanding of the tension between Coal fired electrical Plants, Coal gasification plants and the associated carbon sequestration and climate change? No.

But do I think his answers are meant to contain producing CO 2 in the atmosphere and to look to conservation rather than consumption as the definition of arrow of success? Well yes.

I understand you do not concur. You think more is better. It is easier. It is not necessarily better.

RINGLEADER
09-23-2008, 09:56 AM
Do I think Biden is sophisticated in his understanding of the tension between Coal fired electrical Plants, Coal gasification plants and the associated carbon sequestration and climate change? No.

But do I think his answers are meant to contain producing CO 2 in the atmosphere and to look to conservation rather than consumption as the definition of arrow of success? Well yes.

I understand you do not concur. You think more is better. It is easier. It is not necessarily better.

Well evidently Obama doesn't agree with you or Biden.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy

tiptap
09-23-2008, 10:03 AM
The difference is pretty nil. Obama is talking about instigating cleaner coal burning technology but on existing smokestacks. And that includes sequestering of those plants. And he would be willing to trade sequestered for existing smokestacks. That is different than building additional coal plants in ever increasing numbers.

RINGLEADER
09-23-2008, 11:35 AM
The difference is pretty nil. Obama is talking about instigating cleaner coal burning technology but on existing smokestacks. And that includes sequestering of those plants. And he would be willing to trade sequestered for existing smokestacks. That is different than building additional coal plants in ever increasing numbers.

Um, okay sparky. Whatever you say. LOL.

clemensol
09-23-2008, 01:20 PM
"clean coal" is worse for the environment than any other type of fuel and we don't know if we can successfully institute it on a large scale.

Amnorix
09-23-2008, 01:22 PM
I don't know much about coal except that the US is lucky enough to have it in abundance. We should intensely research (even with gubment funding if necessary) to try to make it as environmentally friendly as possible so that we can use it as an alternative fuel source for power plants and the like.

Seriously, the US has GOBS of coal. Every bit of coal we use instead of oil is a victory. But, obviously, we need to understand/manage/control the environmental risks.

bango
09-23-2008, 06:25 PM
I don't know much about coal except that the US is lucky enough to have it in abundance. We should intensely research (even with gubment funding if necessary) to try to make it as environmentally friendly as possible so that we can use it as an alternative fuel source for power plants and the like.

Seriously, the US has GOBS of coal. Every bit of coal we use instead of oil is a victory. But, obviously, we need to understand/manage/control the environmental risks.

Then if this does not work we sell all of our coal to China and other countries that hate the environment.