<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CLEAN COAL isn&#8217;t clean</title>
	<atom:link href="http://conservationreport.com/2008/10/03/clean-coal-isnt-clean/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://conservationreport.com/2008/10/03/clean-coal-isnt-clean/</link>
	<description>In wildness is the preservation of the world. – Henry David Thoreau</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:20:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Buck Denton</title>
		<link>http://conservationreport.com/2008/10/03/clean-coal-isnt-clean/#comment-1534</link>
		<dc:creator>Buck Denton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:07:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conservationreport.wordpress.com/?p=2487#comment-1534</guid>
		<description>Clean coal isn&#039;t clean, it&#039;s an oxymoron. From The Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-dorner/brian-williams-clean-coal_b_144764.html):

&lt;blockquote&gt;She then profiles a $100 million CCS pilot project in Spremberg, Germany operated by Vattenfall. It is located adjacent to a what Thompson calls a &quot;dirty coal plant.&quot; The pilot project apparently captures 95 percent of its CO2 emissions and stores the liquefied CO2 in giant tanks -- before it is trucked 200 miles away and pumped underground.

Thompson then notes that &quot;this process could increase electric rates by 50 percent.&quot;

And the icing on the cake? A German environmentalist calling the burning of coal without CCS a &quot;crime against the climate.&quot;

I could scarcely have said it better myself. Now, I don&#039;t agree with everything in this story and anything that suggests that clean coal is even close to being ready on the scale or at the cost needed to make it a reality is misleading. Still, it is stunning to see an accurate and honest assessment of what our continued reliance on coal would mean: a crime against the climate. And clean coal? A 50 percent increase in electricity rates.

So -- should America rely on a ruinously expensive, Rube Goldbergian technology that won&#039;t be ready for years (decades?) or put our money and our mouths into the cheap, truly clean, safe, and readily available clean energy technologies we already have?&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clean coal isn&#8217;t clean, it&#8217;s an oxymoron. From The Huffington Post (<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-dorner/brian-williams-clean-coal_b_144764.html)" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-dorner/brian-williams-clean-coal_b_144764.html)</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>She then profiles a $100 million CCS pilot project in Spremberg, Germany operated by Vattenfall. It is located adjacent to a what Thompson calls a &#8220;dirty coal plant.&#8221; The pilot project apparently captures 95 percent of its CO2 emissions and stores the liquefied CO2 in giant tanks &#8212; before it is trucked 200 miles away and pumped underground.</p>
<p>Thompson then notes that &#8220;this process could increase electric rates by 50 percent.&#8221;</p>
<p>And the icing on the cake? A German environmentalist calling the burning of coal without CCS a &#8220;crime against the climate.&#8221;</p>
<p>I could scarcely have said it better myself. Now, I don&#8217;t agree with everything in this story and anything that suggests that clean coal is even close to being ready on the scale or at the cost needed to make it a reality is misleading. Still, it is stunning to see an accurate and honest assessment of what our continued reliance on coal would mean: a crime against the climate. And clean coal? A 50 percent increase in electricity rates.</p>
<p>So &#8212; should America rely on a ruinously expensive, Rube Goldbergian technology that won&#8217;t be ready for years (decades?) or put our money and our mouths into the cheap, truly clean, safe, and readily available clean energy technologies we already have?</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clean R. Coal</title>
		<link>http://conservationreport.com/2008/10/03/clean-coal-isnt-clean/#comment-1532</link>
		<dc:creator>Clean R. Coal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:13:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conservationreport.wordpress.com/?p=2487#comment-1532</guid>
		<description>Posted on: Monday, 15 September 2008, 03:00 CDT 

Geotec, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: GETC) announced today that it has filed patent applications with the United States Patent Office. Acknowledgment, as patent pending, has been received by the USPO for &quot;Methods of refining hydrocarbons fuels and post-combustion production by enzyme and protein reactions.&quot; (Application number 61/132,397) 

The patent applications included the protein and enzyme processing, cleaning and purification of pre-combustion solid, liquid, and gas hydrocarbons. The patent application also included the lowering of metals, mercury, sulfur and other hydrocarbon contaminants that will decrease the air emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and Sulfur Dioxides (SO2) and fine particles. These patents describe the bio-refining process for bio-diesel/jet fuel and marine bio-diesel. 

The Geotec intellectual property and enzyme/protein patents cover several cellulosic enzymes to convert waste farm products (corn stalks/cobs, rice husks, etc.) to ethanol/methanol for inclusion in &quot;GeoRich Bio-Fuels.&quot; The &quot;GeoRich&quot; family of bio-friendly fuels will be used to operate the company&#039;s mining, bio-refining facilities and product delivery with bio-diesel/jet fuel and marine bio-diesel. 

The transesterification of ethanol into bio-fuels and bio-crude, environmental remediation, preliminary stages of carbon sequestration (pre-combustion) and its process to decontaminate gases containing impurities are part of the patent application. 

The protein/enzyme chemical sequestration and control of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxides, nitrogen oxides, metals, and other contaminates from the post-combustion of solid, liquid and gas forms of hydrocarbons are part of the patent applications.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Posted on: Monday, 15 September 2008, 03:00 CDT </p>
<p>Geotec, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: GETC) announced today that it has filed patent applications with the United States Patent Office. Acknowledgment, as patent pending, has been received by the USPO for &#8220;Methods of refining hydrocarbons fuels and post-combustion production by enzyme and protein reactions.&#8221; (Application number 61/132,397) </p>
<p>The patent applications included the protein and enzyme processing, cleaning and purification of pre-combustion solid, liquid, and gas hydrocarbons. The patent application also included the lowering of metals, mercury, sulfur and other hydrocarbon contaminants that will decrease the air emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and Sulfur Dioxides (SO2) and fine particles. These patents describe the bio-refining process for bio-diesel/jet fuel and marine bio-diesel. </p>
<p>The Geotec intellectual property and enzyme/protein patents cover several cellulosic enzymes to convert waste farm products (corn stalks/cobs, rice husks, etc.) to ethanol/methanol for inclusion in &#8220;GeoRich Bio-Fuels.&#8221; The &#8220;GeoRich&#8221; family of bio-friendly fuels will be used to operate the company&#8217;s mining, bio-refining facilities and product delivery with bio-diesel/jet fuel and marine bio-diesel. </p>
<p>The transesterification of ethanol into bio-fuels and bio-crude, environmental remediation, preliminary stages of carbon sequestration (pre-combustion) and its process to decontaminate gases containing impurities are part of the patent application. </p>
<p>The protein/enzyme chemical sequestration and control of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxides, nitrogen oxides, metals, and other contaminates from the post-combustion of solid, liquid and gas forms of hydrocarbons are part of the patent applications.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clean R. Coal</title>
		<link>http://conservationreport.com/2008/10/03/clean-coal-isnt-clean/#comment-1531</link>
		<dc:creator>Clean R. Coal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:06:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conservationreport.wordpress.com/?p=2487#comment-1531</guid>
		<description>There is a company that can CLEAN COAL.......Geotec Inc. may be just a start up company but their patent pending (Sept 2008) protein/enzyme technology not only cleans the coal pre-combustion the cost is somewhere around 6 dollars a ton.  I believe Geotec Inc. will be the lost cost high producer of coal in the very near future.  www.geo-tec.net</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a company that can CLEAN COAL&#8230;&#8230;.Geotec Inc. may be just a start up company but their patent pending (Sept 2008) protein/enzyme technology not only cleans the coal pre-combustion the cost is somewhere around 6 dollars a ton.  I believe Geotec Inc. will be the lost cost high producer of coal in the very near future.  <a href="http://www.geo-tec.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.geo-tec.net</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eddisionklein</title>
		<link>http://conservationreport.com/2008/10/03/clean-coal-isnt-clean/#comment-1311</link>
		<dc:creator>Eddisionklein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 07:56:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conservationreport.wordpress.com/?p=2487#comment-1311</guid>
		<description>Clean coal is an oxymoron and is an alternate energy source.This site explains the reasons why the coal is dirty and how it will effect the environment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clean coal is an oxymoron and is an alternate energy source.This site explains the reasons why the coal is dirty and how it will effect the environment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robot</title>
		<link>http://conservationreport.com/2008/10/03/clean-coal-isnt-clean/#comment-1294</link>
		<dc:creator>Robot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:39:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conservationreport.wordpress.com/?p=2487#comment-1294</guid>
		<description>Clean coal: Never was there an oxymoron more insidious, or more dangerous to our public health.Orwellian language has led to Orwellian politics. With the imaginary vocabulary of “clean coal,” too many Democrats and Republicans, as well as a surprising number of environmentalists, have forgotten the dirty realities of extracting coal from the earth.The points entered by you....is great.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clean coal: Never was there an oxymoron more insidious, or more dangerous to our public health.Orwellian language has led to Orwellian politics. With the imaginary vocabulary of “clean coal,” too many Democrats and Republicans, as well as a surprising number of environmentalists, have forgotten the dirty realities of extracting coal from the earth.The points entered by you&#8230;.is great.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vandy</title>
		<link>http://conservationreport.com/2008/10/03/clean-coal-isnt-clean/#comment-875</link>
		<dc:creator>vandy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 01:07:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conservationreport.wordpress.com/?p=2487#comment-875</guid>
		<description>It seems as though Obama and Biden won the debates on energy.  McCain has mentioned clean coal but doesn&#039;t elaborate as if he knows what it is.  &#039;Clean Coal&#039; technology is utilized in Pennsylvania and Florida, just to mention a few of the coal sites of &#039;gob&#039; that are being cleaned and producing barrels of diesel.  GEO-TEC,INC.net has information on how their company can clean coal using enzymes and even clean the soil where it lay.  They have a patent pending for the technology.   It&#039;s a dirty job but somebody needs to do it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems as though Obama and Biden won the debates on energy.  McCain has mentioned clean coal but doesn&#8217;t elaborate as if he knows what it is.  &#8216;Clean Coal&#8217; technology is utilized in Pennsylvania and Florida, just to mention a few of the coal sites of &#8216;gob&#8217; that are being cleaned and producing barrels of diesel.  GEO-TEC,INC.net has information on how their company can clean coal using enzymes and even clean the soil where it lay.  They have a patent pending for the technology.   It&#8217;s a dirty job but somebody needs to do it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 2008 PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES: Some thoughts &#171; The Conservation Report</title>
		<link>http://conservationreport.com/2008/10/03/clean-coal-isnt-clean/#comment-861</link>
		<dc:creator>2008 PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES: Some thoughts &#171; The Conservation Report</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 02:45:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://conservationreport.wordpress.com/?p=2487#comment-861</guid>
		<description>[...] a comment &#187;  In my opinion, Obama won hands down. While I don’t believe in clean coal (because it doesn&#8217;t exist), Obama won big on energy issues, because his energy policies do not rely on nuclear power or [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a comment &raquo;  In my opinion, Obama won hands down. While I don’t believe in clean coal (because it doesn&#8217;t exist), Obama won big on energy issues, because his energy policies do not rely on nuclear power or [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
