The rule «reinforces what most power company executives and investors already understand — that if and when new coal plants make a comeback, they will need to be
designed with carbon capture and storage,» said David Doniger, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Not exact matches
And while EPA
designed the rule to accommodate fossil fuel plants equipped
with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, the Barnett report said such plants are unlikely to find favor
with investors unless Congress provides incentives to defray their higher construction and operation costs.
According to Obama's Web site, the U.S. Department of Energy under his control would work
with private companies to
design five clean - coal plants that take advantage of
carbon capture and sequestration.
Since then, events have told a rather different story,
with the U.S. waging a multi-front campaign — organizing a global network of bilateral agreements
designed to render the U.N. climate process «irrelevant», sending out its flacks to argue that fossil technologies like «clean coal» and
carbon capture are the best ways forward, insisting that the under - funded climate secretariat separate its Kyoto Protocol accounts from those related to the Framework Convention, ruthlessly undermining all attempts to talk about, or even talk about talking about, the future of the regime.
The US Department of Energy (DOE) will award up to $ 36 million (DE-FOA-0001791) to continue the development of
carbon capture technologies to either the engineering scale or to a commercial
design,
with an eye to reducing fossil fuel power plant emissions.
Thus ended the high profile consortium project
with a
design integrating coal gasification
with carbon dioxide
capture and sequestration - in single demonstration.
It is a fantasy
designed to get the support of Senator Graham and other fuzzy - minded Senators
with visions of lots of new nuclear plants, billions for technology to
capture and store
carbon dioxide emissions from coal - fired power plants, less dependence on imported oil, and tariffs to protect American manufacturing jobs in energy - intensive industries.