Recently announced, a coal company has decided to install an underground carbon capture system. The premise of pumping CO2 underground is easy to understand, but, has some fundamental flaws. This technology, no matter how expertly installed, still pollutes by putting its waste underground. What is the longevity of these systems and how ethically will they be operated? Will underground pressures be knowingly assessed? Or will the companies pump CO2 underground ( and other contaminants? ) until something bad happens, then let the lawyers profit on the mess?

Well, looking closer at this technology, you will find that the resultant capture of CO2 is only %1.5 of the emissions. Yes it is an improvement, but, is it the best solution to reduce emissions? Well, we have to determine the price of this system and compare. The cost of the benefit must be assessed.

Now, these companies are getting "Green"-Aid dollars for this work. But, at what benefit to the investment of Green Tax Dollars (GTD)? Looking at the Return on Environment (ROE), coal generation should be excluded. The entire process is a mess and other technologies provide a larger ROE. One of them is Geothermal Energy. These plants can hit ROI in less than 10 years ( very conservatively ) and provide clean energy that meets the baseload requirements to replace a coal station.

Once you crunch the numbers and look at the superior ROE of geothermal and its realistic ROI and its equivalent quality of power, coal should not be invested in with GTD.

The only way any government should give money to a coal plant, is to give it on the condition they use the money to build geothermal resources. They have the steam turbines and equipment already installed. A planned shift of the facilities can be started. If the coal companies would shift from coal to geothermal, by growing its geothermal content with hard % goals, I would start to give them money.

Oh, here is the article. Read it and take a look:

French firm pushes carbon capture solution at US coal plant


All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!