Department of unresolved contradictions

Posted by David Roberts at 11:06 AM on 23 May 2007

Read more about: politics | energy | elections | greenhouse-gas emissions | coal

I'm going to put up a longer post about this in a second, but for now, I merely note the following two statements from Republican presidential candidate Sam Brownback's energy speech.

One:

... we need to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. This is possible using our ingenuity, resources and determination.

Two:

Coal needs to be at the center of our energy policy for the foreseeable future.

For story: Department of unresolved contradictions
2 Comments | Post a Comment

Or the Department of Redundancy Department?

Hey, all:

And the Office of Repeatedly Unlearned Historical Lessons.

Brownback probably views his fellow Kansan, Dorothy, as a minion of the Devil. Also, he and all the rest of the Fundies are stuck in the same era that gave us "Wizard of Oz", so I shouldn't worry too much about his real chances. Although they do need a new poster boy since Falwell has died. Oooooh, boy. [Inadvertent chill.]

David
Sustainability For Life

Messages done with sustainable energy, with Wind and Sun!

by SustainableGreen at 11:51 PM on 23 May 2007

Well

I will say this.

It's a lot easier to kill Coal plants that do not yet exist.
Than it is to kill ones which already exist.

I don't see the plants we already have, going offline anytime soon.

However no new coal power plants should allowed unless they permanently sequester their carbon.

(Incidentally this almost doubles the cost of the facility, making other low carbon technologies look much more cost effective)

-David Ahlport

by GreyFlcn at 12:10 AM on 24 May 2007
[ Parent ]

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.