Dirty Coal: Time to Say No!

The evidence seems to be convincing that the time has arrived to denounce DIRTY COAL.

There is no magic sequestration that will miraculously appear that will be cost competitive with alternatives. There is no single coal sequestration plant that has been constructed that is CLEAN. It's folly and a pipe dream of the worst magnitude.

Coal, Oil and Nuclear have been heavily subsidized with tax dollars. Is it time to demand the same for alternatives?

Judge: Reduce CO2 Or Don't Build Coal Plant
Largest Coal Promoter Gets a Slap in the Face

In a ruling believed to be unprecedented, a Georgia judge halted the construction of Dynegy's Longleaf coal-fired power plant because it had not made provisions for reducing its emissions of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas most widely implicated in man-made global warming.

The judge ruled that the plant must limit its pollution, according to the Sierra Club, which has been waging a campaign against Dynegy, an energy company with plans to build more coal-fired power plants than any other. Daily Green

How coal got a dirty name

When developers raised the idea of building a new coal-fired power plant in Will County five years ago, the Midwest was leading a resurgence of interest in the dirty-but-plentiful fossil fuel.

But growing concerns about global warming, lingering problems with noxious air pollution and skyrocketing construction costs are slowing the nation's coal rush to a crawl.

Most analysts think coal will remain a large part of the energy mix, at least for the near future. Power plants that burn the black, carbon-rich fuel now provide about half of the electricity generated nationwide. But those plants also are the largest source of carbon dioxide and mercury emissions and are major sources of air pollution that creates lung-damaging soot and smog.

ENN: Kansas Vetos Coal Power: Health Risks Cited

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Opponents of coal-fired power plants say they were given a new weapon last week when Kansas became the first state to reject a coal-fired power plant solely on the basis of the health risks created by carbon dioxide emissions.

A dozen states have rejected plans for new coal-fired power, at least in part because of concerns over carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. However, Kansas does not regulate carbon emissions and is believed to be the first state to tie CO2 to health risks and use that as the only stated reason for denying a required air permit, said Bruce Nilles, head of the Sierra Club's national effort to stop new coal plants and retire the dirtiest of existing ones.

The states where projects have been shelved are Texas, Florida, North Carolina, Delaware, Kentucky, Illinois, Oklahoma, Iowa, North Dakota, Idaho and Arizona, according to a list compiled by the Kansas governor's office, using a federal government study.