Skip to main content

View Diary: Climate change isn't AN issue, it's THE issue (214 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  stern has not embraced that myth (9+ / 0-)

    he does take the approach that we need to try all clean technologies, but his views are evolving, as he realizes that things are worse than he had anticipated.

    there is no such thing as "clean" coal. like natural gas, there are ways of making coal a less dirty fossil fuel, but there is no way to make it clean. and we don't have time for half-measures or an all-of-the-above approach. we need to end use of coal.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Sun May 19, 2013 at 10:33:49 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Right on! Can't waste time chasing silver (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Laurence Lewis, Egalitare


      If we really want to straighten out all this crap we really need to think about shit - Holy Shit.

      by John Crapper on Sun May 19, 2013 at 10:48:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Asfar as I know Stern is still supporting coal CCS (0+ / 0-)

      If you end coal you must replace it with something in
      the next 25 years and please don't say nukes. Wind is 4% with a top end of 20%, solar is under 1%.
      I see a lot of posturing, sloganeering but few proposals.
      Surprise me!

      •  he never supported it (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        he said he we needed to try anything. there is a difference. and that was before his even more ramped up sense of urgency.

        given the time, money, and environmental costs, we can't afford any more coal. solar and wind have been growing exponentially. imagine if they and conservation had the full backing of governments, with manhattan project urgency.

        The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

        by Laurence Lewis on Sun May 19, 2013 at 12:55:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  That old industry straw-man? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Calamity Jean

        Why exactly is it relevant to point out that solar is at 1%? That's more than CCS is currently providing.

        It doesn't matter where solar is now. What matters is how much and how quickly we can build more. The answer is that we can build it faster and for less money than it would take to implement CCS on a large scale.

        We already cut emissions dramatically by reducing consumption and switching nearly half of coal production to natural gas. We could shut down at least 1/3 of the dirtiest coal plants in America this year and no one would notice the difference. Part of the problem for renewables is that we have excess generating capacity from highly polluting coal plants generating power at low prices. Those aging don't need to be equipped with outrageously expensive CCS. They need to be shut down now to make room in the market for more wind and solar. That could be done through aggressive EPA enforcement without a price on carbon.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site