MIT Redesigns Natural Gas Power Plant For Near-Zero Carbon Emissions

Finally! Clap clap clap! Finally! Inovation!

Shouldn't we wait for technology like this to be ready to be used, BEFORE we create a monstrous tax that will otherwise force people to choose between heating their home or food?

"With the conference in Copenhagen swiftly approaching, and the Senate analog to the Waxman-Markey "American Clean Energy and Security Act" struggling towards the floor, little doubt remains that fossil fuel-burning power plants will soon face either fines for, or mandatory reduction of, carbon emissions."

I don't think you could have made a more gross overstatement. At this point, cap and tax is, for all intents and purposes, quite dead. The latest revelations of the Climategate scandal will most certainly be all that is needed to end that bill's short life. With health care lumbering along and hardly guaranteed of its own passage, and next year being an election year, I think it is *very* unlikely that you'll get the carbon trading scheme that you want. Australia just struck down a similar plan yesterday. Dream on.

@Mycellium - No. We spent the critical Bush years listening to that argument. The Bill has provisions for reasonable timelines and sets goals. Just like the new CAFE standards, the industry has MORE THAN ENOUGH time to come up with ample solutions, given their collosal profits.

Climategate has yet to put forth evidence that global warming is not happening.

@blaxpear
From your reply it seems you think this will punish Bush or big business, it won't affect them it will hurt the people. The energy companies don't make money off of the natural gas or coal they use, they make money off of fees. They simply pass the extra costs to the people, higher taxes will not affect them, it will only affect all the people.

Industry doesn't traditionally drive innovation, schools and venture capital start ups do, like this article and so many others about MIT. This will help to shut that down.

Why would you spend the "critical bush years" waiting? You could have been developing the technologies needed to stop a problem you see while not hurting the people. No matter if your an inventor or not, rather than complaining or stewing in anger at those greedy companies, you should have been using that time usefully in fixing the problem that you believe in.

This tax will not help anything or anyone but the politicians and certain companies chosen by the politicians. Rather than an end to those greedy companies, its those greedy companies that provide enough contributions to those same politicians that will be allowed to feed at the public trough at the peoples expense.

@thor0997
"climategate" doesn't have to provide proof of anything except the fraud of the scientists who made the claims. They lied. Its that simple.

People have a hard time giving up on a belief that they've accepted, no matter what the evidence. This is the most dangerous part of people, and has nearly destroyed us many times before.

@Mycellium

Excellent comments. I couldn't have said it any better.

So you managed to get rid of a little bit of the carbon at a price the consumer cannot afford. What are you going to come up with to get rid of a little bit of the radiation that drilling for natural gas creates in our water supply and the consumer cannot afford? If you cannot clean up these fossil fuels at a price the consumer can afford and still afford to eat at least one meal a day, then fossil fuel production should be abandoned and new cleaner, cheaper sources of energy sought. It surprises me how some people insist on beating a dead horse.

Climate change is real. MAN MADE climate change is unproven! People who want to say that man made climate change is real lied.

this is cool

freudianslipnslide.blogspot.com

@ Mycellium

I love how you didnt even address my argument with any facts. It was quite elegent, but it has no merit for an actual argument.

Nice to see how an unethical and probably illegal hacking of one institution's e-mail, perhaps indicating problems with the research of a few scientists, becomes the generalized "they lied" applied to all scientists involved in over 20 years of climate studies that implicate human activity. Please people, a little critical thinking and less herd mentality. We've pumped gigatons of CO2, methane, and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. They're called greenhouse gases for a reason. The average global temperatures have risen at a fairly steady rate corresponding with this increase. I think I can figure this one out myself, regardless of what politically-motivated bloggers say about a few hacked e-mails.

First of all you need to thank me for deleting the original huge rant I wrote and was about to post. If your actually interested in seeing it post an email and I'll send it to you. If you think this is long you should have seen that thing.

Thor0997 - The reason I didn't post other facts is the scientists knew that their science and data was not sufficient. That's why they had to lie, they talked of "tricking" people and "hiding" the actual temperatures that they knew were declining. Thats the only facts that matter. They knew the data was antithetical to the result they wanted so they hid the data and lied about it. It doesn't completely disprove their hypothesis but its a bad sign when the scientists themselves have to cover up their own data.

Mike_R The emails were from a British freedom of information query. Greenhouse gases were named by people who have a vested interest, I don't doubt the science of heat retention by gases that's sound. What I do doubt in light of the massive danger to the developed world and its people, that will have to choose food or light, heat or sustenance is sufficient proof to offset the dangerous effects on the people of this tax, I doubt the motives of the politicians as much as you may doubt the greed motives of the companies and I think their motive is the same greed for wealth, power and control.

I want proof the scientists don't have to "hide" and "trick" people to believe, I want technologies ready to replace the current before we create this horrible tax, I want proof that global warming is actually a bad thing and not an improvement, not just fear the doom scenarios with no good science behind them like some bad 2012 end of the world movie or 2014 like a previous story used.

I want a good world for my kids to grow up in.

I think we all want that, the argument isn't do we want it better or worse, of course we all want better. The argument is which is better and which is worse. The difference is I don't believe them and you do.

In case your wondering I'm an independent that before 2008 when I saw extremism take over the party and media had voted almost exclusively democrat. This isn't nearly as politically motivated as I think you'd like to believe, people need to stop believing it's a democrat/republican left/right issue. That's a way to trick people into blind support like in high school sitting in the auditorium and some speaker you had no interest in listening to said "Let's see who can cheer the loudest, first you left, and a smattering of cheers erupt, now you right, and a louder set of cheers come up, we're not going to let the left beat us we think. Now again you left show them who's got spirit", and now since we have an enemy to work against we erupt in loud cheers even though we don't care at all except to work against "them". This is the same trick they are using on us and we are using on each other, and the sad thing is it still works as well as it used to in high school.

Go! I am all for the rant too and pleased you have beat me too it. There is some flaw in this as with many other so called solutions to our energy crisis. I just do not trust! Where is there one group that can actually demonstrate the best solution and also display the integrity of intent through historical actions.

www.flogas.co.uk