Comments on: A cleaner path to coal: The ABCs of IGCC technology

By: Tenton Horton

Tenton Horton — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:44:55 +0000

My brother-in-law has “black lung disease” from years of working and breathing coal dust as a coal-miner. The best thing that we can do for coal miners is to get them out of these mines. I have met numerous former coal miners who now work at good above the ground jobs. They are all so very glad to be out of these dangerous and unhealthy mines. Clean burning coal would not put anyone out of a job…in my opinion…and would likely create new jobs as well.

By: yiling.li

yiling.li — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 07:41:13 +0000

very good

By: Steve Hurm

Steve Hurm — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 12:13:57 +0000

If you want an example of lipstick on a pig, try this on for size “clean nuclear waste” I’ll stick with coal thank you.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 17:38:49 +0000

If we are going to call it “Clean Coal”, should we call the disease “Clean Lung”. Looks pretty black and sooty to me! When our air and streams are free of coal’s contaminants, I might be able to better stomach the expression clean coal. Until then, it looks like lipstick on a pig.

By: Melissa Molina

Melissa Molina — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:20:57 +0000

In response to Annette O. Bigler posted on 12/27. Clean Coal is not an oxymoron, it is a reality. The ‘struggling coal worker families’ will not be ‘tossed aside’ due to clean coal. In fact, if the clean coal technologies continue to be developed and more theories are put in practice it will secure their jobs in coal. Clean coal is not a different coal than is currently being used, it is the same coal going though new processes to control the emissions and pollutants, thus the term ‘clean’. Furthermore, because it is the same coal to begin with, the coal mining men and women will continue doing the same work they have done, without need for retraining as suggested in your comment.
In addition, I would like to point out that ‘Helen Sizmore’ apparently spent as much time at this website trying to understand what GE is doing as you did. Had she truly understood, she would know that coal gasification and clean coal are great things for the future of coal miners along with boilermakers, pipe fitters and numerous other trades that do and will participate in the building and maintaining of these coal gasification plants.
I am a union boilermaker and our workforce isn’t waiting for GE to ‘retrain’ us for this ‘new industry’. We are already trained, organized and ready for work. The ‘bitter truth’ is that uneducated opposition is slowing the progression to cleaner coal and more efficient power plants because they simply don’t understand the industry or it’s processes. In doing so, the opposition are participating in the ‘tossing to the side’ workers in the coal industry while they stand idle unable to work because they are waiting for laws to pass and public opinion change.

By: Steve Hurm

Steve Hurm — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 21:01:52 +0000

Why does everyone think that clean energy mean a death sentance to coal? Clean coal to me means a new twist on an old technology. It is true that old power plants are both dirty and inefficient. I say lets replace them with modern clean and efficient coal fired power plants! I am a Boilermaker by trade and I am trying to make people understand that the coal fired power plants you see today are old and inefficient. Clen coal technology makes it possible to solve two national problems (pollution and growing energy demand). By the way, Obama is not against he coal industry, he is anti pollution. See the difference?

By: Annette O. Bigler

Annette O. Bigler — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:33:05 +0000

I am very suspicious of the “11/20/2009 11:54 pm Posted by helensizemore.”

It seems more like some propaganda of the coal industry. It is interesting that the “pro-coal” postings are so articulate and the opposing view is “Helen Sizemore” an alleged poorly educated individual.

Everyone knows that clean coal is an oxymoron. If the “clean coal” is created the struggling coal worker families will be tossed aside like so much used Kleenex because they are not educated enough. If GE and other multi-trillion entities had any sense of corporate responsibility they would see to it that the workers that made them rich would be retrained to work in the new industries.

BUT don’t hold your breath. Not only do the industries not acknowledge “corporate responsibilities”, they probably don’t know how to spell it.

(I also will be amazed if this is posted unedited if at all. You see, the truth is a bitter pill to swallow.)

By: Nate

Nate — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:28:19 +0000

An improvement, absolutely. The solution, absolutely not. With present technology, Nuclear is the source that the US should pursue, particularly for baseload power. Solar and wind will likely have their place as well, but the efficiency throughout their entire lifecycle simply isn’t there yet.
GE is also involved in nuclear with their ESBWR being a credible plant for new constructions.

By: Jeff Turner

Jeff Turner — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 05:36:41 +0000

I just hope that what gets pumped into the ground does not have some terrible repercussion down the road. If coal can be cleaned up, then clean it up. I would like to see all the mercury advisories for eating fish in my rivers eventually go away, but that aint going to happen as long as coal fired power plants are allowed to turn mercury airborne.

By: Sascha

Sascha — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:03:00 +0000

I hope the “coal miner’s wife” comment was posted by industry people because nobody should be that poorly educated! Anyway, why would we not change based on what we know now and what we are learning every day from the worlds scientists? “but I didn’t know…” isn’t a good excuse for your grandkids because we do know what we’re doing and what we have to do to give our future a better chance.