The environmental standards I believe you are referring to are not the real problem... natural gas is already more economical, even before you count in the new standards which natural gas meets WITHOUT any changes.
Coal was always going to die. It cannot economically compete unless you drop all environmental regs... and even then, it is a cheaper, and less efficient, option.
This was coming from an engineer whose livelihood depends on coal. His hope is that eventually the government will raise the standards on fracking so that coal can compete again before it is killed in the marketplace.
Eschew Verbosity
Coal - One of the Cleanest Energy Sources in the World!
- 20/02/2013 09:41:02 PM
1183 Views
I wonder if it could work on other fuels?
- 20/02/2013 10:18:08 PM
870 Views
Uh, not quite...
- 21/02/2013 02:45:03 AM
736 Views
But the CO2 levels in our atmosphere are 20% higher than 50 years ago
- 21/02/2013 08:49:29 AM
956 Views
There's a certain irony to being criticized on this one from that sector
- 21/02/2013 05:37:37 PM
926 Views
It seems pretty dubious. It still produces CO2.
- 21/02/2013 10:02:55 AM
742 Views
The technology is still a big improvement over current methods.
- 21/02/2013 05:01:31 PM
765 Views
Oh, I agree. My point is just that sequestration will remain an issue. *NM*
- 22/02/2013 12:39:25 AM
354 Views
Well dense CO2 is easier to get rid of
- 21/02/2013 06:08:33 PM
722 Views
Pretty sure putting it in the dirt would increase atmospheric levels, though. EDIT: Never mind.
- 22/02/2013 12:40:38 AM
751 Views
Probably too little, too late.
- 21/02/2013 04:09:45 PM
832 Views
The excessive regulation is on coal use, not production.
- 21/02/2013 05:00:28 PM
771 Views
Nope.
- 25/02/2013 05:26:39 AM
730 Views