“An exposé of planetary scale.”
~JAMES E. HANSEN  
 
Clearing the PR Pollution that Clouds Climate Science

Desmog Video

You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.


 



Valley of Death for Big Coal?

Is Big Coal getting worried? You bet. A desperate appeal went out this week from the website “Expose Obama.com” to pitch in on their robo-fax campaign to kill the Waxman Markey bill.

The usual climate-denial hyperbole is now reached the shrill pitch of a dentist’s drill:

The U.S. House – on a day that shall live in infamy – passed this so-called Cap-and-Trade legislation by the narrow margin of 219-212, with the help of eight Republican-in-Name-Only turncoats.”

There are few more howlers in this on-line appeal:

Senators need to wake up and consider [Climate expert] Christopher Moncton’s common sense solution for the global warming fantasy that he identifies as a non-problem. It is, he says, “To have the courage to … do nothing.””

Christopher Moncton?

The skeptical brain-trust seems to have hit rock bottom. Otherwise known as the“3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley,” Moncton holds no scientific degree, instead having graduated with a diploma in journalism.

This does not stop him from hectoring the scientific community for their shoddy work, or appearing as an “expert” at events hosted by the Heartland Institute in the company of the likes of F. Fred Singer.

The folks behind the kill the Waxman bill campaign are also relying on the credibility of Senator James Inhofe, who famously called climate change “a hoax.”

Perhaps we should instead question the credibility of Mr. Inhofe, who accepted $662,506 in donations from oil companies between 2000 and 2008, and $152,800 in coal contributions during the 110th Congress alone. $94,500 of those dollars were from industry PACS.

Maybe the real reason that the anti-Waxman lobby is freaking out is that even this watered down bill could spell the economic end of the coal industry. This week’s New York Times compared the bill to Valley of Death for Big Coal.

Unless they come up with a breakthrough technology to capture carbon and store it, coal is dying,” said Kenneth Green, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “If this [bill] does what they want it to do, I would say coal is on its way out.”

However, so-called “carbon capture and storage” (CCS) remains little more than an expensive PR effort. Big Coal has been shoveling money out the door in an desperate campaign to convince the public that coal is “clean”. Even the best minds in the public relations business must have been scratching their heads over how to sell that slogan.

So expensive is this hypothetical band aid that there remains no single commercial-scale example of CCS anywhere in the world. Two of the nation’s largest coal burning utilities just dropped out of a long-delayed demonstration project.

This is in spite of several governments committing billions in taxpayer’s dollars to trying to make it happen – often at the expense of emerging renewable technologies.

And then there is the irresolvable risks (and associated legal liabilities) that this powerful asphyxiant might not stay underground even if you managed to get it there.

In 1986, a volcanic lake in Africa belched a plume of CO2 a mere 90 meters high. Since CO2 is heavier than air, the invisible gas flowed quickly down the adjacent valley displacing oxygen in a kill-zone that spread 19 kilometers.

1,800 people, 3,000 cattle and countless birds and insects dropped dead where they stood in a modern day version of Pompeii. Think about that the next time you hear the slogan “clean coal”.

But the main reason Waxman Markey is terrifying to Big Coal is simple economics. Even mild carbon pricing will force utility companies to quickly conclude that generating electricity with the world’s dirtiest fuel is a money loser. No new coal plants will be built and over time this once mighty industry and political lobby will simply cease to exist.

Meanwhile, emission-free energy technologies like solar are already approaching the dreaded “grid parity” with coal on price. Once that happens, generating electricity with a filthy and more expensive fuel like coal is truly on the way out.

 

 

 



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

With any other issue, such lies would be prosecuted.

"With any other issue, such lies would be prosecuted."

Only in your dreams. Opinion, and the right to express it, is fundamentally protected in the US under the First Amendment.

Please name any issue where different opinions are prosecuted.

It’s beside the point, but “hate”opinions. There is definitely a point where expressing an “opinion” is completely irresponsible (similarly being contrarian for laughs, Paul). I think it’s clear upon which side of the line intentionally sewing the seeds of confusion lies.

if we add all the exxon money that your site cites to all the people, institutions etc that supposedly get this money how does it compare to 300,000,000? btw, how was the un at dispersing food in the "food for oil" scam errr sorry program? i wish you were fools b/c it would be easier for your collective minds to change but your not. you are an agenda driven group who cares more about extraction of us dollars than extraction of coal. obamunism...the road to serfdom....peace, rich

UAH MSU has officially released their June 2009 data. The anomaly was +0.01 °C, meaning that the global temperature was essentially equal to the average June temperature since 1979. i.e no significant temperature change in the last 30 years.

According to the IPCC, the surface warming trend should be around 3 °C per century which should translate to a 4-5 °C warming per century in the mid troposphere where the greenhouse effect has the strongest muscles. You see that according to the last 30 years of the data, the IPCC overestimates the warming trend by two orders of magnitude!

Because the mid troposphere is the dominant locus of the greenhouse "fingerprint", this is the most appropriate method to check the validity of the IPCC predictions. Their two orders-of-magnitude error is equivalent to the mistake of a biologist who confuses squirrels with elephants.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

FOLLOW US!
 
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR E-NEWSLETTER
Get our Top 5 stories in your inbox weekly.
DESMOG TIP JAR
Help us clear the PR pollution that clouds climate science.

About the climate cover-up

About the climate cover-up

Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.

There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.


www.know-the-number.com

Our Climate is Changing!
Please download Flash Player.