Advocating research into carbon capture and sequestration doesn't strike me as "soft on coal."  It's realistic to research whether or not CSS has real potential or no to help cut greenhouse gas pollution.  

More to the point, I don't think Obama's corruptible in the way this Treehugger post insinuates.  He's ambitious, practical, and a coalition-builder -- there was nothing to be gained by alienating independent voters during the campaign.

While I do agree with you here Emily, we should be looking into this to see if it is a viable technology.  At some point we are going to have to come to terms with the fact that we (individuals, corporations, governments) are going to have to make some changes.  Many we might not be comfotable making. Its things like CCS that say "we don't have to change they way we act."  We can continue down the same path, but just tweek it a little so we don't have to make the hard decisions.  The same goes for biofuels; we can continue to drive our cars, we will just put something different in the tank.  This does nothing to address the problem of the one person one car (or truck) system littered with sprawling freeways, parking lots and traffic jams.

Dan is right!  Although I'm not so concerned about the campaign contributions, the technology for processing "clean coal" is simply NOT HERE.  It may become some form of reality in the future, but the highly-touted "carbon capture and sequestration" is not a panacea.It is far from working well enough to count on, though it is being widely hyped..

First, often the geology is not suitable for sequestration.  Beyond that, there is a lot of OTHER environmental damage from coal mining operations (in various forms).  People MUST learn to think more broadly -- the streams, destroyed ecosystems, etcetera during the processes of extracting coal are extremely significant.

RESEARCH is one thing, but every time we hear that daggone ad that uses the clip from Pres Obama's campaign speeches in Virginia, we just get sick.  The rhetoric was great -- the science faulty at best.

We know personally quite a bit about NASA's work to "get a man on the moon" and other space-based science, as well as the realities on the ground.

Sadly, that clip and the resulting ads have been spun into support for more coal-fired power plants in Virginia -- now with the blessing of the new Democratic candidate for the next Va. Governor,  Creigh Deeds.  Deeds is perhaps the best candidate to defeat the Republican gubernatorial candidate, but he needs those downstate coal interests to win -- and we all will suffer.

Don't people realize that coal is still D-I-R-T-Y? WOW!  

There would be jobs for coal-country Virginia if we were to look at REAL evolving renewables technology, with widespread potential, such as plasma arc gasification of municipal solid waste for energy and fuels.

"King Coal" must be deposed.

Well, okay, but to play out your arguments, if CSS is something that might work in the future, i.e. if we do more research on it, then we've got to get started on the research, right?

Of course, research is fine, but "clean coal" is far out.  Ditto with nuclear - - there was another discussion somewhere re how even France, a leader in recycling nuclear waste, is hitting walls. etc.

One of the WORST things is the wonderful huge enhanced power grid envisioned by many.  One of the purposes, of course, is to transport energy from the windy midwest to the heavily populated East-NE coast.

SMALLER GRIDS are less vulnerable to disasters, natual or manmade.

Population centers produce endless wastestreams of municipal solid waste that could be 99% converted to energy, fuel, and some construction byproducts. Ms. Gertz -- there was a discussion regarding Plasma Arc Gasification technology several months ago, which you were pretty cool on.  Oh, well.

Population center trash-to-energy -- smaller grids -- should be good, but only in the U.S.A. does everything have to be bigger to be better!

I don't have time to look it up. But perhaps it would be worth another look.  This technology is advancing MUCH faster than several of the more exotic alternatives.  Remember that the Plasma G. was NOT BURNING -- rather, it is molecular dissociation.

Maybe you could find time someday to pursue a couple of references and do an article on it.  If you can't find it here on Change., i can look it up for you later.

YES -- weeding out the deniers (in so-called scientific positions) would help tremendously. 

Who can do it?

Good points, Craig.  It's pretty clear Obama is relying heavily on Congress to put his policy priorities over the top, and stepping in publicly on legislation when needed.  

I can really appreciate this strategy, if only because it holds the feet of the representatives and senators to the fire -- and you can see that some have just been waiting for the right moment to really get to work, a la Waxman and Markey.

I am trying to get a sense of how well supporters of their bill are rallying the public.

I tend to believe the White House visitor's log issue is more about the Secret Service and the executive branch being cagy for reasons of security and strategy, as they perceive them.  

But those logs were (properly) on the pubic record prior to the Bush administration, and it's disappointing that the Obama administration is trying to retain this bit of Bush and Cheney's executive power grab.

As for the coal industry...well, I'm beginning to think Obama's playing a long game here.

yeah, but Pickins wants to keep the alternate energy in the hands of corporations.

For example, after Katrina, when New Orleans was a clean slate for rebuilding, our local governments gave Enrontergy a ton of money and picked up insuring their infrastructure.

For the same money we could all have had energy independence. Every month I pay two "hurricane taxes" on my bill on top of the petrol add on which are in total more than my charge for energy.

We need every houshold to have it's own energy independence, not some corporation adding massive wind turbines to the landscape to put into the failiing grid.

Issue: For example, after Katrina, when New Orleans was a clean slate for rebuilding, . . .

THAT is exactly when the "clean slte areas" should have been left to regenerate as wetlands -- for natural storm buffers and "nature's nurseries".

But between the factors of human nature, the N.O. Mayor, the Corps of Engineers, and Brad Pitt's cute pink tents - - everyone's just hot to rebuild.  So the same thing can happen over and over.  I'm sure you read the Natl. Geographic that foretold the Gulf Coast mess . . . months before it happened, based on predictable scientific info.

TULANE scientists know that ol' slate will be wiped clean again. Politicians, do-gooders and wishful thinkers apparently don't want to think rationally.

Your last two points are salient enough that the wingnuttery of the first will be overlooked for now.

Please keep your comments and tone constructive if you'd like to continue to participate in this conversation.

Mel,

For the record, your statement "It had to be done with his permission" is incorrect. Obama is a public figure, and his campaign speeches are public record, and anyone can use them.

The world is not black or white - it includes all the shades of grey. The "lesser of two evils" is also the best choice - it just depends on whether your glass is half full or half empty.

Craig

Thanks for injecting some reality, Craig!  The oft-used "clean coal" comment was made here in Virginia (as well as other places, I'm sure).  It was an unfortunate stupid comment. But we do trust Obama's learning capacity -- if he will really listen to Secy. Chu's "no such things as clean coal" comments.

LEADING THE COUNTRY is not quite so easy. YOu can't write off and antagonize people you do not agree with - - - without at least giving them a chance to learn.

It isn't just about getting re-elected, either.  He needs to develop ever-broader congressional support, and many of them are too entrenched in various positions.

You can call Pres. Obama the "lesser of two evils" from your perspective, but FDR got a lot of bad mouthing, too.  Have you ever thought about the good stuff -- like park improvements nationwide, and our interstate highway system, and the many things that FDR did to put people to work AND build infrastructure? 

Then there are the warmongers, who would over-react and go bomb Iran tomorrow . . . so our military people could die because we messed in another country's internal politics again.

Obama needs to learn some things, but if he isn't cutting off anyone, that's okay also.  We think he will come out okay. . . thus we will, also.  Imperfect is not automatically impossible.

At least Obama recognizes imperfections when he sees/finds them, and doesn't hide behind lies.

As for Sotomayor - - well, she's probably one of the BEST qualified nominees in years!  She has upheld our laws as a judge.