Courage is correct that burning liquified coal produces approximately twice the carbon dioxide emissions as burning gasoline.
http://www.sierraclub.org/coal/liquidcoal/
http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/coal/liquids.pdf
Hopefully the Democrats in Congress will realize that liquid coal is a terribly dangerous alternative and put a stop to the legislation to subsidize it. I don't think they would make the mistake of passing it when global warming is becoming such a huge issue, both physically and politically.
2007-06-06 09:21:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dana1981 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Of course not ! How can it ? The Islamists have set themselves against Europe, the USA, China, and India. Globally, they are a minority. Moreover,despite propaganda, Islam is shrinking, both because of a falling birthrate and also because of the huge numbers of apostates. The violence we see in the Muslim world has less to do with any threat to the 'west', than with the fact that Islam is tearing itself apart. In Africa, in the Middle and Far East, all over the world, Muslims kill more Muslims than they kill anyone else. The radicals have created a deep rupture within Islam which will ultimately destroy it.
2016-05-18 01:26:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by brigitte 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
If our world leaders don't start acting in a responsible way toward the environment the weather will get out of control. I have been all around the world in the last couple of years and I now live in Europe and the whole world now has abnormal weather patterns. In 20 years time it is going to be far more worst unless world leaders do something about it and GW is not helping - He will be remembered as a hitler in years to come.
2007-06-06 07:03:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Sam B 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
I know burning coal releases more carbon dioxide than burning oil or gas, but I am not so sure the same is true of liquefied or gasified coal. The process that liquefies or gasifies the coal basically adds hydrogen to the coal. So it may not be as bad as you are thinking. It may only be like finding new deposits of gas and oil, which would be better than just burning the coal, but not as good as something like nuclear fusion.
2007-06-06 08:12:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by campbelp2002 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Yay! Liquid Coal! Good times! Oh the environmental wackos are a funny crowd.
2007-06-06 07:41:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Opoohwan 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
not when the coal fuels run into the same problem as oil.
Its just replacing one problem with the next that will have to be fixed agin very shortly.
2007-06-06 06:33:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by qncyguy21 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
I thought you wanted energy independence, we produce 99.5% of our own coal?
2007-06-06 07:14:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
A Prius that drives like a hummer? I'm in!
2007-06-06 07:29:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Holy cow, do you believe that greenhouse gas crap??
Grow up.
2007-06-06 06:39:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
5⤋
No
2007-06-06 09:19:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋