Here's why carbon capture and storage is a dangerous idea

[kgrandia]

Don't get me wrong it would be amazing if such technology was deployed on a commercial-scale to capture massive amounts of heat-trapping carbon - but it is being used in the meantime to justify the construction of new coal plants now, that may or may see their carbon emissions captured in the next 20 or 30 years - too little too late if we listen to what scientists are saying about the need to reduce carbon emissions by 20% by 2020.

Anyways here's the brief article I wrote on how CCS is being used to justify a massive new coal plant in Arkansas: http://www.coal-is-dirty.com/arkansas-clean-coal-plant-a-joke-with-a-nasty-punchline

[Ghost Dog]

1. But unfortunately there are lots of "in the meantime"

arguments for burning coal (cf. China).

Some sequestered CO2 could be reconverted into synthetic hydrocarbon ethanol-type fuel (CO2 + H2O + solar energy). In fact a closed-cycle could exist, with CO2 emissions being captured & recycled for re-conversion.

See eg. here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x157040

--> Eh, I'm saying we should be pumping down CO2 straight from the atmosphere, not spewing out more of it.

[Zachstar]

2. Coal is going to be built until it is too expensive to build period.

And by too expensive I mean Fusion takes over.