Budget overrun overstated.

The Illinois-based FutureGen project is back! Reasons why include: stimulus money, an Illinois-born president along with other, unnamed advisers also from Illinois, and an administration that is promoting "clean energy" as one of its core goals.

We just hope that their math is a bit better this time. Or does that really even make a difference? What do you think?

Read about it @ BNET Energy.

The United States' transition away from coal energy has begun.

Permits for new coal plants are being denied and many that were in production are being abandoned. With the Energy Department forecasting a 22% increase in power usage in the next 20 years, it is obvious that the vast majority of this increased power will come from alternative sources. This is further evidenced by the $16.8 billion of stimulus allocated for renewable energy compared to the relatively paltry amount of $3.4 billion for clean coal technologies.

Chris Morrison of BNET Energy contends that it would be wise for environmentalists to allow the construction of new plants with better emission-control technologies on the condition that older plants with antiquated technology be closed. While it is true that new plants are considerably cleaner, the general consensus is that "clean coal" technology, which includes carbon capture and sequestration, will not be readily available for at least another decade. It would be more costly to build new plants that would have to be either shut down or overhauled completely in order to implement CCS technology after just ten years. Factor in the exorbitant expense of implementing carbon capture technology and the prospect of building a coal-fired plant becomes financial suicide.

Still, despite the block against new plants, very few existing coal-fired power plants that are in operation have been shut down. With over half of the nation's energy derived from these plants, it is easy to see why.

However, once laws are enacted that impose costly fines against coal producers for carbon dioxide emissions these existing coal factories will certainly begin to diminish. As renewable energy becomes more efficient and reliable the dwindling profits of the coal energy factories will be squeezed further by the new competition.

For better or worse, the transition has certainly begun.

Sources:
Companies rethink coal plants from USA Today.
Coal plants checked by enviro campaigns, costs from The Washington Post.
Cost is Chief Barrier to Clean Coal from The New York Times.
Time for Environmentalists to Compromise on Coal from BNET Energy.

We stated in a previous post that the Obama administration did not favor coal or clean coal technologies.  It has become increasingly apparent that our statement was inaccurate and, thanks to a new article on Reuters, we will complete the unpleasant process of eating our words.

Now it appears that the new administration is committed to coal and the coal industry is singing its praises as a result.  This coupled with the billions of dollars forthcoming from the stimulus package surely has the entire industry breathing a deep sigh of relief.

Read about it at Reuters.

It is no secret that the new administration does not favor coal or clean coal technologies. 

On January 21st, West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller sat before the Senate Finance Committee challenging president Obama's perspective.  Rockefeller's compelling argument included lobbying for aid from the massive stimulus package currenlty passing through Congress.  He proposed that a portion of the money should be used for research and technology which would seek to significantly reduce the carbon dioxide emissions from coal.