<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Air Force Drops Plans For Liquid Coal Plant</title>
	<atom:link href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/02/03/air-force-drops-plans-for-liquid-coal-plant/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/02/03/air-force-drops-plans-for-liquid-coal-plant/</link>
	<description>Patriotism that loves our country, our land, and our planet</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:35:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dennis Miotla</title>
		<link>http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/02/03/air-force-drops-plans-for-liquid-coal-plant/comment-page-1/#comment-37042</link>
		<dc:creator>Dennis Miotla</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Mar 2009 06:34:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redgreenandblue.org/?p=2412#comment-37042</guid>
		<description>When it comes to energy it is not an either or decision.  Wind mills and solar are terribly costly to build and maintain and they require a lot of land in places that have wind and sun. While the US is blessed with money, windy places, sunny places and lots of pristine land, the same is not true for most countries in the world. Big, heavily popolated countries like China and India will burn coal and build nuclear plants as fast as they can. They will utimately set the global GHG emmission rate. Nothing we do in the US will offset their impact. Small, wealthy countrues with no indigenous fuels will build nuclear plants because they generate huge amounts of power in a small area and the fuel supply is not controlled as is the case with oil and gas. Poor countries, well, they will continue to struggle destroying whatever parts of the environment they have to in order to survive and killing others to get their sources.  
 
The world is an ecosystem that ignores national boubndaries. We have only a few choices. We can abolish all national soverinty and develop a highly efficient global energy standard. We can be smug and make ourselves a clean, non-emmitting country and watch the rest of the world poison the planet or we can refine all of the energy technologies so that we can assit each nation in developing the energy forms that best satisfy their geographic, financial and technological realities. As much as I admire the vision of John Lennon, option one is not really an option. Option two serves no purpose other that to assure us honorable mention in the earth&#039;s obituary. Option three requires the US and other &quot;blessed&quot; nations to do the science and to help every other country on earth to achieve its best and cleanest energy alternatives. We can not dictate, we can not lead by example; neither of these have worked.  
 
So please put aside the bitter winner-loser debates and the failed non-proliferation policies and let&#039;s get busy working to optimize each and every energy alternative and make that information, technology and hardware available to all. When it comes to energy alternatives, politicians have said, &quot;we need them all&quot; and for once, truer words could not be uttered. You may say I am a dreamer but when it comes to the air we breathe and the water we drink &quot;we&quot; are all one. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When it comes to energy it is not an either or decision.  Wind mills and solar are terribly costly to build and maintain and they require a lot of land in places that have wind and sun. While the US is blessed with money, windy places, sunny places and lots of pristine land, the same is not true for most countries in the world. Big, heavily popolated countries like China and India will burn coal and build nuclear plants as fast as they can. They will utimately set the global GHG emmission rate. Nothing we do in the US will offset their impact. Small, wealthy countrues with no indigenous fuels will build nuclear plants because they generate huge amounts of power in a small area and the fuel supply is not controlled as is the case with oil and gas. Poor countries, well, they will continue to struggle destroying whatever parts of the environment they have to in order to survive and killing others to get their sources. </p>
<p>The world is an ecosystem that ignores national boubndaries. We have only a few choices. We can abolish all national soverinty and develop a highly efficient global energy standard. We can be smug and make ourselves a clean, non-emmitting country and watch the rest of the world poison the planet or we can refine all of the energy technologies so that we can assit each nation in developing the energy forms that best satisfy their geographic, financial and technological realities. As much as I admire the vision of John Lennon, option one is not really an option. Option two serves no purpose other that to assure us honorable mention in the earth&#039;s obituary. Option three requires the US and other &quot;blessed&quot; nations to do the science and to help every other country on earth to achieve its best and cleanest energy alternatives. We can not dictate, we can not lead by example; neither of these have worked. </p>
<p>So please put aside the bitter winner-loser debates and the failed non-proliferation policies and let&#039;s get busy working to optimize each and every energy alternative and make that information, technology and hardware available to all. When it comes to energy alternatives, politicians have said, &quot;we need them all&quot; and for once, truer words could not be uttered. You may say I am a dreamer but when it comes to the air we breathe and the water we drink &quot;we&quot; are all one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Global Patriot</title>
		<link>http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/02/03/air-force-drops-plans-for-liquid-coal-plant/comment-page-1/#comment-27439</link>
		<dc:creator>Global Patriot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redgreenandblue.org/?p=2412#comment-27439</guid>
		<description>Hard to know what&#039;s really going on without the inside scoop.  The security issue mentioned above doesn&#039;t make much sense, and in the worse case it would only relate to a specific site, not the program in general. 
 
The reality is, as much as we would like to turn coal into liquid fuel (considering our vast resources of coal) using coal in any manner generates a disproportionate level of pollution and CO2 emissions and is not a long term sustainable solution, and there is no technology at present or on the horizon that will change that equation. 
 
Previous comment is perplexing, as there is no threat to national security by canceling the coal-to-gas project. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hard to know what&#039;s really going on without the inside scoop.  The security issue mentioned above doesn&#039;t make much sense, and in the worse case it would only relate to a specific site, not the program in general.</p>
<p>The reality is, as much as we would like to turn coal into liquid fuel (considering our vast resources of coal) using coal in any manner generates a disproportionate level of pollution and CO2 emissions and is not a long term sustainable solution, and there is no technology at present or on the horizon that will change that equation.</p>
<p>Previous comment is perplexing, as there is no threat to national security by canceling the coal-to-gas project.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Air Forces Nixes Coal-to-Liquids Plant in Montana &#124; ecopolitology</title>
		<link>http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/02/03/air-force-drops-plans-for-liquid-coal-plant/comment-page-1/#comment-26972</link>
		<dc:creator>Air Forces Nixes Coal-to-Liquids Plant in Montana &#124; ecopolitology</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 19:14:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redgreenandblue.org/?p=2412#comment-26972</guid>
		<description>[...] Air Force announced that it is abandoning plans for a controversial coal-to-liquid plant in Montana. The move comes despite previous indications during the Bush administration that the Air Force [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Air Force announced that it is abandoning plans for a controversial coal-to-liquid plant in Montana. The move comes despite previous indications during the Bush administration that the Air Force [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert</title>
		<link>http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/02/03/air-force-drops-plans-for-liquid-coal-plant/comment-page-1/#comment-27025</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:30:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redgreenandblue.org/?p=2412#comment-27025</guid>
		<description>What a relief that they aren&#039;t going to have green house gas emissions.  And all we had to do was compromise national security in order to let a bunch of save the world morons sleep better tonight.  I bet if we stopped running police cars, fire trucks and ambulances, WE COULD REALLY SAVE ON EMISSIONS! </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a relief that they aren&#039;t going to have green house gas emissions.  And all we had to do was compromise national security in order to let a bunch of save the world morons sleep better tonight.  I bet if we stopped running police cars, fire trucks and ambulances, WE COULD REALLY SAVE ON EMISSIONS!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

