Didn't say I had one. I was just one of those trying to "keep real" about coal, and that NO energy source is without consequences. The fact that we're only getting about 35% thermal efficiency out of it (65% burned coal is going to waste) should already be a clue that it's not the future and never should be seen as such. There's no such thing as "clean coal" - it's a right-wing invented term of spin used to deflect criticism of the abuses against the environment that the coal industry preys on.
For myself, I really want to see two "great inventions":
1) artificial photosynthesis - solar power that converts CO2 to O2. If we're making it too damn hard for the plants to do it all (and are killing the algae in the oceans that used to do it for us), then we'll have to do it ourselves.
2) *direct* energy. Heat, or something else (Nuke) that takes the excited electrons and released chemical energy and directly puts it into the grid rather than relying on magnetic turbines to do it. Even Nuclear power is really just a giant steam-producer for a large magnet array (at a 45% efficiency, mind you - better than coal). There's got to be some better way of tapping heat into electricity besides this.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-12-23 10:20 pm (UTC)For myself, I really want to see two "great inventions":
1) artificial photosynthesis - solar power that converts CO2 to O2. If we're making it too damn hard for the plants to do it all (and are killing the algae in the oceans that used to do it for us), then we'll have to do it ourselves.
2) *direct* energy. Heat, or something else (Nuke) that takes the excited electrons and released chemical energy and directly puts it into the grid rather than relying on magnetic turbines to do it. Even Nuclear power is really just a giant steam-producer for a large magnet array (at a 45% efficiency, mind you - better than coal). There's got to be some better way of tapping heat into electricity besides this.