Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Progressive & Duke to Merge while building more coal plants (Tar Sands Info Too)

Posted 6 years ago on Dec. 30, 2011, 10:11 p.m. EST by FrogWithWings (1367)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Funny, where are the anti-trust enforcers stopping this like they did with AT&T?

Ask why all these coal burning plants are not gasifying it instead of conventionally burning it?

Ask why both high and low temp gasification isn't being used worldwide depending on the material to be converted?

We don't need any more coal or nukes, nor do we need anymore hybrid electric vehicles until a non-china dependent method of efficient dc energy storage has been discovered and proven viable.

The 60 minutes fluff piece was insulting and clearly crafted to train citizens for yet another publicly funded major undertaking with private profits for those who own the coal.

This is bad wrong.



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

Stop the oil, coal, and Gas destruction of our planet.


Plenty more education available at the Scientific American as well as other on-line sources.

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 6 years ago

Check out NASA's James Hansen's interaction with Duke energy. Another of DC's billion dollar welfare recipients who benefit largely from privatized profits from publicly built infrastructure.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

Do you have anything ( link ) handy?

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 6 years ago

The video is less than 3 minutes. The 60 minutes fluff piece on Hansen and Duke energy will be on Youtube soon, if not already.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

Thanks I'll check it out.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

Thanks I will look into it. Though probably not today as I am going through a functional down cycle right now ( heavy lifting like learning new stuff is very difficult at the moment ). But I do look forward to the exploration.

Thanks again.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

The advantage of the electric car is the fuel burned to power MY car is burned in SOMEONE ELSE'S community

Is there any research on gas power efficiency/polution vs power plant to electricity to car ?

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 6 years ago

Yes, it's just math that's only relevant to the topic somewhat obtusely.

The point is that part of the fluff piece showed various politician/meat puppets talking about coal as if the planet has to build more plants (china is building a new one every week) and the people can pay Duke to capture the CO2 and pump it deep under ground.

It's bullshit from both sides of the aisle, DC and more corporate government dynasties.

Yes it showed Obama giving them a handy as if he had no clue other viable alternatives have existed since the early 1900's.

Hell, many WWII machines were powered by clean burning syn gas with phosphorus nitrate fertilizer by product.

Had Hitler known and had access to half the improvements that have occurred since, I suppose he and Stalin would have converted many persons, instead of burying them.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

A good drama movie - The Formula - with Marlon Brando & George C Scott

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 6 years ago


Some interesting Tar Sands observations from Mr Hansen in the video.

Each coal burning plant in the United States burns 19000 tons of coal daily, that's a train of hoppers one mile long...........

The coal mongers allegedly have a 200 year supply so therefore they are not interested in economically efficient ways of burning it cleanly.

Some object to the high temp gasification (new to this century) as the by product is road paving slag. However, for compost-able carbonous materials, they can be gasified with low temp methods and have a by product of fertilizer.

Ask me how I know these things to be true and the technology viable. Well I've built them. In the early 70's, the Engineering department at the University of Florida, built a unit on a 250cc two stroke enduro, that would travel EIGHTY MILES on 2 pounds of wood. A gallon of gas weighs nearly 8 pounds, depending on how it's mixed.

It is possible to do this with 2 stroke engines and create a synthetic gas and lubrication mixture that burns very cleanly and makes lots of power.

It has been done on conventional 4 strokes for years, even diesels.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 6 years ago





The technology has been greatly refined. I'm serious, to see that Duke sucker lie and say coal MUST BE BURNED TO POWER AMERICA, and they way they are doing it, along with the citizens paying TRILLIONS at each plant to capture the CO2 and TRY to see if pumping it underground (which will work until it manages to leak out) will help....

outright lies

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 6 years ago


NASA scientist tells it like it is. Where's Billion Dollar Al "the hypocrite" Gore?

[-] -1 points by GreedKilIs (29) 6 years ago

My eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Frog.