Investing in Carbon Capture

We are not looking into the health issues humans from mining coal to begin with. Investing in carbon capture is currently the only clean coal reality being presented as an option to American investors. American investors who are just tired of dealing with dirty energy as a whole.

Green Peace is not for clean coal via carbon capture storage:

Sustainable Times David Allison talked with Green Peaces San Francisco Press Contact Daniel Kessler (San Francisco):

CCS is a technology that is still in development. Expanding current technology is really what we should be talking about. CCS is largely untested, and would need development of a large infrastructure just to see if it could work.

We have an extensive review of it on our web site. Look up- False Hope: Why Carbon Capture and Storage Wont Save The Climate.

In this impact review Emily Rochon states (( Ibid Rochon: pg. 15, et., al..)), and reiterates numerous times in different ways that:

  • Carbon capture is the most energy-intensive part of the process.
  • Carbon capture systems have yet to be applied to a single utility scale.
  • Costs for installation are estimated to result in a near doubling of plant costs.
  • Retrofits could be even more costly.
  • There are many green investment firms like the New Alternatives Fund that will not put a dime down on coal research.

    Yet there are other green investment firms, like those supported by the marketing arm of Green Chip Review, who see the grey area in potential clean coal investment. Evan though Green Chip Review primarily promotes more revolutionary energy investing in what is considered as the new green economy according to the current mainstream.

    Nick Hodges position in the Green Chip Review (( http://www.angelnexus.com/o/web/4479)) is not for the promotion of the coal industry. He points out that over forty percent of the worlds electricity is dependant on coal. And that the price of storage in America has dropped to $50 per metric ton.

    He continues his cautious anti-thesis by stating that while coal should be replaced by renewable energy. Coal is going to be in the mix for a short while longer. And the government is going to force the coal industry to curb its emissions. Especially after the next agreement after Kyoto is signed by both the United States of America and by China.

    He feels that if the coal industry is going to be forced to emit less. Than investors should profit from it. This is where he concludes his thought.

    The original thought here is that investors who are thinking ofcashing in on the possibility of cleaner coal should consider the buying power of American coal companies being able to purchase carbon stocks from companies that earn them by not emitting carbon.

    If the carbon stocks turn out to be less costly that CCS. The stocks will be purchased first.

    The law of the land is that a company must do what is monetarily cheapest in order to protect the gains of the investors.

    So far the only natural safe way of containing carbon long term has been in the phenomenon of submerged trees in riparian forests.

    Investing in carbon capture and storage may not make clean coal a reality.

    But the players recommended by Hodge are know for their ability to successfully work CCS for large natural gas companies around the world.

    An aspect Hodge neglects to mention in his anti-thesis is:
    If these firms are successful the sale of carbon stocks may also make this whole thing profitable. : Is Clean Coal a Reality?

    If these firms are successful the sale of carbon stocks may also make this whole thing profitable.

    • None Found

    Posted in News by admin on October 10, 2008.

    New Alternatives Mutual Fund | Home | World Energy Outlook 2008