Monday, June 18, 2007
The Washington Post Wrong To Reject Coal-To-Liquids
AAEA supports coal-to-liquids as a reserve for our military and as a tool to reduce oil imports. Our dependence on imported oil poses a great environmental risk because it can lead us to war. Although we believe global warming is the most important environmental issue facing the world, an escalating war leading to nuclear exchange is not very far behind climate change. As such, we believe coal-to-liquids, like the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, is a hedge against military actions based on our oil addiction. So The Washington Post artlcle calling it a boondoggle for big coal is a cop out. The Washington Post is not carbon neutral either. If only we could get oil from Post-to-liquids. Now there is an energy strategy.
Adopting coal-to-liquids will also put pressure on Congress and the public to establish a nationwide carbon dioxide pipeline system that will be necessary to sequester large amounts of the gas from every section of the country. Why talk about sequestration before adopting such a pipeline? This pipeline is also key to sequestering CO2 from coal burning power plants. If we are to keep so much of it out of our little 90 mile high atmosphere, then we must have the capacity to move it around regardless of its end use or storage.