Monday, November 03, 2008


Why are both candidates talking about clean coal, when we have the technology to convert to wind and solar energy? Is this really a question anymore? Are we serious? Have we gone so far down this path, that we're not even willing to look?

Maybe I'm getting a lot of mixed messages, but from what I understand of where the technology is at right now, we could be free of these limited resources and be completely reliant on natural, clean energy to power our homes, but we don't because a bunch of corporate executives don't want to lose profits, and that scares everybody who stands to lose a job in the related industry, but come on. What ever happened to progress? What happened to "change?" I want a new system.

1 comment:

andrew j. ulasich said...

I think the argument goes that it would take a long time to shift to wind and solar, etc. So, in the meantime, we use 'clean coal.' The argument is also that clean coal is a possibility. Though as far as I know nobody is ready to implement it. Nobody has really figured out how to do it. Some say those two words shouldn't be used together.

I'm with you. Clean coal seems to be nothing more than a way for people to make lots of money. I, too, want a new system.