“We’re in the Lead in Global Climate Change”

Addressing a renewable energy conference in Washington today, the Prez said:

"America is in
the lead when it comes to energy independence; we’re in the lead when
it comes to new technologies; we’re in the lead when it comes to global
climate change — and we’ll stay that way."

Bush threw out some big round numbers that "we" apparently have been spending on "alternative" fuels, although that list includes corn., which few experts in the field consider much help. The Prez heavily touted cellulosic ethanol fuel production, even though recently the USDA said that it will not be economically viable for years — not until 2013 at the earliest.

It’s enough to make you wonder if Bush includes CO2 emissions in the category of "being in the lead when it comes to global climate change."

But to be fair, I read the entire speech, and although it’s mostly misleading and forgettable nonsense with a few buzzwords ("biofuels," "clean," "renewable") thrown in, the Prez notably did not mention the hateful oxymoron "clean coal."

Maybe that’s because after spending close to $1.8 billion on a much-heralded "clean coal" plant in Texas, the Bush Administration Department of Energy has thrown in the towel on development of that technology, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Under the project, called FutureGen Industrial
Alliance Inc., the government was to support the construction of a
nearly pollution-free coal plant that would have turned coal into
hydrogen-rich synthetic gas for generating electricity while pumping
carbon dioxide underground for permanent storage. Carbon dioxide from
fossil-fuel combustion is a primary greenhouse gas linked to global
warming.

In recent years, however, the project’s estimated cost
has roughly doubled from an original level of $950 million, driven
partly by rising prices for certain materials like steel and equipment
and by higher-than-anticipated labor costs.

Some industry observers felt the eventual cost could
have exceeded $2 billion, which would have made it one of the most
costly power plants ever constructed, given its modest, 275-megawatt
size. One megawatt can power 500 to 1,000 homes. In a conference call
yesterday, Clay Sell, deputy secretary of the DOE, said department
officials concluded that the project’s costs were likely to rise even more.

To repeat, according to the paper, if actually built, it would have been "one of the most costly power plants ever constructed, given its modest, 275-megawatt size."

Another sterling Bush effort come to naught.