> For those motorists who dominate this transport newsgroup

> For those motorists who dominate this transport newsgroup and fail to
> see a connection between this article and transport here is are some
> hints, power station/electric train/battery charging/hydrogen
> production.

> "Carbon capture and storage (CCS) aims to reduce the climate impact of
> burning fossil fuels by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from power
> station smokestacks and disposing of it underground. Its future
> development has been widely promoted by the coal industry as a
> justification for the construction of new coal-fired power plants.
> However, the technology is largely unproven and will not be ready in
> time to save the climate."

> Do you ever get tired of blowing off your own toes Duhng? The
> first carbon capture power station is already working.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7584151.stm

> For those motorists who dominate this transport newsgroup and fail to
> see a connection between this article and transport here is are some
> hints, power station/electric train/battery charging/hydrogen
> production.
>
> "Carbon capture and storage (CCS) aims to reduce the climate impact of
> burning fossil fuels by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from power
> station smokestacks and disposing of it underground. Its future
> development has been widely promoted by the coal industry as a
> justification for the construction of new coal-fired power plants.
> However, the technology is largely unproven and will not be ready in
> time to save the climate."

> Doug wrote:

>> For those motorists who dominate this transport newsgroup and fail to
>> see a connection between this article and transport here is are some
>> hints, power station/electric train/battery charging/hydrogen
>> production.
>>
>> "Carbon capture and storage (CCS) aims to reduce the climate impact of
>> burning fossil fuels by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from power
>> station smokestacks and disposing of it underground. Its future
>> development has been widely promoted by the coal industry as a
>> justification for the construction of new coal-fired power plants.
>> However, the technology is largely unproven and will not be ready in
>> time to save the climate."

>
> Only one thing *would* save the climate in your world - that's if we all
> went back to...

> As usual greenpeace complain about just about bloody everything.
> Perhaps they'd be happier if the CO2 was just released into the
> atmosphere instead of the power company trying to make an effort to
> sequester it. They're just becoming a parody. Probably full of muppets
> like Doug.

> Interestingly he was against wind power on the basis that it isn't
> performing that well in Denmark

> Boltar yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>

>> As usual greenpeace complain about just about bloody everything.
>> Perhaps they'd be happier if the CO2 was just released into the
>> atmosphere instead of the power company trying to make an effort to
>> sequester it. They're just becoming a parody. Probably full of muppets
>> like Doug.

>
> There was a program on R4 last week where someone ex-~Greenpeace made
> much the same point. As he said, the environmental lobby needs to stop
> beign anti-everything negative know-alls (like Duhg), and to get off the
> fence and decide which technologies they support and which they don't.
>
> Interestingly he was against wind power on the basis that it isn't
> performing that well in Denmark where 20%% of installed capacity is wind
> generation and Denmark has the advantage of being able to balance its
> load by feeding surpluses to Germany, Sweden and Holland. The UK doesn't
> have the ability to balance load in the same way and needs to install
> pump storage (which doesn't exist and isn't scheduled to be built). ...