Re: [Phys-l] coal

[Spinozalens@aol.com]

In a message dated 4/8/2009 10:19:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
appell@nasw.org writes:

Bob  LaMontagne wrote:
> Alternate energy sources are "alternate" because  they are
> not quite ready for prime time.

No, alternative energy  sources are alternate because the true cost of
carbon-based fuels has not  been truly accounted for.

If you asked the oil and coal industries to  also pay for the damage
their products do to the environment and to human  health -- and I can
see no reason why any industry and its consumers  should *not* pay for
such collateral damage -- not to mention the cost of  our military
shoring up their oil access in the middle east, you'd come up  with a far
larger figure than gas at $2/gallon. $10/gal?  Higher?

> We have an absurdly large supply of ridiculously
>  cheap coal (sorry - I'm not swayed by arguments of "true" cost).

While  you may not be swayed about arguments of coal's true cost, you pay
for it  anyway, via your health and the health of society. Denying them
is absurd.  Several posts here have made that  clear.

David




)))))))))))))))))))


The supply of Coal is essentially infinite because the habitability of the
planet would be destroyed before we got all the carbon stored in   unburned
coal into the atmosphere.

Bob Zannelli
**************New Deals on Dell Netbooks – Now starting at $299 (A
HREF=http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220635155x1201407495/aol?redir=http:%2F
%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B213771973%3B35379628%3Bw)