MONTREAL, Dec. 6 - Under pressure from other industrialized countries at talks here on global warming, the Bush administration announced on Tuesday that it had signed an agreement with a coalition of energy companies to build a prototype coal-burning power plant with no emissions.
So instead of saying "Coal plant will have zero emissions (No Pollution)", the LWM starts out with "prototype" and proceed to say this agreement is because of outside pressure. If someone had found the cure for Aids, wouldn't this be shouted from the rooftops. I believe this could be just as big as development as that, of course assuming that CO2 is a big threat that is threatening the world.
The project, called FutureGen, has been in planning stages since 2003. But the Energy Department said here that a formal agreement had been signed under which companies would contribute $250 million of a cost estimated at $1 billion.
This is the only other mention of the of the Zero Emitting Coal-burning power plant. Even this tries to imply that (as the NYT's spells out explicitly later) it was in the planning stages and was revealed to sway public opinion during the talks in Montreal.
Caption: Protestors in a plaza outside climate talks in Montreal urged passersby to take action to save the Arctic and its inhabitants.
So instead of showing what the plant would look like or a picture of Bush, they instead show protesters which has nothing to do with Zero Emissions Coal Power Plants.
The rest of the article is below...
Environmental advocates at the talks criticized the announcement, saying it was intended to distract from continuing efforts by the American delegation to block discussion of new international commitments to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases that scientists link to global warming.
"You are watching 163 nations do an elaborate dance to try to make progress when the United States is sitting in the middle of the road trying to obstruct," said Alden Meyer, a representative of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a group that has long criticized the Bush administration's climate approach.
"It's getting to be like Charlie Brown with Lucy holding that football," he said. "Every time, at the last minute, the U.S. pulls it away."
The talks here are just one chapter in an international effort to rein in heat-trapping smokestack and tailpipe gases that began in Toronto in 1988 at a conference on the changing atmosphere. Ever since then, climate scientists, with widening consensus, have linked a global warming trend to increasing levels of those gases in the atmosphere.
The linkage led to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, but that treaty had no binding limits on emissions. And while parties pledged to avoid "dangerous" human influence with the climate, they sidestepped defining "dangerous." The Kyoto Protocol, which took effect this year, is an addendum to that pact with binding targets but limited participation.
While more than 150 countries have ratified the protocol, only about three dozen industrialized ones are subject to the binding terms.
The world's biggest emitter, the United States, has not ratified it. And the fast-growing giants of the developing world, China and India, continue to insist that they will not accept cuts in emissions.
Also circulating at the talks were copies of a letter sent to President Bush on Monday by two dozen senators, including two Republicans, urging the administration to change its tactics.
"The United States should, at a minimum, refrain from blocking or obstructing such discussions amongst parties to the convention, since that would be inconsistent with its ongoing treaty obligations," said the letter, signed by Senators Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine; Lincoln Chafee, Republican of Rhode Island; and 21 colleagues.
Administration officials here declined to respond directly, instead referring reporters to a statement made at the talks on Dec. 2 by Harlan L. Watson, the lead climate negotiator for the United States.
Mr. Watson said the United States opposed any new negotiations under the 1992 treaty. "We believe that it is best to address this complex issue through a range of programs and technology initiatives," he said.
What can I say? Instead of hailing this as an accomplishment of engineering, they talk about environmental criticisms.
Hat tip to CommonsBlog.
Good comments and a link to FutureGen -
Tomorrow's Pollution-Free Power Plant...
The initiative is a response to President Bush's directive to draw upon the best scientific research to address the issue of global climate change. The production of hydrogen will support the President's call to create a hydrogen economy and fuel pollution free vehicles; and the use of coal will help ensure America's energy security by developing technologies that utilize a plentiful domestic resource.
And no where does it mention Hydrogen generation in the NYT's article. I wonder why???