All of the plants on the list are already on the EPA list for shutdown pending development of cleaner power sources. The headache is that that agency, as currently run, hates natural gas plants, which is the practical solution for replacing coal.

Common sense ain't so common, as Will Rogers often said. I have tried to explain how the real world works to many clean energy fanatics, to no avail. When I point out that fossil fuels provide over 70% of the world's power, and that wind, solar, tidal, and geothermal sources provide less than 3% as a means of telling them why cutting use of the fuels necessary to build, ship, and install the clean energy facilities is counterproductive, I'm accused of being a shill for an oil company.

One has to be careful about over-generalizing as well, however.

Centralization is necessary in certain things. What I think is a valid objection is in where the centralization lies. I think there are few cases where centralization of control should rest with the Federal government and energy policy is not one of them. I hold that the Founding Fathers carefully considered which things should be Federalized and made that list very short for a very good reason.

Greed is good according to Rand. Where self-interest turns into exploitation is where there is government-sponsored monopoly - such as commonly exists in energy production/distribution. I fully support businesses operating to make a profit. What I don't support is them making a profit as a result of government policy.

Regulation can be looked at either as coordination of efforts or simply the punishing of one in favor of another. I'm totally against the second, but the first can have merit where used judiciously. The problem is that current government mentality is anything but lassez-faire: they think that the only policy to have is a "hands-on" approach. The default should be to do nothing and allow the market to regulate itself - only stepping in when there is no other choice. Current politicians default mode is to regulate every new thing as soon as it comes out. It's a power trip.

Sometimes communicating sarcasm through written form is difficult. I didn't catch it in your opening so I appreciate the update. I use [/sarcasm] to indicate it in my posts for clarity.

Just as an additional comment, I would like to make note of a few themes:
1. Centralization: The wording of the article is clearly in favor of federal power.
2. Greed: Greed drives these companies, not market value or pride in production.
3. Regulation: Rules are required at all stages of economic development. Businessmen are crooks and the government is there as a moral force to direct them.

If any of these themes does not make you sick, your stomach is much stronger than mine.

As I said, the EPA receives all funding from fines. Thanks pragmatist compromise! ;)

Well said, blarman.

Correct. The companies are taxed, fined, and regulated to such an extent that the clean coal is a pipe dream. The newer technologies could be implemented if there was enough cash left to build the place.

This article is propaganda for sure! Notice it is direct from the weather channel. Note also that the weather channel has a vested interest in claiming weather events are dependent on carbon dioxide levels. Meteorologists are the best recruits and get book deals and speaking fees out of the arrangement.

I hope the sarcasm in the original comment comes through...

the epa is at the top of the food chain of corrupt government agencies. they are one more nail in the coffin of the usa.

I used to work for a company that supplied coal to several major power-producing plants. Replacing the technology sounds workable to the layman, but in reality it usually means rebuilding the plant from the ground up, which can take several years - not to mention the permitting. And where is the power going to come from in the meantime?

The problem is that so-called clean technologies can't make enough power to supply the needs of homes, businesses, etc. It never will. It is a progressive pipe dream. Fossil fuels still remain the best source of energy in the world and they aren't going away any time soon. I'm all for cleaner technologies which make economic sense. But I will point out that the current administration has made it their goal to shut down coal-fired plants: Obama even boasted to that effect on multiple occasions. This article is just more propaganda, because all it talks about is why we need to shut these plants down - it completely ignores the problem of what is going to replace it.

I had a friend who tried to capture his flatulence. As a fellow surfer, he would laugh when breaking wind in his wetsuit. His was an odd, if innocuous, obsession. Al Gore, on the other hand, has a clear mission to rule over you with bovine methane taxes. His obsession, climate change, menaces us all -- or so he believes. But I am hopeful that Mr. Gore relaxes and allows the greenhouse gas to pass silently. After all, it is an inconvenient truth to realize that noise pollution can be just as hazardous to health and reputation as the global warming potential of one's own digestive issues.

You should have told them it was approved by Algore for CO2 sequestration to assure that climate change tests were properly rigged.

I am in favor of a clean environment as much as anyone else, but the EPA is nothing more than the jackbooted thugs of an oppressive government.

And, oh by the way, I just got fined by the EPA for having a 4 L bottle of expired HPLC grade ... water.

And sometimes the characters say so much more than a four letter word that would be completely inappropriate could say.

Hello jbrenner,
Sometimes words are inadequate. :)
Regards,
O.A.

!?*&@#$ the EPA.