Clean Coal

None of that has statistics on what happens after it burns, the smoke doesn't float away and turn into stars.

>>8717855
>What are /sci/ thoughts on Clean Coal?

The same way i feel about the "cheap" rolex's the guy on the corner sells.

>>8717867
if it's converted to diesel it should be as pollutant as diesel and not more, so why don't use that instead of saudi shit?

>>8717855
A reasonable option, worth developing.

The Earth is much richer in carbon-absorbing minerals than it is in carbon.

>>8717855

Natural gas has already eaten coal's breakfast, lunch and dinner, clean or not.

>>8717883

It takes a lot of energy to convert one fossil fuel into other forms of fossil fuels, and if you don't care about global warming or air pollution then why even bother?

>>8717855
Another CEO lie to profit at the expense of life.

>>8717855
it's a fucking scam and even if it does work, it's more expensive than nuclear power.