Will there be any more new coal plants built in the USA?

That's the whole idea is to kill the coal industry. And Senator Byrd is never going to let that happen. That said, I don't think we need to build any new plants, other than wind, for some time - - what we need is to improve the transmission infrastructure.

I don't know. I'd have to determine who has a vested financial interest in carbon capture and storage technology and then I could make a guess based on politics.

Yes, because the first time Americans are without power because the "renewable" sources can not deliver cheap consistent power, there will be mass uprisings.

If the Obama Cap and Trade bill is enacted (very doubtful), coal will have a re-birth in power plant building. They can buy pollution permits and/or mitigate on a mix and match basis. The whole idea is just perfectly terrible. You can't have less CO2 by burning more coal in a regime that involves buyable pollution permits. You want less CO2? Tax CO2 releases --- not pollution permits, straight taxes -- on a per ton basis, and on a time of day basis. Use the proceeds to subsidize geothermal, hydrogen, solar, wind, and hydro. You tax the bad stuff, then use the money to subsidize the good stuff -- result in 5 years some changes start happening -- in 10 years -- big changes -- in 20 years panoramic changes. Tax and Subsidize -- that does work Give out or trade permits -- that does not work -- so dumb -- just more coal burning -- so dumb.

Where do you think the energy for electric cars comes from? All you greenies seem to live in lala land... definitely from there if you think windmills are going to power the cars in LA... I personally can't wait until other states cut California off.

Cap and trade probably won't pass. Then we should build more coal fired plants. There is an abundance of easily obtainable coal that should be exploited. Burning coal in stationary power plants will make more petroleum fuel, propane and natural gas available for motor fuel. Since coal does not make a good fuel for cars and trucks this is the best use of energy until more nuclear power plants can be built.

Obviously not, but why burn wood as a backup to nuclear energy leaves me puzzled. Lets see 17 applicants/permits for 26 reactors. What are they going to use for backup? Hot Air... http://article.wn.com/view/2009/06/25/NMU_drops_plans_for_partly_coalfired_power_plant It's becoming a laughable matter.

This all depends on what we do with all the carbon dioxide the we collect. if we collect it and put it into cylinders, which will then go into caves or some other approved location, it will cost a lot of money. If the collected carbon dioxide is put into cylinders, and then these cylinders are sent to the Midwest farms they can be used it enrich the air around the crops which will increase the production and growth of the crops that have enriched air. Increases in corn and soybeans can be used to make ethanol and bio-diesel!!! The Direct and Indirect Effects of Increased Carbon Dioxide on Plant Growth http://www.applet-magic.com/CO2plants.htm It should also be noted a recent article in Science Daily , April 17, 2009, titled: Carbon Dioxide Tranformed Into Methanol http://www.sciencedaily.com

Yes, there should be. Placing a moratorium on the building of new plants won’t stop the use of coal to generate electricity – we’ll just be using older, less technologically advanced plants to do it. Even without CCS technology, power plants being developed today are far more efficient and emit far fewer pollutants than the older facilities they are to replace. Our ever-increasing electricity demand dictates that we must start the process of building new plants now. Because coal is domestically abundant and provides almost half of the electricity we use today, replacing it with a higher-cost fuel would raise energy prices for many Americans. With the right investments in technology, we can continue to pursue even lower emissions profiles for coal-based power plants (including the capture and storage of CO2) and keep energy costs affordable for the American consumer.