Coal-to-liquid diesel fuel discussion at Treehugger
There is a movement in Washington that promotes coal-to-liquid fuel as an alternative fuel that would be grouped along with ethanol and biodiesel. If this were the case, U.S. incentives for ethanol production and coal-to-liquid would be split between the farmers and the coal miners. One might think that this is a good thing, as competition in the marketplace is usually good for the consumer. However, if you thought that ethanol was not a good replacement for gasoline, you should probably not check out diesel derived from coal. The energy that is used in the production of coal-to-liquid is pretty high, comparatively, and produces hazardous materials as a by-product. Thus, the production of diesel from coal is of interest to those concerned with the environment.
Therefore, Treehugger gives six of their own suggestions to perform a "proper and balanced risk management review", one of which is to always compare it with other alternative fuels and produce matching bills for each of them. I think, personally, that diesel engines are a good alternative to gasoline engines. However, when one messes that up by undoing the environmental benefits of having a diesel engine in the first place, why bother?
Click here for all articles from ABG that deal with coal-to-liquid.
Related:
- EcoGeek Hates Liquid Coal
- New Congress sets energy strategy; will address issues with piecemeal approach
[Source: Treehugger, Blue Climate and U.S. Senate]

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Obewan 2:56PM (5/21/2007)
The best plans for liquid coal advocate the use of nuclear power at the refinery. That would produce a fuel with less carbon emmissions than ethanol or biodiesel, and that is also cleaner than regular diesel. We really need to do something else to ensure our continued food production since we only have about 35 years left on our current oil supply. Ethanol can only kick in about 15% if we use ALL the corn production in the US. That for sure does not even make up for the insane SUV waste!
Reply