"Richard Morris" wrote in message
...

George William Herbert wrote:

Richard Morris wrote:

It's already sequestered. Mother Nature has done the
job for us, and I frankly don't see much sense in
digging it up and burning it and then spending a huge
amount of money and energy to re-sequester it.

Why not? The net energy gain after sequestration is still
nearly as high as it is without sequestration. The "huge
amount" is significant, but less than is spent to extract it
and then burn it in the first place.

How much less? References?

This is one I quite liked, while overkill, it has a nice design purity
to it.

http://www.ees.lanl.gov/pdfs/6_zeroemission_52.pdf

Zero emissions coal technology - they are looking at around 93%
efficiency, using the trick of thermo chemical fuel regeneration from
the waste heat.

Pete.