In discussions of Global warming and environment I hear reports
of the "important research" going on at the Lawrence Livermore Labs
where "innovations" in Carbon Capture technology is supposed to
take place. Unless this tech they propose to use is "really new"
and really works, it should not replace known and effective
methods, at this time. It is too expensive in cost and energy use
to be used at this time.
I have always been doubtful and would caution regulators to
consider both the expense of such methods and look for PROVEN
evidence that these methods or Carbon Capture and Storage, work in
new, efficient and effective ways, before giving them priority over
known methods, such as soil improvement by cover cropping,
reforestation and change to clean energy systems, changes
like electric cars and public transport that is green, instead of
millions of cars on the roads every day. People need to change how
they live, not store our never-ending pollution under-ground in an
earthquake state, like California. A couple of shakes and the
carbon is in the air again.
Tried, true and helpful with food production, minimal energy
inputs and resulting in long term usefulness, like better food and
reforested area protections, clean reliable transportation and a
reliable grid production for sharing the benefits and reducing
neighborhood pollution in frontline communities, should be our
immediate focus. Anything that prolongs the problem of burning
fossil fuels, is not the answer for now. To continue to burn
fossil fuels, instead of finding wind power and solar, geothermal
or other clean power, for now, is a mistake.
Thank you for your VERY close look at what and how this proposal
for Carbon Capture is a workable investment and certain to be a
great help, for our immediate future.