10/07/2005

Synfuels

First, let me say that I am not, repeat, am not going to be Scrooge on Gov. Schweitzer's idea of turning Montana coal into synfuels. But there's an old adage that says when a thing looks too good to be true, it probably is. And in all of the press coverage I've seen, and certainly in the Governor's promotion of his plan (in the New York Times, no less!), no one seems to be talking much about any feasibility issues or potential downsides. I wish someone who knows a lot more about this than I do would step up to the plate and tell me if this is pie in the sky or the second coming.

And you have to love the Tribune's editorial today. They're all for it, having bit hook, line and sinker on the whole plan. But this is the part I love. When discussing Schweitzer's plans to build a 10 billion dollar synfuels plant in eastern Montana, they state: "Is it possible? We have no idea."

Boy, if only there were some large organization in this state whose mission was to investigate facts and then write them down. They could maybe print all of those facts on paper somewhere, and I'll bet people would pay money to read them. Too bad we don't have an organization like that, 'cause they might be able to tell us if the Governor's plan is "possible," or nuts.

2 comments:

XB234C said...

Get this through your head. Schweitzer proposed it. It's the Second Coming.:) Actually it doesn't sound like a bad idea, but it does smack of pie in the sky. I support building more oil refineries,nuclear power plants and drilling for more oil here at home including in the political hot potato region known as ANWR. The methods they propose using to drill in ANWR are cleaner and more eco-sensitive than most Earth Day Celebrations. Anything to enrich the evil oil industry. Bwahahahaha!!

XB234C said...

Oh, to answer your question, I haven't heard of any downside to this proposal. That means it must be flawless. ;) Sorry to post twice.