In a message dated 1/3/2009 2:41:12 PM Eastern Standard Time,
william.depaulo@gmail.com writes:
I have
stated earlier my belief that we should not object, per se, to the issuance of
the permit. However, I believe we should insist on complete
transparency, i.e., total access by all to the data collected to see if this
well effectively captures CO2.
Please let me know what thoughts you
have on this issue.
BILL, ET AL........... SEEMS TO ME THAT SOMEONE OR SOME ORGANIZATION
SHOULD
OBJECT BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING CONSIDERATIONS.
I BELIEVE THAT CO2 SEQUESTRATION HAS NOT BEEN DEMONSTRATED TO
BE
AN AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY (TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE), PRACTICAL
(ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE),
SAFE ( NEAR TERM RELIABLE), OR PERMANENT (LONG TERM RELIABLE).
THEREFORE, IF THIS APPROACH WERE APPROVED BY THE P.S.C., IT WOULD BE
AT
SUBSTANTIAL PERIL TO THE STATE. IT WOULD INDICATE TO
THE WORLD THAT OUR
STATE IS OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY. SUCH APPROVAL WOULD
MAKE IT POSSIBLE
FOR A.E.P. TO BUILD THE FACILITY AND THEN TAKE THE POSITION THAT THEY
WOULD
THEN PRACTICE SEQUESTRATION AS SOON AS IT BECOMES FEASIBLE AND RELIABLE,
AND WHO KNOWS WHEN OR WHETHER THIS WILL EVER BE THE CASE.
duane nichols