Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.


Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Twitter Facebook YouTube Mastodon MeWe

RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe

Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...

New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts


The Myth of 'Clean Coal'

Posted on 6 April 2017 by Guest Author

This is video was created by Adam Levy (ClimateAdam on YouTube)

Donald Trump has promised to create clean coal, but does it even exist? And even if it helped climate change, what other problems does coal come with?

0 0

Printable Version  |  Link to this page


Comments 1 to 4:


    This research finds coal is a much larger factor in heart disease than previously realised.

    Clean coal is never going to happen. Firstly clean coal would require very, very expensive systems to filter particulate emissions, and filter and bury the carbon dioxide, and it doesn’t make sense to do this, as there are more cost effective alternatives with gas or renewable energy already available.

    And the only way to get clean coal would be government regulation making this cleaning process happen. The Trump Administration is never going to regulate to ensure they have clean coal. Trump has an open agenda to reduce regulation, and which has already acted against all sorts of environmental initiatives. Clean coal is another illogical and empty promise that won’t happen, just like other recent policy failures.

    0 0
  2. One has to be realistic about what they mean when they say "clean".

    I don't think it means what they think it means :-) 

    0 0
    Moderator Response:

    [PS] Fixed link. Please learn do it yourself with the link tool.

  3. Ironically some of the best research into the inefficiencies of producing energy from coal has been produced by US government researchers.

    They spotted the obvious in that no powerplant can extract all the energy from a piece of coal and that is even before taking into account the losses created from the energy that can be extracted.

    Humanity has wasted a lot of potential that was ever in coal even before you take into account it's horrendous polluting qualities.

    One obvious flaw is the poor thermal energy efficiency of power stations. Most power stations would be better off as CHP plants with the main product being heat and refigeration from the 60% wasted energy. That leaves 40% for electricity production - a secondary product (or it should be).

    That of course requires a near socialist attitude towards energy production as the heat and cooling products MUST be used by local residents and businesses without much competition!

    This is done at one location in the UK (Southampton) and many Scandanavian locations.

    0 0
  4. Should have said in my comment at (3) that the Southampton CHP plant uses gas not coal. It provides heat to local domestic customers and refrigeration and heat to a large retail complex, the electricity is sold to the docks.

    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.

The Consensus Project Website


(free to republish)

© Copyright 2023 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us