Jeff Bingaman: “The issue between the two amendments is what our focus should be, when we think about the future of coal, are we sure…”

“The issue between the two amendments is what our focus should be, when we think about the future of coal, are we sure the best use of coal and the best future for coal is in the developing of transportation fuels? In my view, that is what the Bunning amendment concludes. The Tester amendment, to the contrary, takes a broader view of the future of coal. I believe we want to enable the development of many potential uses of coal that are both environmentally and economically sound. We should not be focused on commercializing in large-scale uses of coal that do not make good sense in the marketplace. First, let me say a couple of things about the Bunning amendment. There are currently no large-scale coal-to-liquid plants in the United States. The price tag of a typical plant is in the billions of dollars. The Bunning amendment purports to require that coal-derived fuels be 20 percent better than gasoline. But we have an apples-to-oranges comparison here because coal-to-liquids plants will produce primarily diesel fuel, not gasoline. The total greenhouse gas emissions from coal-derived diesels are likely to be greater by about 150 percent than the emissions from diesels that are powered from petroleum.”