Reply #31: Since that isn't my argument, your statement is meaningless.

[kristopher]

My statement:

I'm not arguing "for" any position relative to natural gas. What I've said is that natural gas use will inevitably increase in the short term as coal is taken off line. This is inevitable for the same reason that we will initially put more focus on spending for efficiency improvements than we will for building large scale storage - because we get more bang for the carbon reduction buck by this sequencing.

This technology requires the building of an entire infrastructure. The particular sector that it will serve is not inconsequential, but it is one that (with current and near term technologies) returns fewer reduction per dollar spent than other sectors. Therefore economics will delay the adoption of the technology relative to others. Remember that this sequencing is largely driven by the value of the energy provided by the renewable technologies in relation to both the raw cost of existing alternatives and the costs of those alternatives with a carbon pricing included.

To spend money deploying this tech piggybacked on fossil sources that are destined to be phased out is a waste of funds. Those funds are better spent on developing totally sustainable strategies for their use.

This logic is covered in most independent discussions of the future biofuels.