There's been some recent discussion over on Train Orders about the first "clean coal" plant in the US. When it goes operational, they will basically microwave the carbon dioxide out of the coal, then burn whats left. Then of course there is the other method, currently in use in Canada, carbon capture where the carbon is cleaned from the exhaust and cycled back into the ground, keeping CO2 out of the air and EPA happy.
Consider the lack of transmission capacity (pipelines) for NG into northern New England and the facts that we are heavily reliant on NG for power, and continue to build more distribution than transmission capacity for NG.
NG is going to skyrocket again this winter, more distribution was built with no new incoming transmission capacity this year. Home heating gets priority over power generation, and so you have Maine PUC's allowance for price hikes. Power Supply rates are going to more than double for commercial users in January, and while its not been decided yet, you can assume standard offer rates for residential accounts will follow in March when the new contract will be set.
http://www.maine.gov/tools/whatsnew/ind ... =article08" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; PUC release if you're interested. If the link doesnt work, its the top most article on the PUC's home page.
Anyway, back on point here, given NG's price volatility, especially in Maine, and a couple power plants in the early stages of proving clean coal is possible, the big question will be "Can clean coal be economically viable in northern New England?"
Given fracking's tendency to make tap water flammable, and the coinciding bad press it gets, NYS's refusal to allow fracking of NG in the Marcellus formation, and the long wait time on pipeline capacity into northern New England, coal may be sick, but I don't think the doctors have decided its terminal just yet.