I finally saw an article in the Evansville Courier & Press stating that coal has a "bleak" future. While even scientists at MIT believe that coal will be relied upon for energy in the future, carbon sequestration poses major problems--the main one being that it hasn't been perfected yet. I am so tired of reading about IGCC technology as being "clean" coal because it can theoretically be done with a carbon sequestration component. The reality is that many of these IGCC plants are being planned without carbon capture. Rather, they are viewed by many as clean because they could potentially trap carbon in the future so that it potentially could be stored or injected in the ground. Try the latter in earthquake regions, such as southern Indiana, and who knows what would happen. With the Democrats taking the lead in Congress now, carbon caps could become a reality, although perhaps not until our current President is out of office. As the article noted, what will happen to the "cheap" coal then? Coal will no longer represent cheap power in a world of carbon limitations, since coal is one of the greatest carbon content power sources there is. Although the FutureGen coal plant, supposed to open in 2010, will supposedly trap the carbon, this is really a science experiment at this stage. How can we bank on coal for the future, as much of Indiana seems intent on doing, when the price with carbon caps could be prohibitive? It really may not make simple business sense, much less environmental sense. Maybe the coal industry needs to face up to this reality and eliminate any references to "clean coal." The latter phrase is really a myth at this stage.