Shoot, if Venus is next, the interplanetary sulfur tycoons are going to have a field day. </s> In all seriousness, though, this seems pretty bad. Apparently this policy was in the workshop for 20...
Shoot, if Venus is next, the interplanetary sulfur tycoons are going to have a field day. </s>
In all seriousness, though, this seems pretty bad. Apparently this policy was in the workshop for 20 years before its announcement in 2011. I imagine its original creators are annoyed. However, if the upcoming election is a loss for Trump and the EPA reinstates the rule (I think this can happen?), it would cause a major headache for all affected companies.
Does anyone know the details about how these emission scrubbers work? The article says the equipment has a net ~10bn USD annual upkeep cost, so coal companies certainly won't be maintaining it without a very good (financial) reason. But with the election in mind, will it make sense for them to completely remove the systems they've installed?
Shoot, if Venus is next, the interplanetary sulfur tycoons are going to have a field day. </s>
In all seriousness, though, this seems pretty bad. Apparently this policy was in the workshop for 20 years before its announcement in 2011. I imagine its original creators are annoyed. However, if the upcoming election is a loss for Trump and the EPA reinstates the rule (I think this can happen?), it would cause a major headache for all affected companies.
Does anyone know the details about how these emission scrubbers work? The article says the equipment has a net ~10bn USD annual upkeep cost, so coal companies certainly won't be maintaining it without a very good (financial) reason. But with the election in mind, will it make sense for them to completely remove the systems they've installed?