Read Mr Little's response if only to understand just how well he makes my case for me.

And not too surprising when our chief scientist rules out nuclear power and rules in hydrogen created by burning coal or gas as the heat source to cook out the methane, then separate out the hydrogen atoms from the methane molecule then geosequester the carbon.

Then when asked about long haul air flights and the required fuel, knew it couldn't be electric and therefore the fuel had to come from combining hydrogen and carbon? Why not just powered fine coal and save all the steps?

This is our considered response to climate change an the fires?

This is our chief scientist! And the best brains in the world have tried carbon geosequestration and only one coal-fired power plant was built and none other given a 6% energy coefficient?

I don't share the Engineer's/Cheif scientist's perspective and would use rocket planes on long haul air flights and they could be launched by rail gun catapults and fired by hydrogen and ion engines?

And or new age helium airships with painted on solar panels and electric engines enabling the jet stream to move passengers.

Let's not rule out undersea tunnels and vacuum locks that allow supersonic train travel?

Otherwise, we could move passengers and roll on roll off rapid rail inside super-large nuclear-powered submarines, which could operate at speeds of over fifty knots. As today's nuclear-powered subs do now!
Alan B.