It seems like it was only yesterday that politicians, coal executives and even some environmentalists had agreed on the benefits of clean coal technology. Among other duties, it takes the polluting carbon dioxide byproducts of coal-fired power stations and sequesters it deep underground, where its greenhouse gases cannot enter the atmosphere. (For a good overview, try this BBC guide) In spite of the environmental costs of coal extraction, coal’s abundance and low prices make clean coal technology one of the few big-scale approaches to mitigating climate change accepted by advocates from all sides. While a world run on purely renewable energy such as solar or wind is ideal, practicality calls for a diverse energy portfolio.

As the New York Times reports, however, escalating project costs and the slow pace of finding safe, affordable sequestration methods are becoming roadblocks to finding a reasonable solution within the next few decades—which is when they will be necessary. Scientists still need time to test the abilities of various types of rock and soil formations to capture and to retain carbon dioxide, among other variables. The article states that, without ample time to perfect the technology—or at least to make it safe and emissions-reducing, coal companies will just continue building coal plants using current, dirty technology. What’s the point of clean coal if it’s not clean at all?

Unfortunately, as with climate change prediction models and photovoltaic panels, any sort of technology requires time to research and to test and, overarching that, long-term vision.