It's hard to know what's up with the Bush administration's decision to pull funding for the so-called "FutureGen" coal plant that was awarded only a couple of months ago to downstate Mattoon, Ill. The reason given by Energy Secretary Sam Bodman is that costs have grown beyond reason, but not surprisingly, the coal and oil companies behind FutureGen are disputing that. Some suspect it is because Bush's home state of Texas didn't get the project, and Barack Obama's state did, though the former seems a more likely contributor than the latter. The plant has been touted as a "green coal" project because it was going to sequester the carbon dioxide emissions in geological formations underground. Bodman's announcement came one day after Bush included language backing so-called clean-coal technology funding in his State of the Union address, and it's true that the Energy Department's new budget proposes $600 million to continue research into carbon sequestration, considered Big Coal's best hope for remaining relevant as a fuel option. Biofuel, which I consider the least promising option among the renewables, is the only type from that sector getting significant funding. Meanwhile, here's additional perspective on FutureGen, from Andrew Revkin of the Times.