Speaking of ad hominem attacks, where is the evidence that Mark Steyn is "a far right wing nut"? In oder to support that claim you'd need some evidence, some fallacies contained therein, and you've offered none.
Or perhaps you don't understand what "ad hominem" means.
"Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting)".
However, logical fallacies aside, pretty much everyone that knows what "clean coal" is knows that it is an oxymoron, at least from a CO2 perspective. If you want to hang your debating hat on arguing against common knowledge, well, lotsa luck [shrug].
"Pretty much everyone" shouldn't mean a great deal in the scientific community. As well we have to realize that some pollution is going to occur in any society. We have to minimalize it, certainly, and always look to cleaner and more efficient alternatives but ignoring accessible energy while chasing pie in the sky alternatives is a very foolish idea. There is no reason why this search for energy cannot be handled on two or more fronts.