Banner ad promoting "clean coal" misses the mark

[UNCjigga]

"clean coal" banner ad

I saw this at liberal-rag-masquerading-as-news-site CNN.com. Seriously, I find it hard to believe the coal industry's marketing/PR firm couldn't find a better image to portray clean coal to a progressive/liberal audience. An ugly, black lump of coal doesn't portray "clean". Its also not a very uplifting image this close to Christmas!

Of course, you can blame the hipster graphic artist who probably didn't try very hard to please a client opposed to her agenda.

 

[DrPizza]

Looks like a nice clean hunk of 99.9% pure carbon to me...

Reminds me of the chunk just like it that was in one of my bags of rice coal... the one that clogged the feeder on my coal stove. The one that knocked the temperature back in my house by 20 degrees before we figured out what was wrong.

 

[mobobuff]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Looks like a nice clean hunk of 99.9% pure carbon to me...

 

[TBone48]

I think by "clean coal" they mean low sulfur content, no?

 

[gorcorps]

Originally posted by: TBone48
I think by "clean coal" they mean low sulfur content, no?

That's exactly what they mean. Just because coal in itself looks dirty doesn't mean shit... they mean BURN dirty, which is usually sulfur content and other garbage.

 

[Rubycon]

Coal is spooky lookin' stuff!

 

[Platypus]

so this was a thinly veiled political jab thread?

got it

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: UNCjigga
"clean coal" banner ad

I saw this at liberal-rag-masquerading-as-news-site CNN.com. Seriously, I find it hard to believe the coal industry's marketing/PR firm couldn't find a better image to portray clean coal to a progressive/liberal audience. An ugly, black lump of coal doesn't portray "clean". Its also not a very uplifting image this close to Christmas!

Of course, you can blame the hipster graphic artist who probably didn't try very hard to please a client opposed to her agenda.

Lousy Vast Hipster Graphic Artist Conspiracy!


Led by (gasp) a WOMAN!


Good work, you've exposed her just in time. Now to the coal-fired idiot-mobile and beyond!

 

[RU482]

I though clean coal referred to the process that handles the power plant emissions (i.e.scrubbers)

 

[natto fire]

Originally posted by: Platypus
so this was a thinly veiled political jab thread?

got it

 

[nakedfrog]

Oh, you know those idiot liberals will fall for it hook, line, and sinker. Stupid liberals... being all stupid... and stuff.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Oh, you know those idiot liberals will fall for it hook, line, and sinker. Stupid liberals... being all stupid... and stuff.

Conservatives fall for "clean" coal. Liberals and conservatives both fall for ethanol. Intelligent liberals and conservatives recognize the nuclear, wind, and tidal energy as real solutions.

 

[FoBoT]

coal is awesome, we have loads of it, i support using our coal ASAP

 

[BrownTown]

Originally posted by: TBone48
I think by "clean coal" they mean low sulfur content, no?

Thats what is used to mean, however in the new global warming context and in the congressional debates the term means alot more then that. Right now when people talk about "clean coal" they mean carbon capture and sequestration. Currently the technology does not exist to do this, but if you look at the latest global warming bill going in the senate (Lieberman Warner bill) it has MASSIVE subsides fo so called "clean coal", I believe on the order of ~250 Billion dollars. Basically this whole "clean coal" crap has to do with the fact that several states economies are very defendant on coal production and therefore refuse to vote for any global warming bill which will harm the coal industry. Therefore in order to get a bill through Congress they provide huge subsidies for coal in order to get enough votes on the bill. It is rather ironic imo that the current global warming bill has hundreds of billions of dollars of subsides for coal and not a single penny for nuclear. Its just kind of silly how these things go since all that most senators really care about is getting as much of the money going to their state and not so much about having any scientific justification for doing so.