Enviro group prefers name-calling to discussing facts

I had been hoping that with the 2008 election wrapped up, we could all watch TV in peace without negative political campaign ads.

But wait. Evidently, we’re not done with negative ads after all.

A new group called the Reality Coalition has taken to the airwaves with an ad that does nothing more than name-calling and fact-fudging.

So this is what it’s come to for advocacy groups that don’t have the facts on their sides — they sit on the sidelines and throw spitballs. That’s the best idea they have, evidently.

Our campaign has a message based in facts. And we love discussing them every chance we get.

The use of clean coal technologies has already produced remarkable results in improving the environmental footprint of using coal to generate electricity. The term "clean coal" has become an accepted term to describe the entire suite of technologies that reduce emissions and improve the operational efficiency of coal-based power plants. Our campaign has, as one of its goals, supported funding from both public and private sector sources to bring to the marketplace additional advanced clean coal technologies to capture and store carbon.

We’ve come a long way in the last few decades, but we’re not done yet. We’ve more work to do including ensuring that new advanced clean coal technologies are available to capture and store carbon for coal-based power plants both here in America and around the world. 

If our ads were meant to convey the notion that carbon capture technologies are already being used on a wide-scale basis, then why would we be running the I Believe ad? 

I think the Reality Coalition doth protests too much. They see that most Americans agree with our position. American coal is going to be needed to meet energy demand both here at home and around the world, and investing in new advanced clean coal technologies is the best way to achieve our goals of promoting energy independence, keeping energy costs affordable, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the energy sector.

Comments

[John Heizer]

Actully the thisisreality.org site does a great job of debunking your "clean coal." You try to give the impression that "clean coal" initiatives are about clean production and use of coal when the only actual progress that has been made to date is in efficiency. More efficient use does not equal "clean." I am glad that people are finally standing up to the "clean coal" myth. "Clean coal" has become a buzz word that hides the reality.

[Beth]

John, I think you're confused. There is nothing on this site about mining coal. I've read the site, have you?

Also, I work in this field. And you're also confused. Efficiency gains are huge when it comes to reducing CO2 emissions.

I seriously doubt you know what you're talking about or are being objective when it comes to the discussion.

[Megan at ACCCE]

Thanks for your comments, John and Beth. Just one thing to add about clean coal technology:

It's here, and over the last 30 years, it's made our coal-based generating fleet 70 percent cleaner on the basis of regulated emissions per unit of energy produced. The calculations are based on five pollutants: carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate matter. The data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reflects the environmental performance per unit of energy produced.

It's a great achievement—but we know we can do so much more.