1. #9761
    The Undying
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    34,524
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post


    Mitt Romeny against Coal 2003

    Quoting

    "I will not create jobs that kill people.."

    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...obs/?mobile=nc

    Fast forward



    He's FOR Coal.
    I am NOT one to defend Romney, but between 2003 and now, IIRC, "clear coal" really made a showing - which could be what he's talking about. Just to be objective (or, at least, to appear that way :P).

    ---------- Post added 2012-10-05 at 08:50 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Lenonis View Post
    Wheeee false equivalence.
    Shush you - people are "debating" now. (/sarcasm off)

    Last edited by cubby; 2012-10-05 at 08:52 PM.

  2. #9762
    Titan Lenonis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    14,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    pants-shittingly-stupid
    So...would this be before or after you wear them on your head.

    Cause if it is before......ew.
    Forum badass alert:
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochana Violence View Post
    It's called resistance / rebellion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochana Violence View Post
    Also, one day the tables might turn.

  3. #9763
    I think we should just bitch slap anyone who thinks clean coal is a smart idea anyway.

  4. #9764
    Quote Originally Posted by Dakia View Post
    Phew.

    It sure is a good thing that other politicians don't change their positions over the course of nearly a decade.
    Indeed. It's now ok to choose the energy option that kills people.

    ---------- Post added 2012-10-05 at 09:48 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ausr View Post
    I think we should just bitch slap anyone who thinks clean coal is a smart idea anyway.
    There's no such thing as clean coal anyway. There's ultra mega incredibly dirty coal, and then there's the even dirtier, regular kind.

    It's sort of like having someone shitting on your face, except this time it has a hint of pine scent.

  5. #9765
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,080
    Quote Originally Posted by ptwonline View Post
    There's no such thing as clean coal anyway. There's ultra mega incredibly dirty coal, and then there's the even dirtier, regular kind.

    It's sort of like having someone shitting on your face, except this time it has a hint of pine scent.
    I agree. Coal is simply one of those power sources that everyone should be in the process of phasing out. It's antiquated, dirty, and devastating on the environment.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

  6. #9766
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    It's antiquated, dirty, and devastating on the environment.
    But on the other hand, it's a cheap source of energy. Getting off it means a reduction in the standard of living.

  7. #9767
    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    But on the other hand, it's a cheap source of energy. Getting off it means a reduction in the standard of living.
    Only if we don't have viable alternatives.

  8. #9768
    Quote Originally Posted by ptwonline View Post
    Actually, I 100% encourage people to investigate the numbers and learn how they are calculated and what they actually mean. The more educated the public is, the better.

    The one thing I would ask is that instead of arriving at the conclusion and then doing the research, do it the other way around.
    I absolutely agree with that. Sound advice. I also find it strange that the biggest monthly jump in 29 years happens 32 days before a presidential election.

  9. #9769
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    But on the other hand, it's a cheap source of energy. Getting off it means a reduction in the standard of living.
    Is it cheap? Consider the costs of demolishing mountains, transporting massive amounts of coal, dealing with environmental impacts if any accidents happen at any point along those lines. Coal is not cheap. The costs are just incredibly spread out so that it looks cheap. The costs of other forms of power are focused and high at specific points(such as plant construction).

    It's like comparing a lake with an inch of water in as opposed to a bath-tub filled to the brim.

    Getting off coal would only mean a reduction in the standard of living in the short term if we abruptly ended all coal-based power-generation and related activities. Getting off coal would mean an increase in the standard of living in the long term because the replacement technologies require a higher level of expertise, which means an increased demand for educated professionals and higher-quality materials and thus a higher value on education. There is no place wherein well-educated, well-paid individuals see a decrease in their standard of living from that. Go anywhere with an abundance of highly paid, highly-educated individuals and you will see nothing less than a high standard of living.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

  10. #9770
    I dont think i've ever seen a proper piece of coal...
    All we got here is charcoal because fuck natural resources in the underground...

  11. #9771
    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    But on the other hand, it's a cheap source of energy. Getting off it means a reduction in the standard of living.
    and we have coal coming out the ass. seriously, we have a LOT of coal

  12. #9772
    Quote Originally Posted by smelltheglove View Post
    and we have coal coming out the ass. seriously, we have a LOT of coal
    But doesnt many of your cities have serious problems with smog?

  13. #9773
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Cattaclysmic View Post
    But doesnt many of your cities have serious problems with smog?
    Indeed, we do not need to increase our burning of fossil fuels.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

  14. #9774
    Quote Originally Posted by Cattaclysmic View Post
    But doesnt many of your cities have serious problems with smog?
    dont think for a minute that i am advocating coal. we use it because it's cheap and abundant. and we have none of the dependency issues with unreliable sources with coal. none of our sources of power are really awesome imo, id have to go with nuclear as the current best choice

  15. #9775
    Coal is incredibly dirty. The idea of "clean coal" is an oxymoron. It could be clean in comparison, but that's like saying you took a shit that didn't smell bad.

  16. #9776
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    Is it cheap? Consider the costs of demolishing mountains, transporting massive amounts of coal, dealing with environmental impacts if any accidents happen at any point along those lines. Coal is not cheap. The costs are just incredibly spread out so that it looks cheap. The costs of other forms of power are focused and high at specific points(such as plant construction).
    You do realize that all those "spread out costs" are included in the final product which is the cost of producing electricity in coal plants?

    Quote Originally Posted by smrund
    Getting off coal would mean an increase in the standard of living in the long term because the replacement technologies require a higher level of expertise, which means an increased demand for educated professionals and higher-quality materials and thus a higher value on education. There is no place wherein well-educated, well-paid individuals see a decrease in their standard of living from that. Go anywhere with an abundance of highly paid, highly-educated individuals and you will see nothing less than a high standard of living.
    This is the most retarded argument for getting off coal I've ever heard. The only way getting off coal increases our standard of living in the long run is when you factor in potential living standard decreases due to environmental issues.

    You don't actually increase the standard of living by making things harder than they need to be.

    Two total logic fails by you smrund.
    Last edited by mmoc43ae88f2b9; 2012-10-05 at 10:45 PM.

  17. #9777
    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    Two total brain farts by you smrund.
    This is the most retarded argument for getting off coal I've ever heard.
    What happened to you? Is this how you talk to everyone who disagrees with you?

    If you think coal is cheap even including environmental devastation and death I'd love to see your numbers.

  18. #9778
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    What happened to you? Is this how you talk to everyone who disagrees with you?
    If you think coal is cheap even including environmental devastation and death I'd love to see your numbers.
    You didn't read what I said. I specifically said that environmental issues are the only reason for getting off coal. Getting off coal just because it's easy and alternative energy is "hard", thus requiring society to educate more highly skilled people to perform tasks that lower skilled people could previously do, is insane.

  19. #9779
    In a vacuum maybe, but you haven't exactly demonstrated that you're willing to discuss the issue civilly.

  20. #9780
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    You do realize that all those "spread out costs" are included in the final product which is the cost of producing electricity in coal plants?

    Epic fail Smrund.
    No, they are not. That's the whole reason they are "spread out". L2Read.

    Besides, even at the end of the day, coal is still more expensive than other forms of power. In fact this EXACT document has been linked in this discussion before makes this whole argument pointless and stupid.

    http://nuclearfissionary.com/2010/04...ind-and-solar/
    In case you don't like that document as it could be biased.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of...city_by_source

    And of course, as we develop more of an advanced technology, it becomes cheaper and cheaper to do. So resistance to the production of new technologies only maintains their high cost. It's ridiculous to suggest that we do not develop new and advanced technologies simply because the old ways are "cheaper", they are unsustainable.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •