Huff Post - King Coal's Newest Pimps - Children In TV Commercials

[hatrack]

EDIT

The ads urge you to visit a website, run by the coal industry, whose URL I just can't bring myself to link to. But just turn on your TV and you'll see it soon enough. Don't be fooled by the non-profity sounding ".org" tag, these ads and websites were paid for by a coal industry astro-turf group called Americans for Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC), which is made up of King Coal constituents in the mining, hauling and burning industries. Primary funders include the world's largest coal producer Peabody Energy, railroad giant Burlington Northern/Santa Fe, and Southern Company, one of the largest
coal-burning electric utilities in the U.S.

The website features more kids creepily reading the crafty messaging of the coal industry's P.R. gurus, and uses schoolhouse references like "Today's Homework Assignment" to help you "learn more."

For a real laugh, click through to their page on "Responding to Climate Change" and read how the industry doesn't want to be burdened with actually having to apply modern technology to reduce its emissions. No no, they say. The "better way" to reduce carbon levels immediately would be to plant more trees and grasslands. Yeah, right. The fact is, the technology already exists to burn coal in a much cleaner manner, but it's been collecting dust in warehouse basements.

Meanwhile, the planet is warming, and this industry continues to burn dirty coal in antique power plants, some of which were built a half a century ago - before ATMs and the Internet, even before authentic Astroturf was invented.

EDIT

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20060505/cm_huffpost/020393

[phantom power]

1. Laurie needs to ponder what she's saying.

She's worried about climate change, but she thinks it's going to be OK if we just burn our coal into CO2 without sulfur and mercury?

[KingM34]

2. re: coal advertising

I see their advertisments all over the web lately. I wonder how much they are spending?

As dirty as coal is, its abundance, combined with the shortage in petroleum, means we're likely to see more coal burning, rather than less. I'd much rather see the next generation of nuclear reactors pick up the slack. For example: http://theopinionator.com/energy/more_nuclear1.html

[phantom power]

3. Yes, I'm sure Big Coal sees the winds of change blowing.

They know that if they can sway public opinion (and policy) to back a big migration to domestic coal, that kind of business is worth any amount of advertising budget.

Unfortunately, it's quite likely to work, and then kill us all.

[lakeguy]

4. they are willing to destroy the planet for an extra buck?

the short sightedness of the corporation will be the end of us, no doubt in my mind whatsoever.

[dcfirefighter]

5. The Soviets, sans corporate interests, burned plenty of Coal

As do the practicioners of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.

[Dead_Parrot]

6. You really need to ask?

:(

[Strelnikov_]

7. But . . But . . But The Little Girl Sez We Have 250 Years Of Coal

in the US.

Problem is, that is at current consumption rates.

What is the figure, 30-40 yrs. if we start to go CTL and CTG to mitigate the looming liquid fuel and natural gas shortfalls.

And that is assuming that all the coal is recoverable.

If a little girl would mislead us about energy policy, what about all those Girl Scout cookie profits?

[Dead_Parrot]

8. Let's hope she can learn how to eat it

There won't be much else.