What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
93 Comments
- RobotKeaton, on 02/27/2009, -1/+47There's no way this is the Coen Bros. I don't see John Turturro anywhere.
- theDarkGamer, on 02/27/2009, -4/+41Clean or not, it isn't renewable and the act of mining it is dangerous and leads to severe health problems. There's a great episode of '30 Days' that covers what it's like to be a coal miner:
http://www.hulu.com/watch/22466/30-days-working-in ... - DillingerSmooth, on 02/26/2009, -9/+44a lot like the Truth campaigns against tobacco....I love how deceptive these big companies try to be and how transparent they are when you point out their tactics
- slapo12, on 02/27/2009, -13/+27None of the clean coal advocates are saying coal is 100% clean. Rather, they're talking about using anthracite coal, which is the highest grade and cleanest burning coal (92-98% carbon) versus what primarily other nations (i.e. China) using bituminous (60-80%) and lignite (~60%). So, it's more of a misnomer than anything else, but clean(er) coal technology does exist and that's what we're using in the states. Mind you, there's still the problem of sulfur deposits in all coal, which leads to acid mine drainage and acid rain, so while it isn't exactly the best energy source, it isn't as bad as you're making it out to be.
- t3hfrank, on 02/27/2009, -7/+21clean coal = filtered ciggarettes = still poisonous
- carbonfilament, on 02/27/2009, -3/+12everyone arguing clean coal needs to think about how that coal is retrieved: mountaintop removal is ***** our land, our water, and creating giant ecological disasters BEFORE the coal is even burned. Never mind all the toxic sludge left over from the mining process itself.
- designer, on 02/27/2009, -3/+11***** electricity.
- somberlaine, on 02/27/2009, -9/+17I just saw it tonight...finally, someone is trying to put the clean coal myth to sleep
- pintomp3, on 02/27/2009, -4/+12Clean coal is like safe cigarettes.
- anfld05, on 02/27/2009, -5/+12Not that I'm a huge clean coal fan, but did anybody else notice that all of the "facts" on the website it was promoting were borderline sarcastic quotes?
- Diggnabbit, on 02/27/2009, -2/+8That's the point. It IS a misnomer. The coal technology is not "clean." It's cleaner than China, but that's not clean.
- rozlovesben, on 02/27/2009, -1/+7this is no barton fink, but i dugg it anyway
- tidu, on 02/27/2009, -1/+7Or any semblance of writing that took more than 5 minutes scribbling down a script on a napkin...
- GawtMilk, on 02/27/2009, -3/+8Coal is a commodity. We're not going to stop using it because it is a good 50% of our electricity supply (more during off-peak loads), it is plentiful, it is cheap, and it is such a vital part of many state economies (West Virginia, Pennsylvania, etc). Lets continue to use it and use it as cleanly as possible. Clean coal is *****, coal is not.
- strad2, on 02/27/2009, -1/+6I love the Coen Bros, but this doesn't feel at all like their work... Definitely more SNL-like... funny, regardless.
- Wargasmic, on 02/27/2009, -2/+7Watch out for people who believe they know the "Truth," especially when it's a capital T.
- thekronz, on 02/27/2009, -2/+6Or Steve Buscemi!
- dylio, on 02/27/2009, -4/+8NOBODY ***** with the Jesus.
- vocalyouth, on 02/27/2009, -1/+4For information about how fxxked coal mining is and what it does to the people around coal mining, watch this documentary that Vice made a couple of years ago:
http://www.vbs.tv/shows.php?show=1129
it's really eye-opening and well worth watching. - nullvector, on 02/27/2009, -2/+5There's no such thing as "clean" anything. Everything requires manufacture. Cavemen used fire. Animals release methane and waste.
If you want clean anything...clear the earth of life, and it still won't be "clean". You have volcanoes, gas eruptions, natural fires, etc. - AtraSolis, on 02/27/2009, -1/+4http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-_U1Z0vezw
Youtube link for those of us that don't like accepting scripts from 800 different websites a day. - Shamusjp, on 02/27/2009, -0/+3I had no idea this was the Coen bros.
- CaptOblivious, on 02/27/2009, -1/+4sulthernao It's being researched as you speak.
They are pushing the filtered smokestack gases through water & growing algae, then using the algae to make bio oil.
Clean Coal is a GOAL, they are working on it. - mikbunn, on 02/27/2009, -0/+3No matter the cleanliness of coal, companies also destroy entire mountainous landscapes and water supplies in the mining process.
- bushout, on 02/28/2009, -0/+2the partymachine never stops
- RyanBlueThunder, on 02/27/2009, -1/+3Yes. Please do yourself a favor and look up some electricity production statistics.
On second thought, I'll do some of the work for you.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epate ...
There's the net electricity generation (thousand megawatthours) for 2007. As you can see, over 48% of our electricity is generated with coal resources. Natural gas (which is clean, abundant and domestically produced) accounts for 21.6% and will likely remain key since combined-cycle gas generators are highly efficient on the spot market (i.e., when electricity demand peaks in hot summer months, it is far more efficient to spin up a gas generator than any other type). Hydroelectric resources provide about 6%, but our ability expand this is limited because we have already dammed up our rivers. Nuclear provides 19.4% of electricity, but because of the NIMBY crowds and our nations inability to adopt new technologies (currently in use in France and South Africa) nuclear power seems off the table. Solar, wind, geothermal, biomass and other renewables provide just around 5%. Yes, we certainly need coal.
Coal 2,016,456 (48.5%)
Petroleum 65,739 (1.6%)
Natural Gas 896,590 (21.6%)
Other Gases 13,453 (0.3%)
Nuclear 806,425 (19.4%)
Hydroelectric Conventional 247,510 (6.0%)
Other Renewables 105,238 (2.5%)
Wind 34,450 (0.8%)
Solar Thermal and Photovoltaic 612 (0.01%)
Wood and Wood Derived Fuels 39,014 (0.9%)
Geothermal 14,637 (0.35%)
Other Biomass 16,525 (0.39%)
Pumped Storage -6,896
Other 12,231 (0.29%)
All Energy Sources 4,156,745
/DISCLAIMER: While I defend clean coal technology, I purchase 100% renewable electricity from Green Mountain Energy - breamo, on 02/27/2009, -2/+4I knew there was a reason why (Coen Bros.) I loved that ad when I first saw it.
- boomchockalocka, on 02/27/2009, -0/+2@nullvector
Sure, they do when you create them the first time, but thereafter they don't because you can use the energy generated from the clean technologies. You have to start somewhere. - MrSlumberjack, on 02/27/2009, -1/+3Burning coal clean compared to burning wood? No. Coal has the lowest energy output per unit when burnt, no question. That's why coal is considered dirty, because the amount of pollutants released compared to the energy gained is terrible. I should also mention that out of any fossil fuel, coal contains the highest amount of heavy metals.
As said above, clean coal = filtered cigarettes. - slapo12, on 02/27/2009, -0/+1If you're claiming man-made global climate change is a myth, please just look at the polar ice caps. They're melting. People smarter than you and I say that once we hit 450 ppm CO2, they'll be melted and most coastal areas will be underwater. We're currently at ~383 ppm.
- boomchockalocka, on 02/27/2009, -0/+1Point taken. We should use as clean a version as we can. But, just because we don't use the other technologies doesn't mean we shouldn't. I'm all about nuclear. I bet a lot of people will be fine with BIMBY if they get a cut.
If there are no incentives to change what we have, you can bet it won't change. - pintomp3, on 02/27/2009, -2/+3Obviously the only way to create is to destroy mountaintops and poison our environment.
- inactive, on 02/27/2009, -5/+6I don't remember the tobacco companies ever making any claims that the "Truth" commercials refuted.
- slapo12, on 03/01/2009, -0/+1In harvesting anything, something is inevitably destroyed. Yes, for the mountaintop removal mining, the mountain gets destroyed and the local ecosystem suffers from AMD. No one is arguing against this. However, not all coal is mined this way. For most forms of surface mining (strip mining, open pit, etc), the mining companies reclaim the land after they're done with it and can either attempt to return it to its original state or make it into farming land, which could be more productive than it originally was
- D4M4N, on 02/27/2009, -4/+5would be so much funnier if they wrote the commercial.
- theoasis, on 02/28/2009, -0/+1skate?
- shodanx, on 02/27/2009, -11/+12I don't really believe burning coal is anything like spraying powdered, unburnt coal
and I don't think it's a stretch that industrial coal power plant only release burnt gases with no particulate at all
they are probably cleaner per joule than photovoltaic cells at this point
so exactly who's being deceptive ? "Truth" that's a funny name for a campaign based on exagerations - nullvector, on 02/27/2009, -1/+2Like? Give some examples.
Wind power?
Wave power?
Thermal power?
These all have the same thing in common that they require manufacturing processes to create the equipment necessary to glean the power. You can't just say "poof" and generate electricity. Somehow, somewhere, oil, gas, and coal was used in the manufacture of these technologies.
People can badmouth 'dirty' power and pollution as much as they want, but we can't live without it. - bushout, on 02/28/2009, -0/+1yeah, i mean where's the symbolism?
- RabidIceWeasel, on 02/27/2009, -2/+3Right...
first, weather ≠ whether. Second, you state, "I wouldn't trust anyone BUT the coal industry to create this technology. After all, they know a lot about coal, it's their job." This is flawed logic. The coal industry is about making money for the coal industry, period. They may know a whole bunch about coal, but will not spend a dime they are not forced too spend on any clean initiative that is not enforced by law. How long did it take to get smokestack scrubbers installed? The coal industry's lobbyists have fought tooth and nail over regulation and oversite. They preach self regulation, tell us things like "but it is cheaper, other counties are worse polluters." Spare me the *****. Take off the rose colored shades and put down the crack pipe.
I do not trust politicians, but I trust them more than I do industry. We can vote politicians out of office for failure to produce measured results, the best we can do for corporate coal? Give them a fine. How effective is that in curbing the behavior of a multi-billion dollar industry? k thx. - zgf2022, on 02/27/2009, -3/+4There isnt any "sludge" at least not from overburden removal (aka stripmining). I've worked in a coal mine, the only thing we used to get to the coal was draglines and loaders, no sludge that I know of. Besides the Texas railroad commission required us to capture and treat all water on site. ALL water, we even had to treat the rainwater that came in, so I cant say I know exactly what your talking about there.
Yes the act of stripmining makes a hell of a mess when it rolls through, but what most people don't like to point out is that afterwards (at least here) we were required to restore the land to a similar state. That meant rebuilding any hills and valleys that had been there previously and planting a protected (10 years of no logging or so) pine forest on site.
So while coal mining can be a messy thing to watch, its not as terrible as you make it out to be. - s3thin2, on 02/27/2009, -0/+1actually, the carbon was taken back by the tree itself, before it was even burned....
- whytheam, on 02/27/2009, -0/+1exactly
- awtripp, on 02/27/2009, -1/+2No *****, Sherlock. Watch the ***** video and stop being a pompous douche.
- ChiliMac, on 02/27/2009, -0/+1Um, no, they are not.
- sulthernao, on 02/27/2009, -1/+2You know what would be interesting? If we used some sort of algae filter on these coal plants, or any sort of filter. That certainly would be a pragmatic short term solution if it would work.
- slapo12, on 03/01/2009, -0/+1You're making some pretty good points, but I think some sludge carbon is referring to is talking about the fly ash/coal ash that is kept in those tailing dams (like the one Kingston TVA plant's dike that recently burst).
Also, when you're talking about treating all of the water, can you honestly say you treat the groundwater as well? If rain hits the piles of tailings, Sulfide is mobilized from the rocks (i.e. iron pyrite) and acid mine drainage occurs and leeches into the soil and potentially contaminates the underground aquifers.
But yeah, coal mining isn't that bad, as i've said before, atleast compared to whats happening in other places - Rtibbitts07, on 02/27/2009, -1/+2Yea I agree. Our scientists really need to get cracking on that Nuclear Fission thing.
/sarcasm - neognostic, on 02/28/2009, -1/+1Wrong, green energy is now, do the research and the German green movement, it makes the Bush doctrine look asinine.
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/artic ... -
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is