namelesstavern.net

Gaazy wrote:Yeah a lot of mindiaism people spouted about it. Obama sure isnt going out of his way to help it, but its not like romney would have either. That guy was against it in Mass hardcore. Its just an industry that doesnt have much of a future anymore /shrug

Are you derping on purpose? Romney wants to invest in clean coal technology.

no such thing

brinstar wrote:no such thing

Oh look, the great confabulator strikes again! Here, read this you uneducated and uninformed fuck. http://science.howstuffworks.com/enviro ... n-coal.htm

lol, confabulator? which talk radio windbag did you pinch that from

i know what "clean coal" is, you drooling ape, but until the technology is perfected it's an oxymoron

kind of like compassionate conservative

or evangelical christian

I really didnt really want to go into it here, but ok.

even though it is my industry and pays my bills... lets get one thing straight. There is no such thing as 'clean' coal technology. Its kind of an oxymoron. Coal is dirty. Sorry but its true. Only the idiots around here believe they can clean it up 100%. Too many byproducts. Sad but also true. Things can be done to make it not as bad, but its so expensive the power companies just shut the plants down and blame the EPA.

Both of those guys have talked about clean coal technology, and both are just trying to please people. Neither of them would have been a help to me and mine. As brinstar said, the reason the coal market is down, for one reason, is gas. Another major reason is just the global market.

Most of my customers are metallurgical coal, which WV has the highest quality in the entire world of. Thats why im still doing ok mainly. Anyone producing steam coal out of here are hurting right now. Illinois is producing a lot right now though

The link I posted explains the clean coal technology process, and Romney would have invested in that, which with that funding would have been able to even further increase that technology. Coal is great, and it has the potential to become even greater. We just have the wrong president in the driver's seat, unfortunately.

did you not read gaazy's post

no such thing as clean coal

only you would be stupid enough to argue about coal with a coal miner

what happens is to upgrade all these old plants costs a fortune, and its more cost effective for them to shut them down than operate them. Theres also tons of OTHER by products that that technology yo posted does NOT do anything about. I truly wish it did, but the fact is it doesnt.

K Im done, im not changin anyones mind so why keep goin on

Narrock wrote:The link I posted explains the clean coal technology process, and Romney would have invested in that, which with that funding would have been able to even further increase that technology. Coal is great, and it has the potential to become even greater. We just have the wrong president in the driver's seat, unfortunately.

also, government investment in energy technology is okay when it's fossil fuels, but not when it's solar or wind?

hypocrite

We saw how great obummer's investment in Solyndra worked...

focus billy

is it or is it not okay for govt to invest taxpayer money in clean energy technology? you can't argue for it and against it at the same time.

Fact is, Romney's business background would have been much more effective than some agenda-driven chicago thug with no business sense. And yes, Romney is also for solar and wind technology, just in a more intellectual way than obummer.

didn't think you could answer, you spineless twat

brinstar wrote:didn't think you could answer, you spineless twat

You're so bizarre.

that's two "agenda-driven" in the same day in two different threads. must've heard a cute piece on the radio where they said that

brinstar wrote:did you not read gaazy's post

no such thing as clean coal

only you would be stupid enough to argue about coal with a coal miner

also this. bahahahahahah

how retarded are you, mindia? honestly