Bravo to EcoGeek for blocking "clean" coal ads
.jpg)
This business of online publishing that we and many others are involved in is fueled by advertising dollars. It's what pays the bills for bandwidth and servers and trips to cover events. Here at all the sites that are part of Weblogs Inc. the advertising sales department is completely separate from the editorial content side of the business. Those of us who write here and at sites like Engadget have no control or influence over who the advertisers are and I personally don't even look at who is advertising on the site.
I'm not sure exactly how the advertising stuff is done over at EcoGeek, run by my friend Hank Green, but it's likely that he has a deal with an advertising provider that serves up the ads that appear on his site. Hank probably just inserts some code in the page that reads and displays the banners from a remote ad server. In this way Hank gets the same separation between the commercial and editorial sides that we have here. However, Hank runs a site with a very specific point of view, much like the one we have here at ABG. He cares about the environment. A lot. So when Hank spotted an ad on his site for Clean Coal, he did what he felt was the right thing and blocked the ad. He didn't let the ad dollars influence editorial content. But he did let his beliefs influence the ads he accepts. For that I just want to send a big thumbs up to Hank Green.
[Source: EcoGeek]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
why not the LS2/LS7? 10:54AM (3/14/2008)
Wait a minute? Green coal actually captures carbon and thus doesn't contribute to global warming or deliver sulfur oxides and this is something to stand up against?
But a petroleum-powered (Diesel) V12 2-seater sports car that spews nitrogen oxides out at a prodigious rate is something autobloggreen can support!
Seems rather silly and absurdly political to me.
Reply
Andrew 12:05PM (3/14/2008)
"Green coal actually captures carbon" Its interesting that you say that....but how can you write that in present tense when there has never been a clean coal plant developed. I guess the 'green washing' of the coal lobby is making you believe its real and happening.
Reply
why not the LS2/LS7? 12:21PM (3/14/2008)
The reason it hasn't happened yet is because there aren't any "clean coal" plants yet.
That doesn't mean you can condemn them before they happen. There are no HCCI gas engines yet, do we deride the technology? Last I checked there were no fuel cell cars in production? Does that make them and less worthy of keeping track of? And we all know how the fact that Tesla hasn't put their car out to the public yet means it is inherently worse once it does get here.
You need to learn a little more English. Green coal is a type of noun that represent an idea, like "world peace". Just because we don't actually have world peace right now doesn't mean you don't use the present tense when talking about it.
"World peace means no countries at war anywhere."
See how that works? I've obviously been co-opted by the big world peace lobby too.
Reply
sensitive_man 7:12PM (3/15/2008)
Phuleasee... there is NO such thing as clean coal. OK so say you are able to capture the CO2. Happy happy joy joy, what about the mountain top removal that destroys our streams. What about the mercury and sulfur that will still go into the air?
Again, no such thing as clean coal. I am 100% with EcoGeek on this one!
Reply
Michel 8:10AM (12/06/2008)
Green Coal will not be ready before at least 20 years. This means that 300 billions tons of CO2 will be sent to the atmosphere during this 20 years, together with a lot of atmospheric pollutants, mercury and radioactive elements?
Reply