(01-13-2017 10:55 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Well, coal miners bought his lies about saving their jobs.

Hope they take revenge in four years when their mines are shuttered.

You seem pretty excited that good people will lose their jobs.

(01-13-2017 01:03 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  It's funny to see some of the responses here.


To the extreme conservatives on this board, anything that even looks like a "win" for progressives is therefore a "loss" for conservatives. Even if that's nonsense.

They want so bad to defeat this, reverse the trend, and/or pretend like Trump can do something about it.

But they don't even have an inch of a leg to stand on. We won this one, thankfully.

"If" you won it, it had nothing to do with the lefts aversion to coal. It has much more to to with advances in technology that unlocked a ton of natural gas that was previously in the ground, but they couldn't get to it like they can today.

If those of your ilk get their way, they'll kill Natural Gas as well.

(01-13-2017 01:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 01:33 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  Exactly who has said they have a problem with this trend?

Trump, when he lied, and the coal workers who elected him.

So, nobody in this thread then...

Bison is losing it.

Nobody denies coal is on the way out in the US.

the tone-deafness from the left is that IF this is the case, then why do we need to push it off a cliff, costing thousands of people their jobs prematurely?

Use those years of decline to soften the impact on people... let some people retire or migrate out or move. Retrain some people while they're still working so that you don't damage their psyche and home life by putting them out of work just to meet some arbitrary timetable or appease 'activists'.

The left was against drilling and fracking as well. The whole 'we won' thing is laughable.

(01-13-2017 01:49 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Nobody denies coal is on the way out in the US.

the tone-deafness from the left is that IF this is the case, then why do we need to push it off a cliff, costing thousands of people their jobs prematurely?

Use those years of decline to soften the impact on people... let some people retire or migrate out or move. Retrain some people while they're still working so that you don't damage their psyche and home life by putting them out of work just to meet some arbitrary timetable or appease 'activists'.

The answer is because it doesn't impact them directly.

(01-13-2017 01:47 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  You seem pretty excited that good people will lose their jobs.

Bad things happen to good people, and good things happen to bad people.

Just ain't fair, is it kiddo?

(01-13-2017 01:48 PM)Crebman Wrote:  If those of your ilk get their way, they'll kill Natural Gas as well.

That's the next step. First step is to kill dirty coal.

(01-13-2017 01:49 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  So, nobody in this thread then...

Except that I started the thread, which you voluntarily joined. So that response is invalid.

(01-13-2017 01:49 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  IF this is the case, then why do we need to push it off a cliff, costing thousands of people their jobs prematurely?

Use those years of decline to soften the impact on people... let some people retire or migrate out or move. Retrain some people while they're still working so that you don't damage their psyche and home life by putting them out of work just to meet some arbitrary timetable or appease 'activists'.

Here's the ironic thing about this response: it would be appropriate if HRC had been elected.

But she wasn't. The guy who said he was going to end coal regulations and bring the coal business roaring back to life, was elected.


And yet energy companies are shutting down coal-fired plants left and right.


So, I guess, you'll have to take this plea to the energy companies. Because aiming this plea at progressives certainly isn't going to do you any good!

(01-13-2017 01:51 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The left was against drilling and fracking as well. The whole 'we won' thing is laughable.

One victory at a time, my friend.

(01-13-2017 01:57 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 01:47 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  You seem pretty excited that good people will lose their jobs.

Bad things happen to good people, and good things happen to bad people.

Just ain't fair, is it kiddo?

(01-13-2017 01:48 PM)Crebman Wrote:  If those of your ilk get their way, they'll kill Natural Gas as well.

That's the next step. First step is to kill dirty coal.

(01-13-2017 01:49 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  So, nobody in this thread then...

Except that I started the thread, which you voluntarily joined. So that response is invalid.

(01-13-2017 01:49 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  IF this is the case, then why do we need to push it off a cliff, costing thousands of people their jobs prematurely?

Use those years of decline to soften the impact on people... let some people retire or migrate out or move. Retrain some people while they're still working so that you don't damage their psyche and home life by putting them out of work just to meet some arbitrary timetable or appease 'activists'.

Here's the ironic thing about this response: it would be appropriate if HRC had been elected.

But she wasn't. The guy who said he was going to end coal regulations and bring the coal business roaring back to life, was elected.


And yet energy companies are shutting down coal-fired plants left and right.


So, I guess, you'll have to take this plea to the energy companies. Because aiming this plea at progressives certainly isn't going to do you any good!

Of course that happens but most people (because they have human decency) do not take pleasure in misfortune.

(01-13-2017 01:58 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  most people ... do not take pleasure in misfortune.

The end of coal is a pleasurable thing. It should be celebrated.

Not sure what else to tell you. If you insist that fixating on this straw man tangent is relevant, then you'll just have to do your soul searching alone.

(01-13-2017 02:01 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 01:58 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  most people ... do not take pleasure in misfortune.

The end of coal is a pleasurable thing. It should be celebrated.

Not sure what else to tell you. If you insist that fixating on this straw man tangent is relevant, then you'll just have to do your soul searching alone.

Next time, don't edit quotes.

(01-13-2017 01:57 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Here's the ironic thing about this response: it would be appropriate if HRC had been elected.

But she wasn't. The guy who said he was going to end coal regulations and bring the coal business roaring back to life, was elected.


And yet energy companies are shutting down coal-fired plants left and right.


So, I guess, you'll have to take this plea to the energy companies. Because aiming this plea at progressives certainly isn't going to do you any good!

Here's the ironic thing about this response...

It's a crock.

Coal is like any other commodity... it is globally fungible. Shutting down a coal fired plant in the US doesn't mean that we can't export it to China. Give them OUR 'clean' (relatively) power technology for free (it's been around for a while so it is dirt cheap) and it is still a net positive in terms of reducing carbon.

These were miners voting for Trump, not power plant operators. Coal into electricity isn't its only use.

The miners don't care if the mining industry doubles... only the corporations would care about that... what they care about is that they keep their jobs and/or get other ones.

Once again, the left trying to tell 'the right' what they expect out of Trump. If all Trump does is 'tread water' with coal, it will still be better than what Hillary and progressives promised to do.

(01-13-2017 01:58 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 01:51 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The left was against drilling and fracking as well. The whole 'we won' thing is laughable.

One victory at a time, my friend.

Yeah, except you're claiming victory over something you lost on.

(01-13-2017 02:02 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  Next time,

I'll take that as your concession on the point, since you didn't respond to it.

(01-13-2017 02:16 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Shutting down a coal fired plant in the US doesn't mean that we can't export it to China.

China doesn't want it. They're getting rid of coal-fired plants faster than we are!

(01-13-2017 02:16 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  what they care about is that they keep their jobs and/or get other ones.

Believe it or not, I proposed that the government pay coal miners to mine the coal ... and then simply dump it in a pit.

It was roundly shot down here. I tried. But conservatives won't be satisfied unless they can sit on a beach chair with a marshmallow on a stick, watching the coal be burned into greenhouse gases.

(01-13-2017 02:16 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  If all Trump does is 'tread water' with coal

coal-fired plants die, and therefore coal mining dies.

Trump will be a liar, and they will punish him for it in four years.

(01-13-2017 02:21 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 02:16 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Shutting down a coal fired plant in the US doesn't mean that we can't export it to China.

China doesn't want it. They're getting rid of coal-fired plants faster than we are!

But they still have them and they need more power. Many African nations do as well and they too need more power. Coal is cheap and so are their power plants. China is shutting the old, dirty, inefficient/under-sized ones.

Stop arguing meaningless minutia.

Coal miners voted against Hillary as much as 'for' Trump. If he does nothing to help them at all, they're still better off than if progressives were in charge. They hope Trump will improve things. They KNOW Hillary and progressives would make things worse.

You act like Hillary was 'benign' on coal.

Quote:

(01-13-2017 02:16 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  what they care about is that they keep their jobs and/or get other ones.

Believe it or not, I proposed that the government pay coal miners to mine the coal ... and then simply dump it in a pit.

It was roundly shot down here. I tried. But conservatives won't be satisfied unless they can sit on a beach chair with a marshmallow on a stick, watching the coal be burned into greenhouse gases.

Not true. I (and other conservatives) suggested dozens of other similar uses for coal.

Quote:

(01-13-2017 02:16 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  If all Trump does is 'tread water' with coal

coal-fired plants die, and therefore coal mining dies.

Trump will be a liar, and they will punish him for it in four years.

By electing a progressive who promises to speed the process? Keep dreaming.

(01-13-2017 02:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  But they still have them and they need more power.

Hence why they're investing in natural gas and renewable forms.

(01-13-2017 02:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  You act like Hillary was 'benign' on coal.

She was a jerk to coal workers.

Telling them that she would build a new clean energy industry there that would sustain their way of life for generations to come, as well as retrain current coal workers in the new clean energy industry.

What a friggin jerk!

Definitely can see why they didn't vote for her.

(01-13-2017 02:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Not true. I (and other conservatives) suggested dozens of other similar uses for coal.

Fair enough. I'm open to hearing about all of the ones that don't burn the coal or process it in any way that releases any greenhouse gases or other air pollution.

(01-13-2017 02:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  By electing a progressive who promises to speed the process?

You hope you can keep manipulating coal workers, like that.

I'm more skeptical. I think they're apt to come back with a vengeance. We'll see, I guess.

(01-13-2017 02:49 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 02:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  But they still have them and they need more power.

Hence why they're investing in natural gas and renewable forms.

'It's the economy, stupid'

Coal exists because it is far cheaper than those options. Especially when not encumbered by impotent regulation

Quote:

(01-13-2017 02:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  You act like Hillary was 'benign' on coal.

She was a jerk to coal workers.

Telling them that she would build a new clean energy industry there that would sustain their way of life for generations to come, as well as retrain current coal workers in the new clean energy industry.

What a friggin jerk!

Definitely can see why they didn't vote for her.

That's specifically what they said. Take it up with them. No reason why new, clean energy would locate itself into coal country. If they don't have nat gas or wide open spaces or lots of sun or wind, they aren't retraining those workers in the new industry unless they move. They don't want to.

Quote:

(01-13-2017 02:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Not true. I (and other conservatives) suggested dozens of other similar uses for coal.

Fair enough. I'm open to hearing about all of the ones that don't burn the coal or process it in any way that releases any greenhouse gases or other air pollution.

The ones i recall mentioning were water filtration and making carbon-fiber products. since alternatives like steel and concrete and plastics ALSO require releasing greenhouse gasses or other air pollution, it's a relative, not absolute question/issue.

Quote:

(01-13-2017 02:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  By electing a progressive who promises to speed the process?

You hope you can keep manipulating coal workers, like that.

I'm more skeptical. I think they're apt to come back with a vengeance. We'll see, I guess.

Manipulating?

For all the threads trying to claim that Trump was anti-women, anti-legal immigration etc etc etc... Among the biggest screw ups was Hillary's 'we're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of work'. Even if she DID have this long story about how she would retrain those people, the reality in this country is that in cases like these, jobs are ROUTINELY taken away from one state, and given to another. You might install some, but you aren't installing many solar panels in PA mining country.

She screwed herself.... with the help of Obama.

(01-13-2017 03:09 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  She screwed herself.... with the help of Obama.

now there's a picture I would like to erase from my mind.....

(01-13-2017 01:20 PM)banker Wrote:  China is a hugely invalid comparison, but one I would expect from someone who knows nothing of coal. China burns a lot of high sulfur, high ash coal in plants without scrubbers. We haven't done that in the US in decades, and didn't really do it to much before that. Appalachian coal, which was the primary source for power generation until the 1980s, is just fundamentally (actually metallurgically) better coal than Illinois or Powder River coal. The latter two burn much dirtier which necessitated the installation of scrubbers to be burned in a more environmentally favorable way. Also, the issue in China is much like the one in LA, it's more about population density in the major cities and the number of vehicles. Why is LA the smoggiest city in the US yet they have no coal power plants?

Go sit outside on any US coal plant and just stare at the stacks. You will see nothing but a white steam plume coming out. Look at the surrounding area and you will see no haze. You really need to investigate this stuff yourself.

But I thought the DJT/GOP was saying that 'regulations are killing Coal?'...Scrubbers are regulation.