Peabody "clean coal" ad ruled misleading by U.K. regulator

An advertisement from Peabody Energy (NYSE:BTU) promoting coal as an energy source is misleading in its use of the phrase “clean coal,” according to the U.K.'s regulator for advertising standards.

Upholding a complaint from the World Wildlife Fund, the regulator says consumers were likely to interpret the advertisement as a claim that “clean coal” processes don’t produce carbon dioxide or other emissions, and the ad must be changed before it runs again.

The agency rejects a complaint from the WWF that BTU’s statement that “energy poverty” is the biggest human and environmental crisis was misleading and unsubstantiated.

From other sites
Comments (5)
  • 6151621
    , contributor
    Comments (1172) | Send Message
    Since when was CO2 dirty? We know that people breathe out CO2, right? Power seeking regulators (or activists) don't generally care about anyone's well-being beyond their own. (This goes for BTU too but since they are seen as baddies, maybe people should recognize this CO2 pollution claim as the PROPOGANDA it is.)
    20 Aug 2014, 06:35 PM Reply Like
  • stocknerd
    , contributor
    Comments (1503) | Send Message
    What part of dead coal business do you not understand? I care more about clean air than some uneducated coal miner. Government regulations have not hurt the coal industry more than the companies. The coal business for energy is DEAD>
    20 Aug 2014, 11:15 PM Reply Like
  • sethmcs
    , contributor
    Comments (3565) | Send Message
    Yet you exhail CO2. I think we should cap and trade your emissions.
    21 Aug 2014, 12:39 AM Reply Like
  • King Rat
    , contributor
    Comments (1736) | Send Message
    sethmcs, burning coal means releasing sulfur and other junk in the air but since everybody is primarily concerned about CO2, you're right.


    However you fail to understand that certain people are a waste of time to argue with.
    stocknerd's 4 sentences:
    First sentence = personal attack on first poster.
    Second sentence = personal attack on coal miners.
    Third sentence = unsubstantiated fallacy.
    Fourth sentence = (stocknerd's) personal ideal out of touch with reality.


    Speaking logic and reason into people who speak 50% personal attacks, 25% lies, and 25% fantasy is not much more productive than casting pearls before swine.
    21 Aug 2014, 02:55 AM Reply Like
  • 6151621
    , contributor
    Comments (1172) | Send Message
    @K.Rat: the problem is CO2 travels around the world. Other pollutants are more local and they can be scrubbed in coal burning to significantly reduce most of the bad stuff and in the US this is done and that's why US air is better than 40 years ago, not because US stopped using coal.
    21 Aug 2014, 01:59 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs