Think Progress

CNN’s Velshi: I’m not even as ‘clean’ as coal when I ‘get out of the shower.’

Previewing his interview with the CEO of Sasol, a South African company that produces coal-based liquid fuels, chief business correspondent Ali Velshi on Friday admitted that there “are issues with coal,” but minimized its problems:

There are issues with coal. It’s not the cleanest thing in the world. You see the signs for clean coal, 99 percent clean. I’m not 99 percent clean when I get out of the shower. . . I just look clean.

Watch it:

The Wonk Room explains how far Velshi is from the truth when he talks about “99 percent clean” coal.



43 Responses to “CNN’s Velshi: I’m not even as ‘clean’ as coal when I ‘get out of the shower.’”

  1. johnnyRocketpants says:

    Geez, who the hell taught him how to clean himself? What is he, 80% clean coming out of the shower? Is he taking a shit in there or something? Idiot.


  2. Ms_Joanne says:

    #1, now that there’s funny, and I don’t care who you are!


  3. Zooey says:

    Velshi has sold out to Big Coal.

    Next…


  4. Chartreuse Dog says:

    The emissions problem, as bad as it is, is only half of the problem with coal. Mountaintop removal coal mining is the other side of the coin, and equally horrible.


  5. Ms_Joanne says:

    Now I am wondering if he’s got a bad case of smegma. (shudder)


  6. MCMetal says:

    How can replacing one dirty , finite fuel source with another dirty , finite fuel sorce be “minimized” in any way ?


  7. johnnyRocketpants says:

    I’m going to write CNN and offer him a fool-proof manual on how to clean his body. On sale now for only $3000! Lots of big pictures if you get confused Ali!

    Perhaps he’s bathing WITH the coal. He’s already in bed with it.


  8. RUCerious says:

    I’ve got to minimizize my use of koal.


  9. RUCerious says:

    Especially in the showower…


  10. VerbalKint says:

    Well, either Velshi is an idiot, or a lying propagandist (I vote for both). Mining and burning of coal produces many dangerous contaminants, but that is just the beginning. Coal combustion yields CO2 at nearly 100%, and therefore releases the highest C02 output per BTU of any fuel source. Switching oil to coal increases CO2 production per BTU by something like 40%.


  11. Ms_Joanne says:

  12. Ms_Joanne says:

    Verbal, I heard that coal could be cleaner IF they retrofitted all the places where it’s used to have some special kind of lid on the stacks but the cost is so high most places won’t do it.

    Watch that become the talking point…they just won’t mention that they aren’t going to bother doing the right (and costly) thing.


  13. SP Biloxi says:

    “I’m not 99 percent clean when I get out of the shower. . . I just look clean.”

    And I certainly would have the Purell if I sat next to this idiot.

    p.s. Best comment from #1. Sounds like Velshi smells like ass all the time.


  14. Freedom Rebel says:

    There is no such thing as clean Coal. I can understand how he never feels 99% clean; it’s the foul stench of his propoganda he is smelling.

    We would have to increase our coal mining by 40%,to replace only 10% of our oil consumption. In so doing this, we would create a “ton of carbon dioxide for each barrel of liquid fuel”. The coal plant pollution kills 24,000 people a year with an increase of 40%, the death toll would be 34,600.

    This would increase our dependence on fossil fuels and claim more lives in the process. Velshi is minimizing all the negative issues concerning coal based liquid fuels. How much are they paying him to push this issue?


  15. MCMetal says:

    Ms_Joanne Says:
    ——————————————————————————–

    Verbal, I heard that coal could be cleaner IF they retrofitted all the places where it’s used to have some special kind of lid on the stacks but the cost is so high most places won’t do it.

    Watch that become the talking point…they just won’t mention that they aren’t going to bother doing the right (and costly) thing.

    April 28th, 2008 at 10:19 pm

    That’s akin to claiming burning fossils fuels would be much cleaner if we just didn’t use them ……………..


  16. Roket says:

    He’s not totally clean after he gets out of the shower because, sadly, he always has a dribble of shit running out of his mouth. And don’t get me started on his halitosis problem.


  17. MCMetal says:

    I support a muzzle being your birthday present , Voice_Of_Treason …………..


  18. MCMetal says:

    Voice_of_Reason Says:
    ——————————————————————————–

    Barack Obama supports clean coal.

    April 28th, 2008 at 11:15 pm Recommend (0) | Report Abuse

    ——————————————————————————–

    Voice_of_Reason Says:
    ——————————————————————————–

    Hillary Clinton supports clean coal.

    April 28th, 2008 at 11:16 pm

    No , they don’t , you lying skid mark ………..


  19. dbadass says:

    Hi Voice_of_Reason:
    Do you support clean coal? What if anything do you and your family do to effect positive yet simple adjustments in your 24/7 which aid the planet? Do you agree with the new moral obligation of so amny churches to foster stewardship?


  20. Gregor Samsa says:

    The “Voice of Reason” moniker has got to be one of the biggest misnomers in this blog.

    Regardless of who supports and/or endorses this technology, fact remains that “clean coal” is an oxymoron.


  21. dbadass says:

    So what little steps at the bottom of the pyramid are we each engaged in?


  22. MCMetal says:

    Voice_Of_The_HorseshitGOP

    Obama supports “clean coal technology” as a stop-gap before beginning the transition to a new digital electricity grid , powered by an alternative , clean source ; not as a permamnent solution.


  23. MCMetal says:

    And the same for Hillary ; what do you and McStupid propose ?

    More profits for the oil companies , shithead ?


  24. Zooey says:

    Velshi’s going to hate himself in the morning. Never on the first date, dear…


  25. MCMetal says:

    Voice_of_Reason Says:
    ——————————————————————————–

    Don’t try to derail the thread dbadass. The thread is about clean coal. Now please explain why you disagree with both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on clean coal? (not to mention John McCain, Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul, among others).

    April 28th, 2008 at 11:38 pm

    Hey moron

    You want to replace 1 finite energy source with another finite energy source as a permanent solution ?

    What kind of a dipshit are you ?


  26. dbadass says:

    Derail? Are we each not a part of the problem and the solution simultaneously?


  27. VerbalKint says:

    So tell me, VoR, which of these two stellar candidates do you intend to vote for in the general election: Obama or Clinton?


  28. VerbalKint says:

    What VofR does not grasp is that most people here are willing to criticize Democratic politicians when we feel they are wrong. So we feel free to criticize Obama or Clinton regarding their proposed energy policies (although we do it without deliberately distorting their positions). VofR feels that he scores points when he notes that a Democratic candidate supports something that any of us oppose, because he expects Progressives to be ideologically-driven lock steppers like his own brownshirt ilk, and defend our candidates no matter what. But that isn’t how things work for the intellectually honest, VofR, not that I expect you to grasp what I am telling you.


  29. Gregor Samsa says:

    By pointing out that both Obama and Clinton support investment on “clean coal” technology -even if as a temporary measure, VOR has conclusively proven that… uh… oh… hmm…

    What’s the topic of the thread again?


  30. mattjm says:

    Wait, wait. I think ya’ll might have misinterpreted his comment. I think Velshi is being sarcastic. He’s saying; “The signs say coal is 99 percent clean…Yeah right! There’s no way it could be cleaner than me after a shower…”

    Am I right?


  31. pete says:

    We, and others, will continue to burn coal indefinitely, so, it only makes sense to take every possible step to reduce emissions both here and abroad. The CO2 is only part of the problem. Some of the other “goodies” include: mercury, sulfur (Remember “acid rain”? It’s still falling.) and various radioactive elements. Even without “capping”, for carbon, we must reduce the other toxins both here and abroad. Then, of course, there are all the issues with mining and processing. These too must be modernized both here and abroad.

    All of these issues will not be dealt with until MUCH stricter regulation is put in place. Much of the “Third World” looks to us for their cues. We need to catch up with Europe and become an example of responsibility.

    We all know that won’t even begin, in this country, until the Republicriminals are sent packing. Short of torture they will never, effectively, regulate any part of the energy industry. They just don’t “do responsibility”. The self-proclaimed “adults” have proven to be greedy children, devoid of restraint.

    Oh yeah. Mr. Velshi is apparently a major assnugget who would sell his mother for a buck. It’s obvious he’s willing to risk the health, and wellbeing, of his descendants.


  32. pete says:

    Oops! I forgot.

    G’night good people.
    You too trolls.


  33. backup says:

    Well, one positive aspect of coal (for America) is that we have a relative abudance of it.

    I saw a recent report that Montana alone has enough coal to replace our imported oil requirements for 200 years.

    Obviously, the problem is enviromental. Mining issues. CO2 emissions.

    But, if you could make it clean, and enviromentally friendly, it could be an element of an energy policy that could ween us from dependance on foreign oil. That would be positive.


  34. curmudgeon says:

    Wonder if Velshi uses the same claim about coal being cleaner than he is after a shower as his byline on the internet dating sites? If so, wouldn’t the women, men or both who respond to such an ad be an interesting lot?


  35. Fool Zero says:

    This was probably poor Velshi’s way of admitting that he feels dirty after shilling for the coal industry. Lady Macbeth is supposed to have had a similar problem. “Out, damned spot! out, I say!”


  36. jay_severin_has_a_small_pen1s says:

    He’s right! Right-wing reporters can shower all they want but they will not be able to scrub the filth on them away.


  37. Doc Rock says:

    Money speaks, eloquently, doesn’t it?


  38. moondancer says:

    He gets to be a character in a nightmare sci-fi movie “to be determined” for that one.


  39. hussein toasterhead says:

    Voice_of_Reason Says:

    Now please explain why you disagree with both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on clean coal? (not to mention John McCain, Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul, among others).

    April 28th, 2008 at 11:38 pm

    Because the candidates are misguided on these issues. It wouldn’t be the first time that I disagreed with Barack or Hillary on an issue and it won’t be the last.


  40. christopher wiwi says:

    Let me see, big the big money Coal wants us to believe that coal is clean and it impact will leave a small carbon footprint and low pollution,

    NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  41. backup says:

    chris. the energy has to come from somewhere. What’s your idea?


  42. Art says:

    OWWW! I can’t get that mental image out of my head!!


  43. DieNowForPeace says:

    T. Boone Pickens is funding solar and wind farms to replace fossil fuel power plants. He’d rather use natural gas to power automobiles, while cleaning up the dirty and costly coal plants, and he’ll make a fortune doing it.

    Next month, Pickens’ company, Mesa Power, will begin buying land and ordering 2,700 wind turbines that will eventually generate 4,000 megawatts of electricity – the equivalent of building two commercial scale nuclear power plants – enough power for about 1 million homes.

    “These are substantial,” said Pickens, speaking to students at Georgetown University on Thursday. “They’re big.”

    Pickens knows a thing or two about big. He heads the BP Capital hedge fund with over $4 billion under management, and earned about $1 billion in 2006 making big bets on commodity and equity markets.

    Though a long-time oil man, Pickens said he has embraced the call for cleaner energy sources that don’t emit heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

    “I’m an environmentalist – I can pass the saliva test,” he said.

    But Pickens is not out to save the planet. He intends to make money.

    Though Pickens admits that wind power won’t be as lucrative as oil deals, he still expects the Texas project to turn at least a 25 percent return.

    “When I go into these markets, I expect to make money on them,” Pickens said. “I don’t expect to lose.”

    LINK



Jump to Top

About Think Progress | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy (off-site) | RSS | Donate
© 2005-2009 Center for American Progress Action Fund
View Most Popular

Advertisement

What We're About

Featured

image
Subscribe to the Progress Report



imageTopic Cloud


Visit Our Affiliated Sites

image image
Reports


Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.

Name:
Email:
Tip:
(required)


imageArchives


imageBlog Roll