Talk:clean coal

RFV discussion
"Coal which has been cleaned up to make it environmentally acceptable". This is a very vague and dubious definition. Is it coal that has been washed etc, and by what standard is it environmentally acceptable. The Wikipedia article give a lot more meaning, and seems to cover the entire industry and not just a specific supply of the stuff. Is the term US specific. Is there more than one definition needed. --Dmol (talk) 00:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I believe it to be more of a process than a tangible thing. It's not that someone sits down with coal and a scrubbing brush, more that the coal is prepared before being burned in specially designed furnaces with fume extractors to recover soot and pollutant gasses from the exhaust, &c &c. It's a noun in the same mould as "Democracy". ref http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_coal_technology.
 * A cousin of mine who works in the field of environmental engineering has remarked to me that "clean coal" is, charitably, only relative to the normal process, and uncharitably, a contradiction in terms. But that's opinion, not etymology or definition.
 * – Catsidhe (verba, facta) 01:17, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Failed. Since only the first definition existed when the term was RFVed, and the nominator specifically mentioned it’s the definition that is dubious, only that definition has been deleted. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

clean coal
+ . — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:05, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It does damage the environment, though. (OTOH, I'm not sure all misnomers should have entries. I'll stay on the fence for now.) - -sche (discuss) 23:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * In an Orwellian sense like the Clean Air Act cleans the air of birds. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 04:01, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why it is listed for deleted, when the term clearly exists. The reason I listed it at RFV was that the definition is vague and dubious. Feel free to put in a more accurate definition, then I'm sure we can get rid of this sense only.--Dmol (talk) 07:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Because it’s SOP. Clean is used for anything which (whether true or not, as -sche noted) doesn’t damage the environment. There’s clean energy, clean oil, clean technology, clean mining, etc. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:36, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Delete per nom. The Orwellian magic is right in the word clean, like organic, gluten-free, democracy, etc. DCDuring TALK 18:08, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I have added a second definition, taken from Wikipedia, that seems to cover the term. As I have said, I wanted verification of the dubious and vague first definition. --Dmol (talk) 08:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

The nominated sense has been deleted. bd2412 T 17:17, 6 May 2014 (UTC)