Clean Coal: What's the truth?

Upon viewing both sites, I noticed that each had its agenda portrayed to the viewer immediately. Right away the mood is set. Either clean coal is great and necessary, or clean coal doesn't exist and is catastrophically effecting our environment. The pro coal site, Americaspower.org conveys a vibrant, appealing, and "clean" appearance to the cause. One feels at home or comfortable with the use of coal because the site is so peaceful with various of images of people smiling and enjoying the electricity produced by clean coal. On the other hand, This Is Reality produces a message of death and pollution with its mascot bird dying upon running into each negative fact about the use of coal.
I personally preferred the pro coal site, America's Power as it was much easier to navigate and it's information seemed to be clearer to me. It wasn't trying to be too complex with its navigation of the site unlike the anti coal site. Its message was clear from the start by portraying how much America uses coal already, and what it does for us, and how cheap and reliable it is.
For starters, I would like to address what clean coal really is. According to This Is Reality, clean coal is the capturing and storing of the emissions produced by the burning of coal so that it doesn't reach the atmosphere. Therefore burning coal no matter what is always dirty, but its what one does with the emissions that can distinguish it as clean or not. There are two issues at stake in the argument for Clean Coal (CC). The biggest issue at hand is that of global warming and damage to the environment while its counterpart stresses that CC is necessary and cheap way to power the United States of America. America's Power stresses that the use of coal is necessary for America to use in order to keep up with its demand for electrical technology while This Is Reality stresses that coal can safely be part of the the future of our electrical energy source as long as its emissions are captured. It shows much we already use it, and how much we need it, while TIR simply tackles its environmental repercussions.
I believe that both parties target audience are that of younger generations. I feel that in this point in time that older generations whether they be pro or anti CC, they already have their minds made and it would be hard to change that. I think the only reason why someone could call the America's Power could be considered for an older audience is because of how easy it is to navigate and older people with less experience with technology typically would benefit more from that type of layout.
TIR is sponsored by MIT CO2 Capture and Storage Project, Center for Global Development, IEA Greenhouse Gas R&G Program, and Sierra Club Environmental Law Program. This companies provide credibility because their main focus is researching problems like this and understanding the complexities as well as what the proper solutions would be. The sponsors on Americas Power are companies that are strong supports of coal consumption as well as some companies in relation to green house gas emissions. I would have to say that TIR has more credibility because their sponsors actually support the cause, the main issue here as opposed to what coal is actually used for. They don't oppose using coal for energy, they just agree that we need to dispose of it properly. That to me seems more legitimate rather than companies just supporting the actual use of coal.
I think TIR uses emotional appeal to make the viewers feel guilty. By showing the death of the bird, viewers have no option but to feel a slight bit of remorse for the use of coal and its effect on the environment. I think the dark color scheme emphasizes that because black is typically a depressing color. Americas Power has more of a vibrant color scheme that allows for peoples opinions to be upbeat about clean coal. It would hard to have a positive outlook about CC with dark and gloomy colors. This ties in tightly with the visual appeals. You express something you like with lighter and happier colors just as much as you express negativity for something with dark coloring.
Although I liked the Americas Power website more, I found that This Is Reality was a more persuasive website. The fact is, TIR tackled the real issue being the after effect of CC use. They didn't really try and deny that coal is helpful in providing energy, they just clearly outlined how the disposal of its product needs to be changed and improved. On the other hand, America's power just stated why we need clean coal, but not how it really it is clean or how it isn't a pollutant.