The web site, which on Wednesday included sections on oil, natural gas, fuel efficiency, biofuels, wind, solar and nuclear energy, morphed sometime late Thursday to include a new segment devoted to the fossil fuel.

“President Obama has set a 10-year goal to develop and deploy cost-effective clean coal technology,” the site proclaimed.

“The Recovery Act invested substantially in carbon capture and sequestration research, including 22 projects across four different areas of carbon capture-and-storage research and development.”

The section on fuel efficiency is now gone from the online illustration.

According to political blog The Hill, Obama campaign spokesperson Ben LaBolt told the media that clean coal has been an “essential part” of Obama’s energy strategy.

The President has been at the center of a firestorm by coal advocates as of late, including Kentucky representative and chairman of the nation’s house energy and commerce energy and power subcommittee Ed Whitfield, who took issue with the coal’s stark absence again last week.

He reportedly told those at a hearing on electricity reliability rules that “there’s one glaring absence and that has to be coal”

“Many of us get upset about that because it has a tremendous economic impact on our country, it provides a lot of jobs, and it makes us competitive in the global marketplace because coal is still a valuable resource … and yet this administration has been open in the business of putting coal out of business,” he said.

“To not even mention coal as an important energy sector is unbelievable to me.”

Ohio senator Rob Portman told the Washington Times that he was also disappointed that Obama was “out of touch” with the needs of his state.

Talking to the Wall Street Journal Friday, Whitfield said that the update was symbolic.

“At least the president is finally acknowledging our most abundant energy resource, coal,” he said.

“However, I’m skeptical he will actually do anything to draw on this resource.”

Obama’s camp even invited an open discussion with Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney on coal, with campaign spokeswoman Lis Smith pointing out to the Washington Times that it was the former Massachusetts governor that was quoted during his term there that coal-fired plants “kill people”

“Look, if Mitt Romney wants to have a debate about coal, we are happy to have that debate,” she said, according to the political news service.

“The president has supported clean coal technologies and employment in the mining industry is at a 15-year high. Mitt Romney said that coal-fired plants ‘kill people.’”

American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity vice president Evan Tracey responded positively to the change but urged follow-through.

“We’re glad the Obama campaign finally included clean coal in its ‘all of the above’ energy strategy, but the president’s commitment to coal needs to be more than just a talking point.”

According to data from the West Virginia Coal Association made available Friday, Obama had a shocking performance in last week’s primary election in the state, with convicted felon Keith Judd, who is serving 210 months in a Texas penitentiary for extortion, receiving 41% of the vote and winning 10 of its counties including Logan, Lincoln, Boone, Clay, Gilmer, Hardy, Mingo, Tucker, Webster and Wyoming.

He also performed strongly in another dozen counties, such as Raleigh, Randolph, Wayne, Wetzel and Wirt, and almost won all of them. Almost all are among the most coal-rich in West Virginia.

Much of the nation’s coverage of the state’s primary has attributed the shake-up in the results as the state’s protest against the Environmental Protection Agency’s “War on Coal”

Meanwhile, pro-coal governor Earl Ray Tomblin easily won the Democratic nomination and Republican Bill Maloney also won his nomination. US Senator and former governor Joe Manchin, also a coal advocate, won the Democratic nomination with 80% of the vote, according to WVCA data.

While many have criticized Obama’s policies and promises to “bankrupt coal” over the course of his administration, tensions peaked earlier this year when the EPA proposed its first national standards that would limit greenhouse gas emissions from new power plants and possibly alter the future of coal-fired facilities.

Should the EPA’s outlines become final, emissions from coal-fired power plants would be limited to 1000 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt hour of power produced.

Only new coal-fired facilities will be affected as existing plants are already being modified to meet other EPA mandates for emissions and will not be part of the planned standard.

Additionally, power facilities with building permits in place or with plans to commence construction within a year of the effective date of any resulting regulations will also be exempt, along with non-continental US territories and Hawaii.

To meet the standard, if passed, some form of carbon capture and sequestration, such as carbon dioxide for enhanced oil recovery, would be required.

The agency is accepting public input on the proposal until June 25.