The Black Lung Buy Off?

March 12, 2010 by kentuckycoal

From Politico-

The Chamber of Commerce is targeting a provision in the Senate health care bill it says is a special legislative deal inserted by Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) that threatens the solvency of a trust fund created to help mine workers suffering from black lung disease.

“This had to be another one of those backrooms deals that was put into the larger bill to cobble votes together,” said Bruce Josten, the Chamber’s top lobbyist.

To read more click here:

http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0310/The_Black_Lung_Buy_Off.html

Lawmakers From Coal States Seek to Delay Emission Limits

March 5, 2010 by kentuckycoal
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: March 4, 2010

WASHINGTON — Coal-country lawmakers moved Thursday to impose a two-year moratorium on potential federal regulation of carbon dioxide and other climate-altering gases

To read the entire article click here:  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/science/earth/05epa.html?ref=todayspaper

Chandler Foes Consider Cap-and-Trade Revenge

March 4, 2010 by kentuckycoal

March 4, 2010

By John McArdle, Roll Call Staff

Six weeks after the Supreme Court sent shock waves through the political world by lifting long-held bans on corporate and union involvement in federal elections, one district is looking ripe for the new rules to be put into play.

The entire article may be viewed at http://www.rollcall.com/issues/55_98/politics/43818-1.html

 (c) Copyright 2008 Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved.

Jackson: Effort to stop EPA ’step backward’ for science if successful

March 3, 2010 by kentuckycoal
By Jim Snyder – 03/03/10 10:32 AM ET

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson blasted an effort in Congress to block the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases.

She said the effort would be an “enormous step backward for science” if successful.

Jackson defended EPA’s finding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health and welfare. That “endangerment” finding requires EPA to regulate emissions under the Clean Air Act, according to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and others in the Senate and House are seeking to stop EPA through the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to prevent federal rules from being implemented. The act has only been used once, when in the 1990s Congress blocked an ergonomics standard proposed by the Occupational Health & Safety Administration.

to read more click here:

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/84695-jackson-effort-to-stop-epa-step-backward-for-science

Natural gas lobby challenging coal

March 1, 2010 by kentuckycoal

By Jim Snyder

Natural gas lobbyists, who felt their industry got the short shrift in climate legislation, are pushing new incentives to encourage utilities to switch from coal to natural gas.
 
In doing so, the sector is starting a lobbying fight with the coal industry, which has long and deep ties on Capitol Hill and is determined to hold onto its role as the dominant source of electricity in the United States.

Lobbyists for natural gas companies were heartened by reports that President Barack Obama would announce during a speech on the economy last Wednesday a program to encourage utilities to displace coal with natural gas.

The president’s speech was to validate a lobbying campaign to promote the industry’s profile in Washington that has built on new discoveries of huge natural gas reserves in shale rock formations in Texas and the Northeast. But the president ended up only reiterating his support for comprehensive energy and climate legislation in his speech before the Business Roundtable on Wednesday, without mentioning natural gas specifically.
 
Natural gas releases about half of the carbon emissions as coal when burned. According to the Congressional Research Service, displacing older coal plants with nearby natural gas facilities could cut greenhouse gas emissions from the utility sector by 20 percent. The report, however, also raised unanswered questions about the feasibility of such a switch.
 
Coal now accounts for around 50 percent of the electricity produced in the United States; natural gas, around 20 percent.
 
But the fight is just getting started, after years in which energy sectors co-existed peacefully by not challenging one another directly. Climate legislation has strained relations.
 
America’s Natural Gas Alliance, a trade group formed to bring cohesion to the industry’s lobbying efforts split among producers, pipelines and distribution companies, has spent $1.6 million on lobbying since starting in 2009. Its founders say the annual budget could reach $80 million.
 
The alliance has spent some of its money promoting a reversal of the coal-natural gas ratio of electricity production.
 
Industry lobbyists say the need for the revived campaign was underscored by the House climate bill.
 
The measure included enough incentives for “clean” coal and renewable energy that natural gas use would actually decline in upcoming years, according to the Energy Information Administration, even though natural gas is cleaner than coal and more dependable than the wind or the sun.
 
The climate bill and the fact that Obama failed to mention natural gas among his energy priorities in his first major address to Congress after his Inauguration has left the natural gas industry with middle-child-like insecurities that it is trying hard to put behind it.
 
Three gas groups — the Independent Petroleum Association of America, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, and the Natural Gas Supply Association — called for natural gas to be included in a “clean energy standard” that would mandate use of lower carbon fuels and renewable energy sources.
 
A clean energy standard could force some utilities to replace coal with natural gas.
 
“It’s time for policymakers to recognize the new domestic supply reality for natural gas,” said Donald Santa, president of INGAA, said in a release.
 
Other proposals floated include loan guarantees to help utilities finance natural gas plants, or tax incentives to encourage power companies to shut down their dirtiest coal facilities.
 
“ANGA members want to see proposals that recognize that an increased use of natural gas gives this country an extraordinary opportunity, right now, to both accelerate greenhouse gas emissions reductions and advance our clean-energy economy,” said ANGA President and CEO Regina Hopper in an email response to questions.
 
The coal industry rests its carbon-constrained future on “clean” coal technologies that would sequester and store CO2. Coal-powered utilities are responsible for around 33 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions from human activity in the United States.
 
In the near-term, though, coal lobbyists continue to stress the economic advantages of the fossil fuel.
 
The National Mining Association, the coal industry’s main trade group, put out a preemptive press release prior to the president’s speech that said displacing coal with natural gas would hurt the economy.
 
“Creation of an artificial electricity generation market for natural gas in place of affordable, abundant and reliable coal is bad public policy and undermines the administration’s economic and energy objectives,” said Hal Quinn, president and CEO of the mining group.
 
One coal lobbyist was putting together a fact sheet challenging the natural gas industry’s 100-year supply claim and noting historic and projected cost differences between coal and natural gas.
 
Climate legislation would likely reduce coal use, but the industry has proved remarkably adept at surviving in a difficult political climate.
 
A coal caucus formed in January by Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) has grown to 68 members, including 28 Democrats.
 
The House-passed bill included tens of billions of dollars in subsidies to help the industry develop carbon-capturing technologies thanks in large measure to a Democrat: Rep. Rick Boucher, who comes from a coal-producing district in Virginia.
 
Besides the National Mining Association, the industry is promoted by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, which has worked to build a grassroots network for coal over the past several years.
 
Because everyone uses electricity, the fight between coal and natural gas will draw in other groups as well.
 
Coal counts the support of railroads — another venerable Washington power — that get a large portion of revenues from transporting coal.
 
Chemical and fertilizer industries use natural gas as a feedstock. Those and other groups that use it as a raw material are worried that if utilities use more of it, the cost — and thus the cost of their products — could increase as well.
 
“We’re concerned if there is a fuel switch that it’s going to affect the price and availability of fertilizer that our folks need,” said Rick Krause, a lobbyist for the American Farm Bureau Federation.
 
Natural gas lobbyists, however, insist that times have changed and that new discoveries and greater use of drilling techniques, like hydraulic fracturing that allow access to gas in shale rock formations, change the debate in their industry’s favor.

EPA chief goes toe-to-toe with Senate GOP over warming science

February 26, 2010 by kentuckycoal

By Robin Bravender

U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson today defended the science underpinning pending climate regulations despite Senate Republicans’ claims that global warming data has been thrown into doubt.

“The science behind climate change is settled, and human activity is responsible for global warming,” Jackson told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. “That conclusion is not a partisan one.”

Jackson’s comments came as the Senate panel scrutinized President Obama’s $10 billion budget request for EPA. The administration’s fiscal 2011 proposal would cut the agency’s total funding by about $300 million from 2010 levels while allotting $56 million — including $43 million in new funding — for regulatory programs to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

Senate Republicans used the hearing as a platform to blast EPA over its plans to begin rolling out greenhouse gas regulations next month after it determined last year that the heat-trapping emissions endanger human health and welfare.

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the panel’s ranking member, called on EPA to reconsider that determination after recent reports have revealed errors in the reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that were used to underpin EPA’s finding and a recent controversy surrounding e-mails stolen from climate scientists that some have dubbed “Climategate.”

“We’ve been told that the science still stands,” Inhofe said. “We’ve been told that the IPCC’s mistakes are trivial. We’ve been told that Climategate is just gossipy e-mails between a few scientists.

“But now we know there’s no objective basis for these claims,” he added. “Furthermore, Climategate shows there’s no ‘consensus;’ the science is far from settled.”

Committee Republicans released a report today detailing concerns over the content of the e-mails that were lifted last year from computers at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, a research institute whose studies help form the basis of the IPCC reports.

Some of the e-mails reveal frustration with attacks from global warming skeptics, and opponents of greenhouse gas regulations have pointed to several of the exchanges as proof that scientists intentionally withheld climate data.

The Obama administration, as well as the majority of climate scientists and Democratic lawmakers, have maintained that nothing in the e-mails upends the scientific consensus that man-made emissions are contributing to climate change.

Jackson said that although science “can be a bit messy, the dust will settle” and that she has not seen anything at this point to show that the endangerment finding is not on solid ground.

“I do not agree that the IPCC has been totally discredited in any way,” Jackson said, adding that it is important to understand that the IPCC is a body that follows open and impartial practices.

“Let me be very clear,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) the committee chairwoman. “The majority of this committee believes in strong numbers that we must act,” on global warming, she added.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) angrily blasted his Republican colleagues for their implications that global warming science had not been settled. “This country faces many many problems, not the least of which, we have national leaders rejecting basic science,” Sanders said. “I find it incredible, I really do, that in the year 2010 on this committee, there are people who are saying there is a doubt about global warming. There is no doubt about global warming.”

EPA Will Need Increased Climate Funding as Regs Ramp Up, Jackson Says

February 25, 2010 by kentuckycoal

U.S. EPA will need increased funding for climate programs in future years as the agency moves forward on efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions, Administrator Lisa Jackson said yesterday.

“I would expect that the needs would continue to grow as we move into a world — either through legislation, hopefully through legislation, but possibly also with regulation — of increasing activity on climate change,” Jackson told the House Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee.

President Obama’s fiscal 2011 request would allot $56 million — including $43 million in new funding — for regulatory programs to curb greenhouse gas emissions. The climate funding was increased even as EPA’s total budget was trimmed to $10 billion — about $300 million lower than 2010 enacted levels.

The proposed increase in funding is aimed at aiding states as they begin to implement forthcoming greenhouse gas regulations and for EPA to develop new standards and pollution control guidance. EPA is expected to roll out its first greenhouse gas regulations next month for cars and

light duty vehicles; those rules will also trigger stationary source regulations.

Despite the increased funding request, Jackson and other Obama administration officials continue to voice a preference for comprehensive energy and climate legislation over EPA regulation.

While Jackson predicted that EPA will need even more cash for climate programs, the top Republican on the House panel questioned the proposed spending levels.

“I agree with you, Administrator Jackson, that using the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas is not the best way to address climate change,” said Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho). “That is why I question whether the nearly $50 million in EPA’s FY ‘11 budget for greenhouse gas regulation is prudent.”

Simpson expressed concern that the rulemaking staff at EPA, buoyed by receiving the largest budget in history last year, “are sprinting like thoroughbreds out of the starting gate.”

“Some people will say that these actions are long overdue,” Simpson added, “but I can’t help feeling wary about the rapid pace at which the EPA is implementing broad regulatory changes and the impact these changes are having on our struggling economy.”

Subcommittee Chairman Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) applauded the administration’s climate policies and the $43 million requested boost for greenhouse gas regulatory programs. “As you know, we in the House passed our version of a climate bill last June,” Dicks said. “We recognize the need for action, I’m glad to see the administration does too.”

Another Democrat, however, detailed concerns about inequalities that could arise for coal-dependent regions and other areas as EPA moves forward with regulations.

“While there are many of us who live in some of these areas who think that this is a problem that has to be addressed, the whole climate change problem … we’re also concerned that it be done in such a way that some regions of the country are not disadvantaged unfairly,” said Rep. Ben Chandler (D-Ky.), who last year voted for the House climate bill.

That legislation attempted to address those inequalities, Chandler said, “But when the EPA goes about its business of regulating emissions, is there any thought being put into what happens to certain jurisdictions that burn coal, for instance?”

Jackson acknowledged that a climate bill would offer more flexibility than regulations. “Through legislation, there are many more opportunities to address geographic differences, industrial differences, international differences, as well as provide market incentives,” she said.

But the Clean Air Act also provides opportunities to mitigate regional disparities, Jackson said. “There are certainly tools under the Clean Air Act,” she said. “It is a powerful and effective tool for addressing air pollution and it has a proven history over many years.”

Great Lakes

Jackson also faced criticism for the Obama administration’s proposal to slash funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative to $300 million in fiscal 2011, a $175 million drop from 2010.

“You understand what concerns those of us in the Great Lakes,” said Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio). “It looks like $175 million for something that is really needed has taken a walk.”

That program — aimed at cleaning up contaminated sediments and toxic chemicals and fending off invasive species — still has money left over from this year, Jackson said.

“This one was one of management and of pragmatic ability to put the money on the street,” she told the panel. By the time the money was authorized so EPA could solicit grant proposals for the $475 million, it was close to the end of calendar year 2009.

“The $300 million is simply a reflection — for this year only — that we have quite a chunk still to spend,” Jackson said.

Ky. House urges Congress to block EPA greenhouse regulations

February 24, 2010 by kentuckycoal

By James Bruggers

FRANKFORT, Ky — The House passed a resolution on Tuesday that calls on Congress to block the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from regulating heat-trapping gases.

A similar resolution was introduced Monday in the Senate by Sen. Brandon Smith, R-Hazard. Neither would have the force of law.

The Kentucky action comes the same week the EPA laid out its timetable for regulating greenhouse gasses if Congress doesn’t pass legislation to help reduce risks from potentially catastrophic consequences of climate change.

The Obama administration says the science is clear that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plants endanger public health and welfare, and that it is compelled to regulate them under a 2007 Supreme Court decision.

However, Rep. Jim Gooch, D-Providence, the lead sponsor of House Resolution 132, argued that “the science is not settled” and called on lawmakers to “stand up and say, ‘Wait a minute’.”

He said EPA action would “totally disrupt the American economy.” Gooch, who chairs the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee, is the vice president of a construction company that works with coal companies and is among the staunchest supporters of the coal industry in Frankfort.

Kentucky depends on coal for more than 90 percent of its electricity, and is the nation’s third leading coal-producing state.

The vote was 76-16, with eight members not voting. Among those dissenting in House were some of the Democratic legislators from Louisville and Lexington.

Rep. Jim Wayne, D-Louisville, said hundreds of millions of people in the world are already affected by floods, droughts and wind storms brought on by climate change.

“We know from scientific research that we need to do something about this,” he said, making a case for moving forward with “green jobs” through renewable and alternative energy sources.

“We’ve got to be thinking about our children and our grandchildren,” said Tom Burch, D-Louisville.

Rep. Harry Moberly, D-Richmond, voted against the resolution and said something must be done someday about global warming, but that Kentucky’s coal-based economy is not ready for change.

But Gooch’s argument won the day. “We can’t allow the EPA to usurp Congress,” he said, adding that any regulations would be detrimental to Kentucky’s economy.

The resolution comes amid growing unease over whether the nation can afford to curb greenhouse gas emissions during a recession.

Several Democratic senators in Washington recently sent a letter challenging EPA authority on greenhouse gas emissions to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. It was signed by Democrats Mark Begich of Alaska, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Carl Levin of Michigan and Max Baucus of Montana.

The Democrats said they did not object to EPA regulation of emissions from cars and light trucks, but questioned the agency’s ability to do anything further under the Clean Air Act.

Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway, who is running for a U.S. Senate seat, supports an effort by U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, to get Congress to pass a resolution curbing EPA authority over greenhouse gases.

Jackson, in a letter dated Feb. 22, to Rockefeller, said she shares his goal of “ensuring economic recovery” and that the EPA was working on “addressing greenhouse-gas emissions in sensible ways that are consistent with the call for comprehensive energy and climate legislation.”

She said the EPA anticipates phasing in requirements for large industrial sources like power plants in 2011 and that the EPA does not intend to regulate the smallest sources of greenhouse gas emissions any sooner than 2016.

If Congress were to block the EPA, Jackson wrote that it “would be viewed by many as a vote to move the United States to a position behind that of China on the issue of climate change, and more in line with the position of Saudi Arabia.”

Virginia Files Challenge to E.P.A. Greenhouse Gas Regulation

February 19, 2010 by kentuckycoal

Virginia’s attorney general, Ken Cuccinelli, filed a petition Tuesday asking the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its finding that global warming poses a threat to people.

Mr. Cuccinelli, seeking to block the decision, also filed a petition with a federal appeals court for a review of the December E.P.A. finding, in which the agency asserted that carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases emitted from automobiles, power plants and factories “threaten the public health and welfare of the American people.”

To Read More click here:  http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/virginia-files-challenge-to-e-p-a-greenhouse-gas-regulation/

Three charged with trespassing at Massey office

February 19, 2010 by kentuckycoal

By Associated Press-

MORGANTOWN, W.Va. — State Police charged three anti-mountaintop removal mining activists with trespassing and obstruction Thursday after they defied a federal court order and invaded a Massey Energy office in Southern West Virginia.

 Climate Ground Zero founder Mike Roselle and associates Joseph Hamsher and Tom Smyth were taken to Raleigh County Magistrate Court for arraignment after they occupied the Marfork Coal Co. office near Pettus.

 All three were lodged in Southern Regional Jail in Beaver, with Roselle and Hamsher held on $5,000 cash bonds and Smyth held on $7,000 cash bond.

 Virginia-based Massey issued a statement offering a dramatic account of the morning protest, describing how “three criminals clad in fatigues and carrying chains invaded a company office and chained themselves to chairs in the lobby. A terrified receptionist went into shock and was transported by ambulance to a local hospital.”

 The claim about the secretary could not immediately be verified by State Police in Whitesville, who did not return repeated telephone messages.

 Massey provided photographs showing Hamsher and Smyth in camouflage jackets and Roselle in a blue parka.

“They are now trying to provoke Massey members into a confrontation,” Chief Executive Officer Don Blankenship said, labeling them “domestic terrorists.” He said they “are part of an anti-coal group that wants to shut down mining in Appalachia and destroy West Virginia’s economy.”