Archive for the ‘Coal Economics’ Category

Hearing set on EPA plan to revoke mine permit

May 18, 2010

The Associated Press

The Herald-Dispatch

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) — Coal producers and environmentalists are planning to give the Environmental Protection Agency an earful about the fate of what would be West Virginia’s largest surface coal mine.

 The agency is holding a public hearing on St. Louis-based Arch Coal’s Spruce No. 1 mine at 7 p.m. Tuesday at the Charleston Civic Center.

 The EPA says it’s going to veto the water quality permit granted for the Logan County mine in 2007. The problem? EPA says Arch plans to buy seven miles of intermittent streams with mine waste and that would hurt water quality.

  Environmental groups and coal industry associations from West Virginia and Kentucky say they’re planning to testify as well as hold rallies.

Senate climate change bill seeks compromise on offshore drilling

May 11, 2010

By Jim Snyder & Ben Geman

The Senate climate change bill will call for greenhouse gas emissions to be cut by 17 percent by 2020 and seeks to find a workable compromise between opponents and supporters of offshore drilling in light of the ongoing spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

“Mindful of the accident in the Gulf, we institute important new protections for coastal states by allowing them to opt out of drilling up to 75 miles from their shores. In addition, directly impacted states can veto drilling plans if they stand to suffer significant adverse impacts in the event of an accident,” according to a document described as a “draft short summary.”

The long-awaited bill, to be released in full on Wednesday, also includes a 37.5 percent state royalty share to help protect coastlines and coastal ecosystems. That could upset drilling opponents who see the royalties as an inducement for expanded offshore drilling.

The legislation also contains a number of provisions designed to attract business support.

For example, it will include a “hard price collar” that will keep carbon prices between $12 and $25 in the trading market created by the legislation, a significant win for electric utilities that sought more assurance the sweeping climate bill would not lead to huge increases in energy costs.

And it contains new subsidies to support coal and nuclear power.

Its nuclear provisions include approval of $54 billion in loan guarantee authority to help spur a “nuclear renaissance,” a level supported by the Obama administration. It would also streamline the process for permitting nuclear plants, another change the industry had sought.

The coal industry, meanwhile, would get $2 billion a year to research and develop technologies to capture carbon before it reaches the atmosphere. Coal-fired power plants account for roughly one-third of the country’s annual carbon emissions.

The summary also states the legislation would provide “significant incentives for the commercial deployment of 72 [gigawatts] of carbon capture and sequestration.”

As expected, large manufacturers get a reprieve from having to comply with the emissions reductions until 2016. That year, “energy-intensive and trade-exposed industries receive allowances to offset both their direct and indirect compliance costs,” the summary states.

As in the climate bill passed by the House last summer, farmers would be exempt from having to comply with the carbon caps. Instead, they could see a benefit in the form of revenues through an offset program companies can use to meet their targets in addition to cutting emissions at the smokestack.

Mine safety hearing takes shape; Harkin eyes broader focus

April 24, 2010
By Ben Geman – 04/23/10 05:14 PM ET
A Senate hearing next Tuesday on coal mining safety will also explore workplace hazards more broadly, according to the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee that will host the April 27 session.

The hearing will be the first on Capitol Hill to address the April 5 explosion at the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia the killed 29 workers, the nation’s worst mining disaster in four decades.

“This hearing will examine weaknesses in our laws that provide incentives for companies to ignore the health and safety of workers – such as inadequate penalties and the excessive delays that employers can create in challenging citations,” a committee announcement states.

“These issues will be explored both in the context of mine safety and non-mine workplaces, where this is an equally prevalent problem, but will not explore the scientific causes of the Upper Big Branch Mine disaster due to the ongoing investigation,” the committee said.Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and other lawmakers, including Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), are exploring changes to mine safety laws. Rockefeller said April 20 that he expects legislation that toughens safety rules to reach the floor this year.

Here’s the witness list for the April 27 Senate hearing:

Panel I



Joe Main, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health, Washington, DC




Panel II



Cecil Roberts, President, United Mine Workers, Triangle, VA



Jeff Harris, Mine Worker, Farley, WV 



Wes Addington, Deputy Director, Appalachian Citizens’ Law Center, Whitesburg, KY



Bruce Watzman, Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, National Mining Association, Washington, DC




Panel III 



David Michaels, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, Washington, DC




Panel IV



Peg Seminario, Director of Safety and Health, AFL-CIO, Bethesda, MD



Holly Shaw, Philadelphia, PA 



Dr. Michael Brandt, Board President (2010-2011), American Industrial Hygiene Association, Los Alamos, NM 



Kelli Heflin, Coordinator of Regulatory Compliance and Safety Manager, Scott’s Liquid Gold, Denver, CO

Obama attacks mining and other industries

April 16, 2010
By Ben Geman – 04/16/10 06:00 AM ET

President Barack Obama on Thursday launched a new populist battle against mining companies, echoing his attacks on major Wall Street banks and other corporate interests he accuses of putting profits ahead of the public interest.

Obama, responding to the West Virginia coal mining accident last week that killed 29 workers, accused the industry of shirking safety rules and using legal loopholes that keep regulators at bay.

“It is clear that while there are many responsible companies, far too many mines are not doing enough to protect their workers’ safety,” Obama said.

 He promised a wide-ranging investigation of the accident, and more broadly said the administration would work with Congress to boost enforcement of laws and reform them. Obama also said the Labor Department would streamline rules that allow regulators to take action against mines with patterns of safety problems.

Obama’s offensive against the mining industry follows other populist attacks in the debates over healthcare and financial legislation.

On those two issues, Obama and Democrats have cast Republicans as siding with the powerful interests and against ordinary citizens.

Obama on Wednesday did not link the GOP with the mining industry, but the hint to Republicans was clear.

“The implication is that Republicans are on the side of corporations,” said Ross Baker, an expert on the presidency and a political science professor at Rutgers University.

He said the president’s move toward populism and his outrage over the mining tragedy “fit together nicely.”

“Obviously, they don’t want to appear to be capitalizing on a tragedy, but at the same time it does give them an opportunity to underscore their alliance with everyday Americans against big corporations,” Baker said.

This is a situation that “kind of falls into your lap,” that allows for the White House to side with the American people without taking any direct swipes at the GOP opposition, he said.

Democrats believe that by casting health insurance companies as the villains in the final weeks of the healthcare debate, they boosted support for their bill.

In the fight over Wall Street reform, the White House on Wednesday suggested opponents were siding with lobbyists for the powerful financial industry, and that it would not agree to loopholes and special-interest carve-outs in a final bill. Obama and Democrats have made it clear they feel public will is behind them on that issue as well.

Populist rhetoric has also been a part of Obama’s attacks on the Supreme Court’s decision in the controversial Citizens United case that knocked down restrictions on corporate and union political spending. Democrats are set to introduce legislation in the House and Senate seeking to amend campaign finance rules in light of the decision, and they believe the issue will help them in the fall campaign.

Obama referenced his criticism of the decision last week when he said he would seek a successor to retiring Justice John Paul Stevens who would support the common man against the powerful interest.

“It will also be someone who, like Justice Stevens, knows that in a democracy, powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens,” Obama said.

Stevens was among the dissenters in the court’s 5-4 decision in the Citizens United case.

Obama on Thursday directed his toughest comments toward Massey Energy Co., which owns the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia where the 29 workers died in an explosion April 5 — the worst mining disaster in decades. But he also called the problems more widespread in arguing that mine-safety legislation passed in 2006 does not go far enough.

“Safety violators like Massey have still been able to find ways to put their bottom line before the safety of their workers, filing endless appeals instead of paying fines and fixing safety problems,” he said in comments from the White House Rose Garden aired live on cable television.

Obama said Massey must be “held accountable for decisions they made and preventative measures they failed to take.”

Carol Raulston, a spokeswoman for the National Mining Association, said the group is in sync with the White House on the need for worker protection.

“We share the president’s view that it is the responsibility of every mine operator to provide for mine safety, and for MSHA [the Mine Safety and Health Administration] to protect the safety of workers,” she said.

But she also defended the industry, stating that 85 percent of U.S. mines lost no worker time to injuries last year.

“The huge percentage of American mines operate safely and they operate safely every day. We continue to stress that as our No. 1 objective,” she said.
“Something clearly went wrong at this mine, with terrible results. We anxiously await the outcome of the investigation,” she added.

The president also called government to task, calling for a review of the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). But even when focusing on the federal bureaucracy, he noted, “For a long time, the mine-safety agency was stacked with former mine executives and industry players.”

Now, he added, it is run by former miners and safety experts, citing top MSHA officials Joe Main, who was a longtime health and safety official with the United Mine Workers of America, and Kevin Stricklin. Both Stricklin and Main were present when Obama made his comments on Thursday.

Obama said there would be an immediate new review of mines with “troubling” safety records and that inspectors would be dispatched to those mines right away.

He said the administration would “work with Congress to strengthen enforcement of existing laws and close loopholes that permit companies to shirk their responsibilities.”

Utility hikes hit poor the hardest

April 13, 2010

U.S. Senator McConnell on the EPA and Kentucky Coal

March 26, 2010

 

For Immediate Release, Thursday, March 25, 2010

Contacts: Don Stewart 202-224-2979, Robert Steurer 202-224-8288,
Jennifer Morris 202-224-6871, Jonathan Samford 202-224-8285

 

A Threat to Coal-Mining Businesses in Kentucky

The EPA’s “attack on an important Kentucky industry hampers the growth of jobs”

 Washington, DC – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell released a statement Thursday regarding a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) Minority staff report, which claims the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) coal-mining permit approval process is having a negative impact on coal-mining jobs in Kentucky.

 “The EPA has turned the Section 404 permitting process, already a cumbersome process to begin with, into an illegitimate, back-door means of shutting down Kentucky coal mines. This is outside the scope of their authority and the law. It represents a fundamental departure from the permitting process as originally envisioned by Congress,” McConnell said. 

 “This Senate needs to make it clear to the EPA that they must complete the permit review process in a timely manner, and provide complete transparency along the way to all sides. They cannot continue to impose a back-door ban on mining operations in Kentucky through an illegitimate process,” McConnell added.

 The EPW Committee Minority report estimates that roughly 3,500 mining jobs in Kentucky could be in jeopardy if the EPA doesn’t revise its permit approval process.

 “Coal is a vital part of my State’s economy, and a vital part of America’s energy portfolio,” McConnell said.  “The EPA’s attack on this important Kentucky industry hampers the growth of jobs, and it especially hampers the growth of small business – the greatest engines of job creation.”

 

The full text of Senator McConnell’s statement is below:

 “I rise to sound an alarm about a threat to coal-mining businesses in Kentucky. Coal is a vital part of my State’s economy, and a vital part of America’s energy portfolio. The coal industry creates over 60,000 jobs in Kentucky, including approximately 15,000 coal miners. More than half the country’s electricity is generated by coal, electricity those workers help generate.

 “But this important sector of the economy now faces a back-door attempt to restrict coal mining, one that was implemented without a hearing or a vote by this administration’s Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA is overstepping its authority by using an approval process meant to assess the environmental impact of mining operations as a means to halt those mining operations altogether.

 “According to one study by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, it could be estimated that roughly 3,500 mining jobs in Kentucky are in jeopardy if the EPA does not let go its stranglehold on the growth of that industry. And mining industry jobs are not the only jobs lost thanks to this wrongheaded, bureaucratic over-regulation. For every coal-mining job, 11 other jobs are dependent on it. That means up to 38,500 jobs in my State alone could be affected.

 “Let me give a concrete example of how what the EPA is doing directly affects jobs. Out of 49 Kentucky applicants for permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, only one application—that’s right, one—is actually under review. One out of 49. Actually, that should be one out of 42, Mr. President, because seven applicants were kept waiting so long by the EPA’s foot-dragging tactic that they had no choice but to withdraw their applications.

 “After all, during this whole length of time that the EPA unfairly prolongs the process, mine operators must still spend resources to keep their mines ready to operate. Eventually paying these costs while earning no profit in return forces many of these businesses to just give up.

 “While the rest of the permits are technically pending a review, Mr. President, in reality, they are in limbo and essentially dead as long as the EPA refuses to even begin its official review process. This “run out the clock” tactic is bad news for Kentucky’s economy.

 “I know I don’t have to tell my colleagues we are in a recession. Unemployment is higher than any of us would like it to be. In Kentucky it is 10.5 percent, higher than the national average. My highest priority as the Senator from Kentucky is to help everyone from my State who wants a job to find one.

 “That’s why I must speak out against what the EPA is doing. Their attack on an important Kentucky industry hampers the growth of jobs, and it especially hampers the growth of small businesses—the greatest engines of job creation.

 “The EPA has turned the Section 404 permitting process, already a cumbersome process to begin with, into an illegitimate, back-door means of shutting down Kentucky coal mines. This is outside the scope of their authority and the law. It represents a fundamental departure from the permitting process as originally envisioned by Congress.

 “This Senate needs to make it clear to the EPA that they must complete the permit review process in a timely manner, and provide complete transparency along the way to all sides. They cannot continue to impose a back-door ban on mining operations in Kentucky through an illegitimate process.

 “Let me add one more thing. The Section 404 permit review process is only one aspect of the EPA’s war on coal. They are also seeking to impose a back-door national energy tax by regulating carbon dioxide emissions from coal plants under the Clean Air Act, which will hurt our economy and endanger millions of jobs across the country. The Senate will have an opportunity to vote on the EPA’s actions in that regard in the near future.”

Lawmakers From Coal States Seek to Delay Emission Limits

March 5, 2010
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

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

February 25, 2010

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 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

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/