The EPA Permitorium

November 26, 2010 by

The agency’s regulatory onslaught has stopped new power generation.

by Wall Street Journal

President Obama is now retrenching after his midterm rebuke, and one of the main ways he’ll try to press his agenda is through the alphabet soup of the federal regulators. So a special oversight priority for the new Congress ought to be the Environmental Protection Agency, which has turned a regulatory firehose on U.S. business and the power industry in particular.

The scale of the EPA’s current assault is unprecedented, yet it has received almost no public scrutiny. Since Mr. Obama took office, the agency has proposed or finalized 29 major regulations and 172 major policy rules. This surge already outpaces the Clinton Administration’s entire first term—when the EPA had just been handed broad new powers under the 1990 revamp of air pollution laws.

Another measure of the EPA’s aggressiveness are the six major traditional pollutants that the agency polices, such as ozone or sulfur dioxide. No Administration has ever updated more than two of these rules in a single term, and each individual rule has tended to run through a 15-year cycle on average since the Clean Air Act passed in 1970. Under administrator Lisa Jackson, the EPA is stiffening the regulations for all six at the same time.

The hyperactive Ms. Jackson is also stretching legal limits to satisfy the White House’s climate-change goals, now that Senate Democrats have killed cap and trade. The EPA’s “endangerment finding” on carbon is most controversial, but other parts of her regulatory ambush may be more destructive by forcing mass retirements of the coal plants that provide half of America’s electricity.

A case study in the Jackson method is the EPA’s recent tightening of air-quality standards for sulfur dioxide. The draft SO2 rule was released for the formal period of public comment last December. Yet the final rule published in June suddenly included a “preamble” that rewrote 40-odd years of settled EPA policy.

The EPA has heretofore measured the concentration of pollutants in the ambient air by, well, measuring the concentration of pollutants in the ambient air. The preamble throws out this sampling and ultraviolet testing and substitutes computer estimations of what air quality might be. The EPA favors modelling because it can plug in the data and assumptions of its choosing, like how often a power plant is running at maximum capacity. Gaming the models will allow the agency to punish states and target individual plants, even if actual measurements show that SO2 is under the new EPA standard.

The EPA is within its legal discretion to reinterpret clean-air laws—but not without any prior warning, and the preamble surprise violates years of case law about federal rule-making. Worse, the agency hasn’t gotten around to detailing how the models should be built or how the analysis must be conducted. Without any ground rules for approval, the permits required for any major energy or construction projects can’t be issued.

The uncertainty created by the SO2 rule and similar rule-makings has resulted in a near-total freeze on EPA permits, imposing a de facto project moratorium that will last for the next 18 months at minimum. North Dakota, Texas, Louisiana, South Dakota and Nevada are already suing the EPA because of the restrictions they now face on their “ability to permit new sources or expand existing sources,” and many more states are expected to join them.

The same goes for the EPA plan to require “maximum achievable control technology” on a plant-by-plant basis to nearly every coal- or oil-fired utility in the country to limit pollutants like mercury. The EPA started writing that rule while the data that will supposedly inform its decision were still being collected. Then there’s the upcoming “boiler rule,” which the EPA’s lowball estimate says will impose $9.5 billion in new capital costs on manufacturers, paper mills, hospitals and the like. There are so many others.

The electric industry in particular is being forced to choose between continuing to operate and facing major capital expenditures to meet the increasingly strict burden, or else shutting down and building replacements that use more expensive sources like natural gas. Either way, the costs will be passed through to business and consumers as higher rates, which is the same as a tax increase. The general consensus is that as much as a third of the U.S. coal-fired fleet will be retired by 2016, costing north of $100 billion—a consensus that includes an important federal advisory agency, as we wrote last month in “The Unseen Carbon Agenda.”

Ms. Jackson responded to that editorial in a letter that waved off any criticism of her industrial policy as merely opposition to “common-sense efforts to reduce harmful pollution.” And it’s true that some of these costs might be justified if they resulted in real environmental improvements like less acid rain.

Yet return to sulfur dioxide: SO2 emissions fell by 56% between 1980 and 2008, despite a 70% increase in fossil fuel-based electric generation over the same period. With current levels so low, the EPA’s own 168-page analysis estimates that the direct benefits of the new SO2 regulations will amount to all of $12 million nationwide in 2020. Liquidating the EPA budget would yield better returns.

At least 56 Senators in next year’s Congress are on record supporting bills that would freeze the EPA’s carbon regulation for a time or strip the agency of its self-delegated powers. But the EPA is still pursuing the same agenda through other means, harming business expansion, job creation and economic growth. A key task for the next Congress will be to start pushing back.

For coal people, mining is their lifeblood

November 25, 2010 by
By Dennis B. Roddy and Daniel Malloy Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

BAILEYSVILLE, W.Va. — Just about every man who works underground here promises himself he’ll be the last of his family to dig coal.

Johnny Vance knew this, he believed it and he promised himself his own son would stay out of the cold ground of Appalachia. He told that story as his boy, Adam, was getting ready for his night shift at a coal mine 20 miles away.

“If that’s what he wants to do, I’m gonna support him,” says the elder Mr. Vance, who hobbles on legs made wobbly by underground falls and gulps for air with lungs caked with black dust. Johnny’s father was a miner and wasted away at 56 with a single working lung, crushed ribs and worn out hopes. Johnny is 53, knows he looks older and knows that’s how people on the street can spot him for a miner.

Adam, 28, married his high school sweetheart, Patti. They settled into a house a quarter-mile from his parents. The jobs came and went, at $7 or $8 an hour, and along came Logan, their firstborn.

“She kept saying, ‘You need to go into the mines, you need to go into the mines.’ And I told her I wasn’t going. Told her I’d make it elsewhere,” he says. He landed a few jobs that paid decently. Then came layoffs. “The only thing really going at the time was underground. That’s where I went.”

Today he draws between $60,000 and $70,000 a year. Life is good, if not always safe. The work can be dirty, grueling, dark and dangerous, yet like so many others who go underground, Adam Vance finds dignity in bringing coal to the surface.

“It makes steel. It does electricity. Without coal you wouldn’t have automobiles. You wouldn’t have buildings. You wouldn’t have just about anything,” he says.

He says all this and declares something else: Those two boys at the side of the yard, bouncing and laughing on the trampoline a miner’s bountiful wages bought — they’re not going underground. No way

“I’m gonna be wrassler,” says Logan, age 7. He flips forward and howls.

This is a rolling land of mountains teeming with burnable rock, isolated by two-lane roads forced to loop back on themselves to make it over the peaks, with too little flat bottom land for factories, tied by rail and highway to a nation hungry for electricity and the cheap fuel needed to generate it. Here, escaping the ubiquitous, cyclical, perilous and strangely enriching life beneath the mountains of Appalachia is a thing not often done.

“It’s not easy to escape because there are so few economically viable options in the coalfield communities,” says Dwight Billings, a University of Kentucky sociologist who grew up in Appalachia and has studied its coal culture. “For those who wish to live there — and … the deep ties to family and kin and place is the lure — mining represents the best-paying opportunity despite the danger.”

The economic draw doesn’t explain it all, though. Shannon Elizabeth Bell, a sociologist at the University of Kentucky, has lived among and studied the people of the region since 2000.

“This identity of being coal people is very strong in the region,” she said. “It’s part of their heritage and their history, and a great source of pride.”

Both mineral and metaphor, coal defines towns like Baileysville. It is as much a culture as a job. Even in times of cheap oil and the subsequent low demand that registers in layoffs across the coal fields, men and women call themselves miners and mining families. The bonds are born of shared cycles of wealth and poverty.

Shared, too, is the suspicion that much of the outside world, the one from which their winding roads and isolated hollows shield them, a world known by satellite television, looks down on them.

Adam Vance lives in a spotless, prefabricated house, the kind that crowds narrow strips of flat land between mountains. In the living room, a 55-inch television shows Jerry Brown in a campaign commercial before his victory in the California governor’s race. The station beams by satellite from Los Angeles.

He’s seen other commercials, notably the ones mocking the idea of “clean coal.” They’re a slick set of 30-second spots pushed by environmentalists, mostly from outside West Virginia, and the Vances can’t help but think someone is mocking them, belittling their labors, without answering the question of whether global warming is a safer bet than freezing in the dark.

“They don’t understand coal,” he says. “Just ’cause we got coal dirt on us or whatever, they think we’re uneducated. Yeah, we all have accents from down here. We’re not the most well-spoken people.”

A town without a post office

Baileysville is a spread of land with no government of its own save the general consensus that the people there like one another and, in large measure, have deep roots. The town’s post office closed in 1973. The local high school at which Adam Vance piled up the third-most rushing yards in the football team’s history is shuttered.

The road on which the Vance family lives — and this means the immediate clans of Adam, his father, his uncle and the cousin with whom he rides 40 minutes to work most days — stops abruptly. When a long-gone coal company that cut the road played out its mine a generation ago, maintenance ended.

“There’s a tree growing right in the middle of it,” says Adam’s uncle, Roger Vance.

Wyoming County is tucked just short of the Kentucky border. To its west is Mingo and to its south McDowell. The Tug Fork River marks the West Virginia-Kentucky line and the Vances have been here long enough to lay a profound claim on Appalachian lore.

One ancestor, James Vance, was kin to William Anderson “Devil Anse” Hatfield, patriarch of the clan that feuded for a generation with the McCoy family from the Kentucky side of the Tug Fork. The murky origins of that feud have been as various as a fight over the ownership of a razorback hog to a jilted bride. The Vances were among those killing and dying alongside the Hatfields, and the nearby Hatfield-McCoy Trail now hosts hikers and ATV riders.

At the county seat of Pine-ville, locals are mixed about whether it has appreciably bolstered the economy. Tourism does not pay the way coal does. Tourism, in the words of Pat Armstrong, doesn’t keep the lights on.

If the Vances are characteristic of coal’s hold on the families of southern West Virginia, Pat Armstrong’s shop, called Pat’s Fashions and Tax Service, is emblematic of coal’s secondary economy.

“Every time a coal truck goes through here, I don’t feel bad about dust blowing all over town. I think that’s another man supporting his family, going out making his living,” she says.

Mrs. Armstrong lives where she grew up: Glen Rogers, an old coal camp where her father worked underground. She worked in the dress shop on Pineville’s main street and bought it out when the owner ran into problems. Yet it was a fascination with taxes that held her. So, like many a person in rural West Virginia, she doubled up on jobs.

This odd mix works. The formal wear side bustles during prom and wedding season in spring. Tax season picks up in the winter. In addition, Pat’s offers UPS shipping, Western Union wire transfers and a tanning salon.

“She wanted to do bail bonds, too, but we talked her out of that one,” says Jessica Jewell, one of Mrs. Armstrong’s four employees.

The endless season, and the one families here shudder to think could end in another down cycle for the market, is coal season. It’s year-round, and nobody wants it to fade. By this autumn, the cash register at Mrs. Armstrong’s shop was signaling a slight dip.

“The economy has finally gotten to us. We’re always the last, usually, on the totem pole. We’re always the last to get hit, but we’re always the last to recover,” she says.

Just around the corner is the office of Democratic state Sen. Richard Browning, a former teacher at the local high school, an ardent fan of coal and a counter of the cars and heavy trucks that lumber past his storefront.

“Five of six of the cars that pass here have something to do with natural resources — coal, gas, lumber. It’s our economy here,” he says. People here know a coal mine has shut or laid off because the traffic thins, the town isn’t noisy enough, and the trains stop running.

He knows the blessing and the curse of the business. Thirty years ago, when he taught high school, he had a student in his class who was out-earning him. Each school day, the boy would slip off to the second shift at the mine.

Mr. Browning wonders at the cost of that kind of early economic leap — the ability to graduate or quit high school, take the 80-hour course needed for a mining license at one of the private teachers in town and then slide into a mining life.

By one measure, it means a great income. By another, it leaves the place locked into an economy that cries for diversification because of the fickleness of the marketplace.

“I’m tired of riding this roller coaster,” he says.

There are the other costs. Two of the senator’s brothers were miners.

“Both are dead,” he says. Early heart problems took one. Black lung killed the other. He taught Robert Clark, one of the men who died in the blast at Upper Big Branch in April. His daughter called from college to tell him one of her high school classmates, Adam Morgan, had died as well.

Many of Mrs. Armstrong’s tax clients are mining families. With both spouses working, six-figure tax filings aren’t unusual. Their incomes buttress the other shops on Pine­ville’s short but noisy main drag. The number of storefronts hasn’t changed much since her girlhood, Mrs. Armstrong says.

That economy is endangered, she says, by an administration and Congress increasingly focused on the environmental harm of extracting and burning coal. In these parts, environmentalists are scornfully called “tree huggers” and the refrain to D.C. is: Leave us alone.

Even mountaintop-removal mining — a controversial process in which coal companies lop off the top of a mountain to get to the coal inside, dumping the waste in surrounding streams — is fine by Mrs. Armstrong, because it creates jobs.

“We’ve got enough mountains around here,” she reasons. “If they haul off a few mountaintops, they’ll re-seed it.”

The coal operation just up Route 16 from downtown Pine­ville is an underground mine where two generations of Vances have worked. From the depths of Pinnacle mine, workers hauled out 864,000 tons of metallurgical coal last year for Cleveland-based Cliffs Natural Resources.

To work in the dark

In the darkness each night, Adam winds through two-lane roads dotted with churches and convenience stores to Pinnacle, where he works the midnight to 8 a.m. “hoot owl” shift, though those hours often extend with overtime.

To make room for a passenger, he has to move the King James Bible from his truck seat. He stopped taking it underground after someone vandalized it following an argument over a broken piece of mining equipment.

Back home, Patti Vance prays, too.

“I pray every night for him to come home safe to me,” she says.

At the mine, after the pre-shift prayer in a small locker room on the surface, 100 or so workers on the shift take turns crowding into a freight elevator that plunges them 600 feet into the mountain.

Pinnacle is a vast expanse of tunnels. Its miners boast that its footprint is about the size of Washington, D.C., its employees like to boast. Miners have dug here since 1969, when the mine was owned by U.S. Steel, and there are a few more decades’ worth of coal yet to be cut.

The rail car ride to Adam Vance’s usual section, under the undulating roof held up by ancient-looking steel bolts less than 6 feet overhead, takes about 40 minutes through chilly crosscurrents of air, whisking explosive methane and invasive coal dust out of harm’s way.

Along the way, small clusters of miners working to repair train tracks or on other jobs are chipper, offering a “Hiya” or “How’s it goin’, buddy” to passersby.

They toil as the lights attached to their helmets bore small holes into the dark. Mr. Vance operates the shuttle car, a 20-foot orange hauler that he calls a “buggy.” It whisks loose coal and rock from a continuous mining machine to a feeder, a conveyor belt that takes the material to the surface.

On a recent predawn Wednesday, a small crew is working to prepare a new section for the longwall mining machine, a $100 million feat of coal-shearing engineering. The machine works a few months at a time to hollow out a section before moving on to a new one; the new longwall must be ready to go when the old one is finished so the investment doesn’t sit idle.

Near the end of this shift, work has ground to a halt as the feeder has broken down. Mr. Vance chats with co-workers about his mine foreman class schedule. He has the training to do a variety of jobs in the mine — roof bolting, running the miner — and a foreman’s certification would be another avenue to find work the next time he’s looking for a job.

Mr. Vance could get a fine recommendation from Frank Shrewsbury, a rotund 30-year veteran of the mines who’s operating the continuous miner with a joystick that wouldn’t look out of place next to an Atari.

“He’s a good worker, conscientious of his job and all the safety aspects,” says Mr. Shrewsbury, 49, of Pineville. “When somebody’s running a piece of equipment like this, you’ve got to have a little faith and trust.”

When something goes wrong, Mr. Shrewsbury said, Mr. Vance is “cool and calm. You gotta be.”

‘Put it to back of your mind’

Disasters like the one at Massey Energy’s Upper Big Branch mine, an hour away in Raleigh County, are rare, but their reverberations are felt throughout the coal fields. Mr. Vance said he now gives more thought to the methane levels in his mine, which has high levels of the flammable gas, similar to Upper Big Branch.

But more frequent than the headline-grabbing disasters are miners dying alone or in pairs, under fallen roofs or crushed by machinery. The 2001 accident that sent Johnny Vance out of the mines for good easily could have been fatal. A load of coal fell and almost crushed him.

“I worry every day when I go up there it could be the last day I tell my kids goodbye,” Adam Vance said. “But you still gotta go make a living for them. You put it to the back of your mind and go along with it.”

If he’s not heading off fishing or hunting with some of the other 11 men on his section — “your second family,” he calls them — Adam heads home in the morning when his shift is done and spends a couple of hours with son Braden, 3, before going to bed. He’s back up in the evening to go to church or take Logan to peewee football practice and have a little more family time before he returns underground.

On a recent evening, the children bound around the house. Adam and Patti are chagrined. An aunt has treated the boys to Mountain Dew and a small sugar jag has ensued. Adam watches the Cincinnati Reds win a game. He orders Braden down from the coffee table, where the child is brandishing a play World Wrestling Entertainment championship belt.

From the latest video game systems to birthday parties at Chuck E. Cheese’s in Charleston, the boys want for nothing. Yet in a quiet moment before his father leaves for work, Logan pulls a visitor aside, first to show him his stash of video games, his set of wrestling figurines, and then to pass along something that has been boiling inside him for months, something he hasn’t even told his mom and dad.

“I think it’s not very good that he’s in the coal mines. You know how all those coal miners died? I’m scared. He might die.”

The boy looks away, hugs the visitor, and resumes childhood.

The mines’ dangers are why Roger Vance, Adam’s uncle, retired early from his job at a local golf course. It opened up a spot for his 20-year-old son, Joseph, who against his father’s wishes had insisted on going underground.

“It’s too dangerous,” Roger says of the family trade. “People don’t live a long time.” Roger worked in the mines briefly before getting out; three of his four brothers made careers there.

In the weeks after Johnny’s career was cut short by injury, he implored Adam not to go underground. His oldest son, John, wanted no part of the mines and is now a sheriff in neighboring McDowell County. Adam never intended to go underground, but never promised not to, either.

He worked a few jobs and caught on with a railroad company for a while. But when the company told him he had to move to Ohio or quit, he chose to stay in the only home he’s known. There was no choice left, he said, if he was going to make a decent living. Johnny understood but refused to help him get certified. Adam had to go to his father-in-law for that.

Now Adam is focused on logging 20 years of union time. It would earn him medical coverage for life. The labor is dangerous and difficult, but it’s the best way to be a provider in the hollows of Wyoming County.

“If I could find something right now with the same benefits and making the same money outside around here, I’d quit the coal mines in a heartbeat,” he says. “I’d go to it and never look back. But until I do, I guess I’ll stay.”

Former coal company owner donates $1 million to Harlan County Central

November 24, 2010 by

By Dori Hjalmarson

A former Virginia coal company owner has donated $1 million toward Harlan County High School’s new football stadium and the first track and field facility in the county.

The donation toward the $3.2 million project speeds up planned construction of sports fields at the newly consolidated high school.

Richard Gilliam, who earlier this year sold his Cumberland Resources company, parent of Harlan County’s Black Mountain Resources, to Massey Energy, donated the money from his private charitable foundation.

“Coal is a big contributor to the economy in the area. The sale of the company was not just a reflection of his successes; it was because of the contributions of the work force of Harlan County,” said Ross Kegan, vice president of Black Mountain Resources.

The donation to Harlan County School District is an effort to thank employees.

Gilliam did not want to comment for this story, Kegan said. After Gilliam sold the company, he gave about $80 million in profits back to Cumberland Resources employees in the form of retirement plan contributions and cash bonuses, Kegan said. The company had 1,200 employees, about 650 in Kentucky, when it was sold, he said.

“The Harlan County High School project is one that touches a large number of families,” he said. “A lot of employees’ children go there. A lot of the graduates will become future employees.”

To read the entire article click here:  http://www.kentucky.com/2010/11/20/1532419/former-coal-company-owner-donates.html

Nancy Pelosi chosen to lead House Democrats as minority leader

November 17, 2010 by

 

By CHARLES BABINGTON

The Associated Press
Wednesday, November 17, 2010; 3:25 PM

WASHINGTON — House Democrats elected Nancy Pelosi to remain as their leader Wednesday despite massive party losses in this month’s congressional elections that prompted some lawmakers to call for new leadership. Pelosi, the nation’s first female House speaker, will become minority leader when Republicans assume the majority in the new Congress in January.

She defeated moderate Democratic Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina, 150-43, in secret balloting in a lengthy closed-door gathering of House Democrats in the Capitol.

Pelosi, 70, overcame a rebellion from party centrists, and even some fellow liberals, who argued that the party needs to offer a new face of leadership after losing at least 60 House seats on Nov. 2. She remains popular among the liberals who dominate the party’s House caucus. But Shuler’s level of support – plus an earlier 129-68 vote against postponing the election that Pelosi wanted to wrap up quickly – underscored the degree of discontent in a party that Pelosi had largely bended to her will in the past four years.

Republicans voted to keep John Boehner of Ohio as their top House leader. Boehner, who celebrated his 61st birthday Wednesday, had no opposition, and will become speaker in the new Congress. Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., will become majority leader.

Many House Democrats defended Pelosi, who said the bad economy and high unemployment were the reasons for her party’s election losses.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/17/AR2010111704150.html

Manchin: Reid promises cap-and-trade is dead

November 17, 2010 by

By Darren Goode and Ben Geman

Manchin: Reid promises cap-and-trade is dead

Meanwhile, Rockefeller’s newly anointed fellow West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin Tuesday said he received assurances from Reid personally that cap-and-trade is dead.
 
“He made a total commitment to me that cap and trade is dead when we go through the next Congress,” Manchin told reporters in the Capitol.
 
Manchin — who in one of the midterm election’s more famous TV campaign ads shot a hole through a mock version of last year’s House cap-and-trade bill — also said Tuesday that he “completely” supports Rockefeller’s two-year suspension of EPA’s climate regulations.

To read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/129601-e2-morning-roundup-barton-and-boehner-chat-up-energy-panel-bid-upton-get-some-help-from-the-right-rockefeller-and-reid-ponder-epa-reg-delay-vote-and-a-lot-more

 

After a Strong Counterattack, Big Coal Makes a Comeback

November 9, 2010 by

by Jeff Goodell

With an aggressive campaign focused on advertising, lobbying, and political contributions, America’s coal industry has succeeded in beating back a challenge from environmentalists and clean-energy advocates. The dirty truth is that Big Coal is more powerful today than ever.

The coal industry — perhaps the least entrepreneurial, most politically-connected business in America — likes to present itself as a hapless collection of hard-working guys just trying to keep the lights on. In the run-up to last week’s election, the industry skillfully played up the idea that it was under siege by out-of-control federal bureaucrats, including a president unsympathetic to the idea that burning more coal is the surest route to a healthy economy. In the weeks before the election, I saw banners in several West Virginia towns that said “Stop the War on Coal” and, my favorite, “Legalize Coal.” Luke Popovich, a spokesperson for the National Mining Association, went so far as to accuse the Obama administration of carrying out a “regulatory jihad” against coal.

Of course, the idea that the Obama administration is on a mission to kill coal would strike many energy and environmental activists as something like the inverse of the truth. In their view, the administration has been all 

From the point of view of the Earth’s atmosphere, the war on coal has been a spectacular failure.

hat and very little cowboy when it comes to the issues that really matter, like reforming mountaintop removal mining and limiting greenhouse gas pollution.

But the biggest irony is that this so-called “war on coal” has never been much of a fight to begin with. Despite all the talk about a clean-tech revolution, the dirty truth is that Big Coal is more powerful today than ever.

You can see this simply by looking at the numbers. In 1988, NASA climate scientist James Hansen stood before Congress and testified that global warming was not only real, but was already happening. It was a turning point in the scientific and political understanding of the risks of burning coal, and, in a broad sense, it helped spark the beginning of a clean energy revolution. What has happened to our appetite for coal since then? In the U.S., annual consumption has increased by 100 million tons. Globally, the trend is even starker — yearly consumption has increased by about two billion tons, to about 7.2 billion tons. Meanwhile, annual CO2 pollution from coal has increased by more than four billion tons since 1988, to 13 billion tons a year. It’s safe to say that from the point of view of the Earth’s atmosphere, the war on coal has been a spectacular failure.

Another example is in the build-out of new coal plants. In order to break our addiction to coal, we obviously need to stop building new coal plants and begin to retire the old ones. That is not happening — not in the U.S. and not internationally. Globally, there are more than 300 new coal plants in 26 countries that are currently either under construction or on the drawing board. Each of these plants is likely to run for 40 years or so, making the push to cut overall greenhouse gas emissions all the more difficult.

 

An industry ad from the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity

And the new coal plants aren’t all in China. According to Bruce Nilles, who heads up the Beyond Coal campaign for the Sierra Club, 22 new coal plants have been constructed or are under construction in the U.S. since 2002, with another 53 proposed. Nilles points out that the Sierra Club, as well as other activists, have stopped construction of 145 new coal plants — “that’s opened up a huge market for clean energy,” Nilles says. True enough, but slowing up the march of new coal plants is not the same thing as stopping it. Just days after last week’s election, newly-elected Kansas governor Sam Brownback announced he would revive two coal plant proposals that had been blocked. As for the much-touted “clean coal” plants that capture and bury CO2 pollution, there is still not a single commercial-scale plant in operation anywhere in the world.

But maybe the clearest measure of Big Coal’s success is the rise of climate skepticism, especially in the U.S. Congress. According to one analysis, half the newly elected House Republicans deny the existence of man-made climate change, and 86 percent of them are opposed to climate change legislation. Although the coal industry is hardly the only one that is pushing the notion that global warming is, as West Virginia coal baron Don Blankenship puts it, “a hoax” and “a Ponzi scheme,” they are pioneers in the campaign to discredit climate science. The Greening Earth Society, which was largely funded by the coal industry, argued that CO2 pollution is a great boon for civilization because it increases plant productivity.

Indeed, the triumph of coal is deeply connected with an anti-science agenda, and always has been. Over the years, the industry has argued that 

The argument that mining and burning coal contributes to energy independence is a false one.

air pollution from coal plants doesn’t cause an increase in heart attacks; that mercury, a potent neurotoxin emitted from coal plants, does not cause neurological damage; that mountaintop removal mining does not hurt the environment; and that burning coal does not heat up the atmosphere. All these arguments fly in the face of science — and, often, in the face of common sense. But it doesn’t matter. Coal is an empire of denial.

The persistence of coal is a subject of much debate among environmentalists and clean energy activists. The simplest answer is that most people don’t know where their electricity comes from and don’t care, as long as their bill doesn’t go up. This ignorance gives coal advocates all kinds of advantages, such as allowing them to get away with the false argument that mining and burning coal contributes to energy independence. (Coal is no substitute for oil — we don’t use coal to power our vehicles, and we don’t use oil to generate electricity.) Another answer is that geology is destiny: The world — the U.S., China, and India especially — has a lot of coal, and so naturally we are going to burn it. Finally, there is a good argument to be made in favor of inertia. Vaclav Smil, an energy expert at the University of Manitoba, Canada, has pointed out that energy systems are not like PCs: Innovation happens over a period of decades, not months.

These answers have merit. But the real reason for the persistence of coal is politics. And I mean that in several ways.

The first and most obvious way that Big Coal gains leverage is simply with money. By any accounting, Big Coal — and by that I mean not just coal mining companies, but also the railroads that haul the coal, as well as the electric utilities and power companies that burn it — exerts a huge influence not only in Washington D.C., but in state and local governments, too. The Southern Company, a large Atlanta-based power company that is one of the largest coal burners in the country and a longtime opponent of global warming legislation, spent about $9 million in federal lobbying fees this year alone — that’s nearly as much as ExxonMobil, a company that is 10 times larger. Peabody Energy, the largest privately-held coal company in the world, spent almost $6 million.

And then there are campaign contributions. As of early October, the mining industry, which is mostly coal, contributed more than $3 million to federal candidates, the great majority of it going to Republicans. The industry backed up its contributions with a major media blitz — the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, an industry front group, spent more than $16 million on ads this year touting the virtues of “clean” coal.

But coal flexes its political muscle in another way, too. Virtually all the big Rust Belt states — Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, not to mention Kentucky and West Virginia — are coal-heavy states, where the mining and burning of coal not only keeps the lights on, but contributes significant (although 

Cleaner ways to generate electricity are on the way, and every coal executive I’ve talked to knows it.

declining) revenues to local economies. These states have a lot of throw-weight in Congress, making it difficult to get enough votes to pass legislation that is seen as tough on coal. To make matters worse, politicians from Big Coal states are constantly compelled to demonstrate their loyalty to the industry, lest their campaign contributions stop and media attacks begin. Witness West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin, who understands very well the problems coal has wrought on his state, yet who vigorously defended mountaintop removal mining in his Senate campaign and shot a bullet through the cap-and-trade bill in one of his TV ads.

There is also a third way that coal exerts political influence, and that is through the historic connection between coal and progress. Environmentalists do not like to admit it, but we really do owe a large debt of gratitude to the coal industry. Coal was the engine of the Industrial Revolution, and without the power generated from coal, modern life as we know it today would be impossible to imagine. In the past, it really was true that one measure of progress was how much coal you mined and burned.

Of course, that connection is no longer valid today. In fact, the opposite is true: Mining and burning coal is a sign of a world that has not yet made the leap into the 21st century. But a sentimental attachment to coal remains, especially in places like West Virginia (the state flag has a coal miner on it), where coal mining is not just a job, but a way of life. To many people, coal is a symbol of simpler times, before anyone worried about jobs moving to China or the collapse of subprime mortgage loans. The coal industry understands these cultural connections very well and exploits them at every opportunity — the real point of all those wholesome “clean coal” ads that blanketed the airwaves this year is to remind viewers that coal is as American as mom and apple pie. Only a socialist — are you listening, Mr. President? — would be against it.

In the fight against coal, environmentalists and clean energy activists have yet to figure out a way counter the industry’s overwhelming political advantages. They have made great progress, for example, in highlighting the ravages of mountaintop removal mining, but legislation to curb that destructive practice is unlikely to gain momentum anytime soon. And of course the prospects for legislation that will put a price on CO2 pollution, is, for the foreseeable future, nonexistent. In fact, House Republican leaders have made it clear that one of their top priorities in the new Congress is to strip the federal Environmental Protection Agency of its authority to regulate CO2 as a pollutant.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Jeff Goodell is an author and contributing editor at Rolling Stone. His latest book, How to Cool the Planet: Geoengineering and the Audacious Quest to Fix Earth’s Climate, was published earlier this year. His work has appeared in The New RepublicThe Washington PostThe New York Times Magazine, and Wired. In previous articles for Yale Environment 360, he has written about electric cars and carbon sequestration.

Dems hold cards on climate policy

November 8, 2010 by

A handful of swing-state Democrats hold the cards when it comes to blocking the Obama administration’s climate change policies.

At least 56 senators next year are likely to support efforts to block the Environmental Protection Agency’s plans to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, a POLITICO analysis shows. That’s just short of the 60 they’d need to overcome a filibuster, but a slew of moderate Democrats facing re-election in 2012 could put that number within reach.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44809.html#ixzz14hd4tsLK

EPA policy chief steps down

November 5, 2010 by
//

One of the Obama administration’s most aggressive officials on global warming regulations is stepping down from her post at the Environmental Protection Agency.

Lisa Heinzerling, the head of EPA’s policy office, will return to her position as a Georgetown University law professor at the end of the year, said EPA spokesman Brendan Gilfillan.

Within EPA, Heinzerling is one of the more dogmatic proponents of regulating greenhouse gases to the maximum extent possible under the Clean Air Act.

There are two camps within the agency on climate, said an environmental advocate who spoke on background. The Heinzerling camp, with the mind-set that, “we have the law on our side; let’s go get them.” In the other camp are Administrator Lisa Jackson and EPA air chief Gina McCarthy, who are trying to maintain the support of the White House and Congress.

Heinzerling gained fame in the environmental community for her role in helping to win a landmark 2007 U.S. Supreme Court case that gave EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. At EPA, she’s played a leading role in crafting the agency’s controversial climate policies as Jackson’s senior climate policy attorney and then as the associate administrator of EPA’s Office of Policy.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44708.html#ixzz14Pypjs3K

U.S. Rep. Ben Chandler Gets Endorsement from Sierra Club

October 27, 2010 by

 

http://www.sierraclub.org/politics/endorsements/

Kentucky Poll: Ben Chandler and Andy Barr locked in tight race

October 25, 2010 by

Democrat has won easily before, but national issues affecting this race

By John Cheves

U.S. Rep. Ben Chandler, D-Versailles, is barely clinging to his House seat as the Nov. 2 election approaches, a new Kentucky Poll shows.

Forty-eight percent of likely voters surveyed in Central Kentucky’s 6th Congressional District said they would vote for Chandler, compared to 44 percent for Andy Barr, his Republican challenger. Eight percent were undecided.

Chandler’s four-point lead is within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

Chandler also should worry about other numbers in the poll, said J. Brad Coker of Mason-Dixon Polling & Research of Washington, D.C., which conducted a district-wide telephone survey of 500 registered voters Oct. 15 to 19 for the Herald-Leader and WKYT-TV.

Only 46 percent of voters said they approved of Chandler’s job performance as congressman while just 42 percent said they held a favorable opinion of him.

The fact that Chandler fell under 50 percent on all those questions — after four terms in Congress and two decades in Kentucky politics — suggests that many undecided voters would consider a change, he said. These sorts of numbers often precede an incumbent getting the boot, he said.

“The big picture is, this seat is definitely in play,” Coker said. “Chandler may still pull it out. But he’s going to really have to work for it in these final days.”

Nationally, Democrats are expected to suffer at the polls because Americans are unhappy with the leadership of Congress as the economy continues to sputter, said Transylvania University political scientist Don Dugi.

“It’s just unfortunate timing for Chandler,” Dugi said. “Individual members of Congress aren’t fighting their own local battles, really, they’re fighting a national battle where there is a wave of hostility against the incumbents this year.”

“In any other election year, without the protests and the wave effect of the Tea Party people, Andy Barr would not have been a serious candidate and Ben Chandler would have won re-election again quite handily,” Dugi said. “But this is not a typical election year.”

Chandler spokeswoman Jennifer Krimm said the congressman’s internal polling still shows him with “a strong lead.”

“Ben’s record of independence will stand tall on Election Day, and we are confident that the people of Central Kentucky will again choose Ben to stand up for them in Congress,” Krimm said.

Barr campaign manager John Connell said the results are roughly what he expected.

“Andy Barr is in a great position to win on Nov. 2 because voters want someone who will represent Kentucky, not Washington,” Connell said.

Since winning his seat in a 2004 special election, Chandler has been popular enough to routinely trounce opponents. The Republican Party didn’t even field a challenger in 2006.

This year, some Barr supporters who participated in the poll said their philosophy was ABC: “Anybody But Chandler.”

“I like Barr because, first off, Barr isn’t Chandler,” Jerry Hale of Lexington said Friday. “He would not be a supporter of cap-and-trade, like Chandler is, and that’s pretty critical for Kentucky and for the country. He’s also against the whole Obamacare thing and he’ll try to get that taken down.”

Advertising by Barr and national Republicans has highlighted Chandler’s vote for a “cap-and-trade” plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from coal and other fossil fuels. The House passed the plan but the Senate removed it from the pending energy bill, effectively killing it for now.

On the health insurance overhaul, Chandler bucked his party’s leaders and voted against the plan as it became law earlier this year.

Other poll participants said they’re sticking with the incumbent.

“Mr. Chandler is a fairly reliable congressman who sometimes votes against the way I’d like him to because he has to protect his seat, and I understand that,” said Roger Anderson of Nicholasville. “Mr. Barr seems like he would be darned dangerous. He seems like he would fit into the Tea Party model, the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party.”

In the poll, Chandler did better in urban Fayette County than in the suburban and rural counties ringing Lexington. Chandler enjoyed an 11-point advantage in Lexington but was even with Barr in the remaining 15 counties of the district.

Chandler won support from 70 percent of Democrats, who dominate the region in voter registration. However, 22 percent of Democrats, or nearly one in four, said they would cross party lines to vote for Barr, who also won 79 percent of Republicans and 41 percent of independents.

Asked their opinion of the candidates, 42 percent said they viewed Chandler favorably, 31 percent said they viewed him unfavorably, 26 percent were neutral and 1 percent didn’t recognize his name. For Barr, it was 31 percent favorable, 31 percent unfavorable, 30 percent neutral and 8 percent who didn’t recognize his name.

The equal unfavorable ratings is interesting given the ceaseless mudslinging on television that has come to define both campaigns in this race, said Dugi of Transylvania University.

As of Friday, Chandler’s commercials accused Barr of having “covered up a criminal conviction” (Barr got caught as a 19-year-old college student trying to use a fake I.D. during spring break). Barr’s commercials accused Chandler of taking a “payoff” for his vote for the stimulus package last year in the form of an $80,000 state job for his wife (Chandler denies having anything to do with the job).

Dugi said politicians aim for the “weak identifiers” — voters without strong ties to any party or candidate — by blaring negative messages they hope will ruin their opponents’ image. In theory, disaffected voters will flee into the arms of the candidate whose attacks were best, Dugi said.

“Of course, if enough weak identifiers get discouraged by all of the attack advertising and say ‘Screw it, I’m staying home on Election Day,’ that backfires on Democrats and helps Republicans because Republican voters tend to show greater turnout,” Dugi said.

Another possible boon for Barr is Rand Paul, the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate and a favorite of the Tea Party movement, Dugi said.

Paul is staying ahead of Democratic Senate nominee Jack Conway in most statewide polls, including a five-point lead in the Kentucky Poll this week. If enough Republicans are enthusiastic about Paul and turn out in droves to vote, it stands to reason that some in the 6th District will reach down and push the button for Barr, too, Dugi said.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.