Archive for the ‘Climate policy’ Category

« Older Entries

New EPA data pinpoints global warming polluters

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Here’s the latest from Dina Cappiello at The Associated Press:

The most detailed data yet on emissions of heat-trapping gases show that U.S. power plants are responsible for the bulk of the pollution blamed for global warming.

Power plants released 72 percent of the greenhouse gases reported to the Environmental Protection Agency for 2010, according to information released Wednesday that was the first catalog of global warming pollution by facility. The data include more than 6,700 of the largest industrial sources of greenhouse gases, or about 80 percent of total U.S. emissions.

According to an Associated Press analysis of the data, 20 mostly coal-fired power plants in 15 states account for the top-releasing facilities.
Gina McCarthy, the top air official at the EPA, said the database marked “a major milestone” in the agency’s work to address climate change. She said it would help industry, states and the federal government identify ways to reduce greenhouse gases.

The Obama administration plans to regulate emissions of heat-trapping gases under existing law. A proposed regulation to address pollution from new power plants could be released as early as this month. Eventually, the EPA will have to tackle facilities already in operation. The largest emitters will be the first in line.

The largest greenhouse gas polluter in the nation in 2010, according to the EPA’s data, was the Scherer power plant in Juliette, Ga., owned by Southern Company. That coal-fired power plant reported releasing nearly 23 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas, in 2010.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Climate science | No Comments »

EPA moves forward with greenhouse gas limits

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

The Obama administration today quietly posted a notice on the White House Office of Management and Budget website announcing it was moving forward with greenhouse gas limit rules for coal-fired power plants.

The notice, posted here, indicates that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency yesterday filed for OMB review a copy of its proposed rule, Greenhouse Gas New Source Performance Standard for Electric Generating Units.

Recall that EPA had entered into a legal settlement with environmental groups, promising to issue a proposed rule by July 26, 2011, and a final rule by May 26, 2012. EPA missed that deadline, and has been negotiating with environmental groups and states who sued to try to force agency action.

EPA spokeswoman Cathy Milbourn Betsaida Alcantara said in a statement:

Consistent with a Supreme Court ruling in Mass vs EPA, the EPA has sent OMB a proposal for review that would address greenhouse gas pollution standards for new power plants. EPA will work with OMB throughout the interagency review process and will issue the proposal when this review is complete. EPA has engaged in an extensive and open public process to gather the latest and best information. The agency is fully considering this input as it develops smart, cost-effective and protective standards. The agency will be soliciting additional comment and information at the time that it proposes the new source rule and will take that input fully into account as it completes its process for this rule.

Share|

Posted in Climate policy | No Comments »

Drop in coal use drives U.S. greenhouse reductions

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Here’s the latest from Lester Brown and the Earth Policy Institute:

Between 2007 and 2011, carbon emissions from coal use in the United States dropped 10 percent. During the same period, emissions from oil use dropped 11 percent. In contrast, carbon emissions from natural gas use increased by 6 percent. The net effect of these trends was that U.S. carbon emissions dropped 7 percent in four years. And this is only the beginning.

The initial fall in coal and oil use was triggered by the economic downturn, but now powerful new forces are reducing the use of both. For coal, the dominant force is the Beyond Coal campaign, an impressive national effort coordinated by the Sierra Club involving hundreds of local groups that oppose coal because of its effects on human health.

And here’s more:

In August, the American Economic Review—the country’s most prestigious economics journal—published an article that can only be described as an epitaph for the coal industry. The authors conclude that the economic damage caused by air pollutants from coal burning exceeds the value of the electricity produced by coal-fired power plants. Coal fails the cost-benefit analysis even before the costs of climate change are tallied.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Alternative energy, Climate policy | 4 Comments »

Business booster Bray Cary takes a step foward on global warming, but a step back on solutions

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

If it was surprising to see the ultra pro-business State Journal newspaper editorialize that West Virginia needs to look “beyond coal,” it was even more shocking to read the promo for this past weekend’s edition of Decision Makers, Bray Cary’s television talk show:

I would implore you to watch this weekend’s Decision Makers.

I’m not exaggerating when I say this may be our most important show ever.

We’ll learn the dire truth about global warming and that a planet in peril demands action.

This is an issue that transcends political rhetoric and media talking points. Quite simply, we must act now to address climate change.

Wow. Check that out again — “our most important show ever” and “a planet in peril demands action.”

That was certainly enough for me to check out the show — though I admit I watched it online:

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Media coverage | 4 Comments »

Reinventing fire: Amory Lovins on coal’s costs

Friday, October 14, 2011

Folks who follow the work of Rocky Mountain Institute co-founder Amory Lovins certainly are well aware that he’s got a new book out.  Called “Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era,” the volume is being promoted as a blueprint to the new energy era:

Business can become more competitive, profitable and resilient by leading the transformation from fossil fuel to efficiency and renewables. This transition will build a stronger economy, a more secure nation and a healthier environment.

I wanted to share a few things Lovins has to say in the book about coal:

Coal fires the power stations that generate 45 percent of U.S. and 41 percent of world electricity … Burning coal emits sulfur and nitrogen oxides (causing acid rain), particulates, mercury and other toxic metals … Coal ash from power plants pollutes streams. Mining coal injures and kills workers and inverts landscapes. Such hidden costs of U.S. coal-fired electricity total $180 to $530 billion per year. Properly charging that on our electric bills, rather than to our health and our kids, would double or triple the price of coal-fired electricity.

… Coal depletion, long assumed to be centuries off, may arrive unexpectedly soon. Coal resources had long been assessed with little or no attention to their exploitation cost. Recent reassessments of coal’s economic geology are more sobering, suggesting that ‘peak coal’ will occur within decades even in such coal-rich countries as the U.S. and China. Physical depletion could take much longer, but the cheap coal is going fast.

Lovins explains:

… Business, motivated by enduring advantage, supported by civil society, sped by effective policy — can advantageously achieve the ambitious transition beyond oil and coal by 2050, and later beyond natural gas, too … New technologies, and new ways of combining them, can wring several-fold more work from the same amount of energy. Those efficiency gains then allow renewable energy sources, equally enabled by modern information technology, to by deployed faster. The transition will create new industries with vast potential for jobs, profits, and better, cheaper, more robust services.

Check it out …

Share|

Posted in Alternative energy, Books, Climate policy, Media coverage, Peak coal | No Comments »

If coal is so good, then why is W.Va. so poor?

Friday, July 22, 2011

A coal truck drives out of downtown Welch, W.Va., Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2011. (AP Photo/Jon C. Hancock)

As we wrap up another week of news from the coalfields of West Virginia, it’s worth looking back to see exactly who is asking the tough questions that need to be asked about this industry and its impacts on our state.

First, it takes a couple of members of Congress from California of all places to press Kevin Crutchfield, CEO of Alpha Natural Resources, about exactly how opposing unions fits into his company’s notion of “Running Right.”

West Virginia’s elected officials don’t seem to be interested in finding out what Crutchfield is doing to reform the Massey Energy safety practices that brought us the Upper Big Branch Mine Disaster. Contrast the grilling of Crutchfield by Reps. George Miller and Lynn Woolsey to the attitude of Rep. Nick Rahall, who this week touted “the new ownership in Southern West Virginia” as the answer to any coal-related problems. Of course, my good friend Congressman Rahall, despite spending more than 30 years in Washington, hasn’t been able to figure out what agency should look into the recent scientific study that found his constituents who live near mountaintop removal mines face a greater risk of birth defects.

Then, we had a Boston native, billionaire business information mogul (and mayor New York City) coughing up $50 million of his personal wealth to help the Sierra Club fight construction of new coal-fired power plants, encourage the closure of polluting older plants and halt new mountaintop removal mining permits.

That move by Michael Bloomberg really touched a nerve with the powers that be in West Virginia’s coal industry and among some of its political allies.

The United Mine Workers issued a statement blasting Bloomberg. So did the National Mining Association. I couldn’t imagine that Sen. Joe Manchin was going to let it slide, and he didn’t disappoint, issuing a press release saying:

Coal not only built this country, but it built the skyscrapers of New York City, and without coal, the lights of that city would be dark and its economy would be devastated.

My buddy Matt Ballard at the Charleston Area Alliance (a local business booster group) must have gotten the memo on this, because I noticed him tweeting about it:

1/2 Really would have liked 2 have seen #Bloomberg donate $ to build CO2 technology to help make coal cleaner & advance the industry.

2/2 tech advances environmental science to help reduce #CO2. But instead he chose to not think about our domestic security. #Bloomberg

That was a general theme from the UMWA, the NMA and Sen. Manchin … that Mayor Bloomberg should have used his money to support development of  “clean coal” technology such as carbon capture and storage, or CCS.

OK, now let’s be clear again on something: American Electric Power dropped its work on one of the largest CCS test projects in history over in Mason County at its Mountaineer Plant. Why? Because federal and state officials have failed to make such technology necessary, by not passing any sort of binding limits on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Alternative energy, Business, Climate policy, Green jobs, Health, Mountaintop Removal | 25 Comments »

Mayor Bloomberg to donate $50 million to help Sierra Club fight coal-fired power plants

Thursday, July 21, 2011

The big announcement is coming later this morning, but NPR’s Elizabeth Shogren had the scoop already:

The Sierra Club is getting a big boost in its effort to shut down coal-fired power plants. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is supporting the organization’s efforts with a donation of $50 million. The plants produce nearly half the nation’s electricity. But they also pump out lots of pollution that contributes to climate change, makes people sick and causes premature deaths.

Once efforts to embargo the story were out the window, The Washington Post went with their story, reporting:

Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune described the gift from Bloomberg Philanthropies, which will be spread out over four years, as “a game-changer, from our perspective.” The group will devote the money to its “Beyond Coal” campaign, which has helped block the construction of 153 new coal-fired power plants across the country since 2002.

Bloomberg and Sierra Club officials were to appear together later this morning outside a coal-fired plant in Alexandria, Va., for the announcement.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Air pollution, Climate policy, Legal actions, Media coverage | 5 Comments »

W.Va. leaders keep their heads in the sand on climate change and mountaintop removal

Friday, July 15, 2011

It’s been a year and a half since the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd cautioned West Virginians and their coal industry to “embrace the future.”  Remember what he said:

To be part of any solution, one must first acknowledge a problem. To deny the mounting science of climate change is to stick our heads in the sand and say “deal me out.” West Virginia would be much smarter to stay at the table.

It was hard this week to see much progress being made toward West Virginia, the coal industry and our elected leaders taking Sen. Byrd’s advice.

First, there was the incredible response that Gazette statehouse reporter Alison Knezevich got when she asked Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, acting as governor, about the groundbreaking West Virginia University study linking mountaintop removal to birth defects among Appalachian residents:

There’s reports every day on something causing some kind of illness.

Had Mr. Tomblin looked closely at the study or asked anyone in his administration to do so?

I’m not a researcher. Obviously it’s sad when any child is born with birth defects.

And not one West Virginia political leader I’m aware of has raised a single objection to the coal industry’s lawyers trying to dismiss the study’s results as being caused by imbreeding among coalfield residents. Not even Sen. Joe Manchin, who has always been quick to follow his uncle’s lead and jump on any outsider who makes hillbilly jokes.

It was left to a congresswoman from California, Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier to respond to the claims of Crowell & Moring lawyers Clifford J. Zatz, William L. Anderson, Kirsten L. Nathanson, and Monica M. Welt, saying at a House hearing yesterday:

The coal industry’s response to this study was outrageous.

I’ve been trying most of the week to ask Rep. Nick J. Rahall, whose district includes most of Southern West Virginia’s mountaintop removal operations, what he thinks of the increase risk of birth defects among his constituents near the mines he so vocally supports. So far, he hasn’t had time for an interview on the subject.

I wondered yesterday if Rahall and Rep. Shelley Moore Capito were listening to the very powerful testimony of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Nancy Stoner, who told a House Oversight subcommittee:

In 2010 an independent, peer-reviewed study by two university professors found that communities near degraded streams have higher rates of respiratory, digestive, urinary, and breast cancer. That study was not conducted in a far-off country. It was conducted in Appalachian communities – only a few hundred miles from where we sit today. A peer-reviewed West Virginia University study released in May concludes that Appalachian citizens in areas affected by mountaintop mining experience significantly more unhealthy days each year than the average American. And a peer-reviewed study released days ago concluded that babies born to mothers who live in mountaintop mining areas of Appalachia have significantly higher rates of birth defects than babies born in other areas.

In addition to health studies, peer-reviewed science has increasingly documented the effects of surface coal mining operations on downstream water quality and aquatic life. Peer-reviewed studies have found elevated levels of highly toxic and bioaccumulative selenium; sulfates; and total dissolved solids in streams downstream of valley fills. Studies by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection and independent scientists have emphasized the role of high selenium levels in causing developmental effects in fish. Peer-reviewed studies by EPA scientists have concluded that the environmental effects of surface coal mining include resource loss, water quality impairment, and degradation of aquatic ecosystems.

It has been a high priority of this Administration to reduce the substantial human health and environmental consequences of surface coal mining in Appalachia, and to minimize further impairment of already-compromised watersheds.

Perhaps this was considered out-of-bounds testimony, since the name of the GOP-organized hearing was “EPA’s Appalachian Energy Permitorium: Job Killer Or Job Creator?“

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Media coverage, Mountaintop Removal, Politics | 6 Comments »

Searching for Cecil Roberts III: Exactly what sort of environmental protection does the UMWA support?

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Cecil E. Roberts, president of the United Mine Workers of America, addresses a labor rally of Friday, April 1, 2011 in Waynesburg, Pa.(AP Photo/Keith Srakocic)

Say what you want about my friend United Mine Workers of America President Cecil Roberts, but you pretty much always know where he stands.

Except when he writes op-eds like the one in today’s Gazette, in which he makes like a Chamber of Commerce leader and slams the Obama administration’s effort to keep reducing deadly pollution from coal-fired power plants:

Just as our economy is beginning to climb out of the deepest recession since the Great Depression, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing a variety of new rules that will inevitably lead to large-scale unemployment and massive rate hikes over the next several years.

… Tens of thousands of jobs will be lost in the utility, coal and transportation sectors. Hundreds of communities will suffer as their tax bases shrink with the closure of nearby utility plants. Industrial states that were hit hard by the recession and still suffering from high unemployment will take another, needless hit.

Now, there are folks in the regional and environmental community who will immediately jump on this as typical stuff from the UMWA. These folks remain increasingly bitter that Cecil Roberts won’t join their fight to stop all mountaintop removal (or maybe all surface coal-mining).

That wouldn’t be fair.

Maybe I’m just feeling nostalgic. All of the publicity about the upcoming march to urge protection of Blair Mountain reminds me of when I met Cecil, more than 20 years ago.

It was the summer of 1989. Cecil was vice president of the union, leading its strike against Pittston, fighting for the health-care benefits of UMWA retirees and widows. It was a young intern at the Gazette, and somebody thought it was a good idea to let me cover the strike (one joke in the newsroom that summer was about how, if there were any trouble on the picket lines, I wasn’t on the company’s health-care plan). UMW leaders were re-enacting the march to Blair Mountain to draw attention to their fight with Pittston (subscription required).

One thing I learned that summer was how so many UMWA fights were not really about the working miners who were doing the fighting, but about either protecting the union’s retirees or trying to ensure a better life for their kids.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Air pollution, Climate policy, Labor, Mountaintop Removal | 6 Comments »

Ignoring the inconvenient facts about coal

Friday, May 13, 2011

We were talking yesterday on this blog about the decades-old problem of West Virginia as natural resource colony, the fact that much of our state’s coal, gas and timber is owned by out-of-state interests and how parts of West Virginia that generate the most of these valuable products remain generally pretty poor.

In a post that started out as simply an effort to note the candidacy of the Mountain Party’s Bob Henry Baber and some of Baber’s comments on the coal industry, I noted this line from a story by the Daily Mail’s Ry Rivard:

… The distinction Kessler makes between “wealth” and “jobs” from the coal industry may be a hard one for him to make given West Virginia’s long history with the industry.

And, I wrote:

Of course, one reason it might be hard to successfully make this case is that media coverage of these issue is so bad.

Today, of course, the Daily Mail hasn’t failed to disappoint, making my argument for me so clearly in an editorial headlined, Of course coal mining creates wealth in W.Va.

The editorial listed a series of facts presented at a congressional hearing by West Virginia Chamber of Commerce President Steve Roberts:

– A 2008 study found that the coal industry directly employed 20,454 West Virginians and paid them about $1.5 billion in wages that year. Total compensation rises to $2.8 billion.

– In 2008, coal companies paid $676.2 million in taxes. Over a decade that would be $6.7 billion.

– If the Obama administration, to cater to its political base, were to end surface mining in West Virginia, coal production would drop by more than 40 percent. Of the 537 mines operating in the state, 232 are surface operations.

– Surface mining employ 6,255 people directly — and the employment of a large portion of the 2,340 people who work in coal-handling facilities depends on those mines as well.

And then, the Daily Mail opined:

Acting Senate President Jeff Kessler, a candidate for the Democratic nomination in the governor’s race, commented recently that while the coal industry has been “an excellent job creator” for West Virginians, it has “not been a wealth creator.”

If the loss of $2.8 billion in compensation and $676 million in annual tax revenue would be called an economic catastrophe, what should the continuance of that revenue be called?

Easy. Wealth creation.

This is what happens when the news reporting on these issues leaves out a whole bunch of facts that aren’t especially convenient for West Virginia’s coal industry, its friends in the media or its staunch defenders among our political elite.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Media coverage, Mountaintop Removal, Peak coal | 8 Comments »

New National Academy study outlines ‘pressing need for substantial action’ on global warming

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Here’s the conclusion from a new report issued today by the National Academy of Sciences:

Climate change is occurring, is very likely caused by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems. Each additional ton of greenhouse gases emitted commits us to further change and greater risks. In the judgment of the Committee on America’s Climate Choices, the environmental, economic, and humanitarian risks of climate change indicate a pressing need for substantial action to limit the magnitude of climate change and to prepare to adapt to its impacts.

Among the specifics important to readers of this blog:

… Continuing to build new coal-fired power plants will lock in further dependence on GHG-intensive energy sources (unless commercial-scale carbon capture and storage soon become widely implemented).

And:

Significantly reducing U.S. GHG emissions, however it is accomplished, will produce “winners” and “losers” along several dimensions.

Increasing the price of carbon-intensive energy, for instance, will have a disproportionate impact on those who need to drive long distances to work and residents of some coal-mining communities.

Basic notions of fairness require that adverse energy price impacts on those least able to bear them be identified and addressed.

Carbon-related revenues, obtained from carbon taxes or auctioning of emissions allowances in a cap-and-trade system, would provide resources that could be used for this purpose.

Alternative or additional policy measures that make incentive-based climate change policies more accessible to low-income households (e.g., graduated subsidies or tax credits for home insulation improvements) may also be appropriate.

Directly engaging economically disadvantaged and other vulnerable communities in the policy planning process helps allow the legitimate interests of those communities to be addressed, while nonetheless allowing broadly desirable investments to be made.

A summary of the report is available here, and this is what my friend Dina Cappiello at The Asociated Press wrote about it:

An expert panel asked by Congress to recommend ways to deal with global warming said Thursday that the U.S. should not wait to reduce the pollution responsible and any efforts to delay action would be shortsighted.

But that’s exactly what Republicans and some Democrats in Congress are trying to do.

With a majority in the House and many freshman lawmakers skeptical of the science behind climate change, Republicans are pushing measures to block the federal government from controlling greenhouse gases.

The House passed a bill to do that last month. An identical measure failed to get enough votes in the Democratic-controlled Senate, but a majority there did support reining in the Environmental Protection Agency’s plans to reduce heat-trapping pollution.

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Climate science | 8 Comments »

Sen. Manchin praises coal-to-liquids project

Monday, May 9, 2011

This just in from Sen. Joe Manchin’s office …

U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) today highlighted the critical role that coal will play in our nation’s energy future at the groundbreaking of the country’s first coal-to-gasoline plant in Mingo County, which is projected to create hundreds of new jobs and provide additional domestic resources to help bring down the price of gas.

“The price of gas has skyrocketed to more than four dollars a gallon in the last year, and there’s no question that West Virginia families are hurting,” Senator Manchin said. “West Virginia is a state where people have to drive to survive, and I know these high prices are hitting families hard. This country has to get serious about making energy independence a priority, which is why we must develop a national energy policy that harnesses all of our vast domestic resources and push forward with new technology – just like coal-to-gasoline – that will help us achieve energy independence within a generation. All West Virginians can be proud that Mingo County, West Virginia is at the center of a very exciting new frontier in energy technology that will help reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign oil.”

According to Manchin’s office:

This coal-to-gasoline plant – the first of its kind in the United States – is projected to convert 7,500 tons of West Virginia coal into clean gasoline each day, which can be used to run cars, trucks, tanks and jets. It is expected to produce 18,000 barrels (756,000 gallons) of Premium 92 Octane gasoline each day. When it is fully operational, this plant is expected to create 300 full-time jobs. And, over a four-year construction period, its estimated that 3,000 skilled trade workers will be employed.

So, this one plant — if it’s every built — would produce about one-third of the gasoline that West Virginia uses every day, at least according to figures published by the state Division of Energy.

Now, Sen. Manchin doesn’t mention questions about the lack of financing (subscription required) for this project.  He doesn’t mention lingering problems with the company’s state environmental permits — such as the fact that its stormwater permit for its construction not being issued yet.

And Sen. Manchin certainly didn’t mention the biggest question facing the TransGas proposal: The fact that it has no plan for capturing and storing its greenhouse gas emissions, meaning the fuel it produces could end up generating twice as much carbon dioxide as traditional fuels.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Alternative energy, CCS, Climate policy, Politics | No Comments »

House hearing update: Lawmakers avoid cold, hard facts about mountaintop removal and coal’s future

Friday, May 6, 2011

A coal truck drives out of downtown Welch, W.Va., Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2011. Coal brought a large population to the McDowell County in the 1940′s. Now the population is shrinking and the county suffers from unemployment and poverty. (AP Photo/Jon C. Hancock)

Maybe it’s unfair to criticize the Republican leadership of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for setting up such a one-sided, clearly scripted hearing aimed at piling criticism on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over the Obama administration’s crackdown on mountaintop removal coal mining.

After all, the Democrats in the Senate held a mountaintop removal hearing that wasn’t exactly the most balanced affair around … and this is all just politics, right?

Wrong … this is supposed to be about governing. And that’s why I’m a little sorry I used a pithy headline on yesterday’s post, House hearing: Let the EPA bashing begin!

There are serious issues here on all sides, even if nobody wants to admit that the folks they happen to disagree with have legitimate concerns.

Coal miners are rightly concerned about their jobs and their families’ futures. Folks who live near mountaintop removal mines are rightly upset about the way these mines impact their lives. Scientists are troubled about the growing data showing mountaintop removal’s negative effects on water quality, forests and public health.

But it’s hard to take a hearing like this seriously when it is all so staged, such an obviously one-sided affair and carried out in a manner that does so little to point the region toward solutions that will help deal with the big issues facing the coalfields. And I wonder often if the vast majority of West Virginians — folks who don’t like mountaintop removal,  also don’t like the idea of people losing their jobs, but don’t live their lives obsessed with hating coal or despising the EPA — are put off by the posturing from both sides.

Really now … how far do the industry’s repeated nonsensical arguments about bottled mineral water not meeting EPA’s conductivity standard really get anybody in understanding the water quality issues scientists are worried about? And why do environmental activists persist in trying to make out like coal companies are actually dropping bombs on the people of Southern West Virginia?

And that’s the way yesterday’s hearing went, though because coal’s friends in the GOP House leadership controlled the witness list, the industry’s side of this pointless political game carried the day.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Mountaintop Removal, Peak coal, Politics | 9 Comments »

Sierra Club cautions TransGas on groundbreaking

Thursday, May 5, 2011

TransGas has announced that it plans to hold a groundbreaking ceremony next week for its proposed coal-to-gas project in Mingo County, W.Va. But the Sierra Club is cautioning the company against actually starting construction of the facility.

In this letter to TransGas lawyer David Yaussy, the Sierra Club reminds the company that it has yet to receive its final air pollution permit from the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. The letter says:

Pursuant to West Virginia and federal law, the company cannot construct a major source of air pollution without a Prevention of Significant Deterioration permit … Nor can the company move forward with construction of a minor source without a final minor source permit.

While a mere ‘groundbreaking’ does not meet the definition of  ‘construction’ under the Act … TransGas faces significant risk if it moves forward with constructing the source itself. Doing so without the proper permit could subject your client to both federal and citizen enforcement actions, even if the state permitting authority has condoned the project.

Interestingly, the Sierra Club tells me:

WVDEP is taking the position that TransGas can go ahead and construct while they are fixing their permit.

I’ve tried to ask WVDEP about that, but agency officials have not responded to my questions.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Air pollution, Alternative energy, Climate policy, Legal actions | 26 Comments »

State of deniers: GOP gubernatorial candidates

Monday, April 25, 2011

If you thought the Democratic gubernatorial candidates here in West Virginia were something else … check out the answers from the Republicans regarding a simple question about global warming … hard to know what to say about answers like these.

Do you accept the science that global warming is occurring, and is largely caused by the emissions from coal-fired power plants? If so, what specifically would you have our state do about it?

– Clark S. Barnes:

Scientists continue to debate the issue and I’m not in a position to determine the answer. Carbon-based fuels continue to be the efficient method of providing the nations needed energy. Recent disasters in Japan will fuel a resurgence in the importance of the energy provided by West Virginia.

– Mitch B. Carmichael:

NO. I do not adhere to the belief structure that purports that climate change is caused by man-made initiatives. As Delegate, I voted against the “cap and trade” bill that was passed in the Manchin administration.

– Ralph William “Bill” Clark:

Global warming does seem to be occurring, but solid scientific evidence is not yet available to show that it is largely caused by coal-fired power plants. The full extent of the cause and/or effect roles played by CO2 is not yet known. We must protect both our economy and the environment.

– Larry Faircloth:

I reject such science.

– Betty S. Ireland:

Our world would be better if all nations worked together to eliminate pollution of our environment, from all sources.

– Bill Maloney:

When I’m governor, West Virginia will mine coal. The EPA and the OSM are out of control. I’ll continue the fight and the lawsuits against the EPA, and I’ll also assert the primacy of West Virginia laws, so that our coal miners can make a living.

– Mark A. Sorsaia:

I do not accept the proposition that global warming is occurring as a direct result of coal-fired power plants. Good government is about maintaining a balance between a clean environment and a healthy economy. We can do both, without the radical approach taken by the EPA.


Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Politics | 42 Comments »

A day in coal news: Are West Virginia’s political leaders moving forward or stuck in the past?

Friday, April 15, 2011

Yesterday was one of those days where news developments illustrated clearly what I was talking about when I started this blog: That there are really two different discussions going on in this country about coal:

One of them is out there in the broader world. Scientists, policymakers and even investors are becoming more and more convinced that the downsides of coal have to be addressed. One way or the other, coal-fired power’s contribution to global warming must be dealt with. To these folks, the question is: Can coal have a place in our energy mix in a carbon-constrained world?

The other discussion is happening here in West Virginia, and in other coal communities. Locally, the issues are different, and in many ways much more emotional. It’s a battle between families who rely on coal to put food on their tables and send their kids to college, and folks who live near coal mines and are tired of blasting, dust, and water pollution. To these folks, the questions are: How can we protect coal’s future or how can we shut down mountaintop removal?

Increasingly, connections are being made between parts of these two threads. Scientists and environmental activists who worry about climate change are more and more understanding the on-the-ground impacts of mountaintop removal, coal ash and even unsafe working conditions in the nation’s coalfields.

The late Sen. Robert C. Byrd talked hinted at this in his “embrace the future” speech and essay, telling us:

West Virginians can choose to anticipate change and adapt to it, or resist and be overrun by it. One thing is clear. The time has arrived for the people of the Mountain State to think long and hard about which course they want to choose.

So then we have yesterday’s developments …

First, a significant announcement by the Tennessee Valley Authority:

The Tennessee Valley Authority announced plans Thursday to retire 18 older coal-fired generation units at three power plants as part of the federal utility’s vision of being one of the nation’s leading providers of low-cost and cleaner energy by 2020.

… The capacity will be replaced with low-emission or zero-emission electricity sources, including renewable energy, natural gas, nuclear power and energy efficiency …

During a conference call with news reporters, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson explained that TVA’s move was a “business decision,” but also a move that fits in with EPA efforts on a variety of fronts to force the coal industry to confront the externalized costs of its pollution:

The message here is that we don’t have anything against coal, but we have to reduce pollution that comes from coal to our air, to our water and on our land.

At about the same time that TVA announcement was being made, the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce was holding a hearing on West Virginia Republican Rep. David McKinley’s bill to block EPA from taking action to better regulate toxic ash from coal-fired power plants.

Rep. McKinley (whose bill is co-sponsored by Republican Shelley Moore Capito and Democrat Nick Rahall) touts his proposal as another effort to curb excessive regulation of the coal industry by President Obama and the EPA.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Politics | 9 Comments »

Rockefeller on coal: ‘In some ways, it defines us’

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Here’s a commentary out today from  Sen. Jay Rockefeller.  Rockefeller’s office is distributing it  to explain the West Virginia Democrat’s efforts to block EPA action on global warming:

Here in West Virginia, coal mining isn’t just a way of living – it’s a way of life. It pays bills, lights homes and feeds families, and it also is a binding source of pride for those who work in it, know it, and respect it. I am one of those proud West Virginians – I always will be. And I will always fight for our miners, our jobs, and our economic future.

West Virginians are well aware of the big showdown in Congress that pits the Environmental Protection Agency and rules on greenhouse gas regulations against the interests of our coal miners.

This battle among the EPA, coal and energy companies, Congress, the President, and our entire state delegation is on the front page of papers. Recent votes in Washington have not settled the issue but, when taken together, show that there is a path forward.

For as long as I have been in the Senate, I have fought for coal miners – for their safety, their health care, their retirement, and their jobs. We have stood shoulder-to-shoulder on the front lines of some pretty tough fights – during which I have always focused on practical solutions and a willingness to engage head-on those who oppose us.

For me, today’s battle involving the EPA is no different.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Congress, Politics | 9 Comments »

Budget deal doesn’t include EPA riders

Monday, April 11, 2011

President Barack Obama visits the Lincoln Memorial at the National Mall in Washington, Saturday, April 9, 2011. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

It sounds like the budget deal late Friday night averting a government shutdown went through without policy riders concerning climate change and mountaintop removal regulation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

President Obama mentioned this specifically in his statement Friday night:

At the same time, we also made sure that at the end of the day, this was a debate about spending cuts, not social issues like women’s health and the protection of our air and water. These are important issues that deserve discussion, just not during a debate about our budget.

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Congress, Mountaintop Removal, Politics | 3 Comments »

Sen. Rockefeller loses again on EPA bill

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

The U.S. Senate just voted down — by a count of 88-12 — the latest effort by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., to delay any EPA action to deal with global warming.

Sen. Rockefeller’s office issued this statement just before the vote:

I’m convinced that my approach to stopping the EPA in its tracks is the best idea on the table to protect the mining industry. We need a timeout on EPA regulations right now, and I don’t understand why Republicans are saying they will block what we’re trying to do just to score a point against the White House. If that happens, it’s a shame. The plan I have for blocking the EPA will protect West Virginia, allow miners to keep their jobs, and is reasonable enough that it can become law. None of the other plans have any chance of that. We ought to put aside bickering and agree on a plan that offers real solutions and good outcomes.

As we’ve discussed before here on Coal Tattoo, Sen. Rockefeller’s version of these events is that the coal industry and utilities need more time to perfect and deploy carbon capture and storage equipment … but there’s plenty of evidence that what is really keeping CCS from moving forward is the lack of a comprehensive climate and energy plan that puts a price on greenhouse gas emissions by requiring cuts in those emissions.

See previous posts here, here, here and here.

Share|

Posted in CCS, Climate policy, Coal pollution, Congress, Politics | 4 Comments »

Senate set to vote on blocking EPA climate action

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

There should be some interesting action today in the U.S. Senate, where lawmakers will be considering a variety of efforts to block the Obama administration from pursuing actions to try to curb global warming.

UPDATED: It looks like votes on this issue may not come until Thursday.

West Virginia’s Sen. Jay Rockefeller is a key player in the drama, with his amendment — to an unrelated small business bill — to block any U.S. Environmental Protection Agency action on greenhouse gas emissions for two years.

Sen. Rockefeller is trying to portray himself as a moderate in this debate, noting that he isn’t supporting all-out efforts to dismantle EPA and the Clean Air Act altogether. And in fact, he’s been under attack in an advertising campaign by a group called “The Committee for Truth in Politics“:

(more…)

Share|

Posted in Climate policy, Politics, Uncategorized | 6 Comments »

« Older Entries