<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Why does everyone assume that coal mining in Appalachia must continue?]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by precipice http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/ Sat, 25 Aug 2007 08:54:10 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/1 These national delusions

We live in crazy times in a crazy land. But right fucking on, David.  Cheering for coal is only one of the ongoing stupidities that should have been smother many years, billions of dollars and millions of lost lives ago. But the continuing deification of coal has by far the highest stakes in terms of the extinction of our species.

This is nuts. So, in the most practical terms, how can we put a halt to the coal insanity?

]]> These national delusions

We live in crazy times in a crazy land. But right fucking on, David.  Cheering for coal is only one of the ongoing stupidities that should have been smother many years, billions of dollars and millions of lost lives ago. But the continuing deification of coal has by far the highest stakes in terms of the extinction of our species.

This is nuts. So, in the most practical terms, how can we put a halt to the coal insanity?

]]> Comment #2 by GreyFlcn http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/ Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:30:02 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/2 The irony being

The "Well because it's economical" arguement doesn't hold water anymore now with Clean Air Act compliance.

And the "Well because it's there we should use it" arguement doesn't hold much weight when you consider how many thousands times more renewable energy there is to be had.
http://greyfalcon.net/greenenergy.png

Even the energy independance arguement is a tad silly.
http://greyfalcon.net/dilbert2.png


]]> The irony being

The "Well because it's economical" arguement doesn't hold water anymore now with Clean Air Act compliance.

And the "Well because it's there we should use it" arguement doesn't hold much weight when you consider how many thousands times more renewable energy there is to be had.
http://greyfalcon.net/greenenergy.png

Even the energy independance arguement is a tad silly.
http://greyfalcon.net/dilbert2.png


]]> Comment #3 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/ Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:35:16 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/3 Sounds good

"This is why I'm on a jihad against coal."

Coal, the new melange.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world


]]> Sounds good

"This is why I'm on a jihad against coal."

Coal, the new melange.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world


]]> Comment #4 by caniscandida http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/ Sat, 25 Aug 2007 18:54:25 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/4 "melange"

Frank Herbert ought to be considered one of the most over-rated sci-fi authors of all times.

Nevertheless, that one sole creation of his, the Guild Steersmen or Navigators, fascinates me.  They are apparently a new species evolved from human origins, on account of constant high exposure to the spice, "melange," and need to remain in an environment of spice-gas.  And even better, their hallucinatory "prescience," never explained, enables them to travel in space; and so they are responsible for all space-travel in the "Dune" universe.

Unfortunately, Herbert is otherwise not a story-teller of the most recommendable sort ...

And I am afraid, BioD, that I cannot quite see how "coal is the new melange."

Or do you mean, we believe, falsely, unwholesomely, destructively, that coal is the substance that is necessary for our survival, and the survival of our society, and so we must do everything we can to ensure that we always have it and use it?  OK, that, I get.

Chickens are our cousins! So are other sensitive animals! Enough is enough! No more factory farms!

]]> "melange"

Frank Herbert ought to be considered one of the most over-rated sci-fi authors of all times.

Nevertheless, that one sole creation of his, the Guild Steersmen or Navigators, fascinates me.  They are apparently a new species evolved from human origins, on account of constant high exposure to the spice, "melange," and need to remain in an environment of spice-gas.  And even better, their hallucinatory "prescience," never explained, enables them to travel in space; and so they are responsible for all space-travel in the "Dune" universe.

Unfortunately, Herbert is otherwise not a story-teller of the most recommendable sort ...

And I am afraid, BioD, that I cannot quite see how "coal is the new melange."

Or do you mean, we believe, falsely, unwholesomely, destructively, that coal is the substance that is necessary for our survival, and the survival of our society, and so we must do everything we can to ensure that we always have it and use it?  OK, that, I get.

Chickens are our cousins! So are other sensitive animals! Enough is enough! No more factory farms!

]]> Comment #5 by Its GEtting Hot in Here http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/ Sun, 26 Aug 2007 01:37:27 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/5 Hey, Harry Reid can be quoted on it now!

There's not a coal-fired plant in America that's clean. They're all dirty. - Harry Reid

Harry Reid Says No New Coal
http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/08/19/harry-reid-says ...

Check out dispatches from the youth climate movement: http://www.itsgettinghotinhere.org/


]]> Hey, Harry Reid can be quoted on it now!

There's not a coal-fired plant in America that's clean. They're all dirty. - Harry Reid

Harry Reid Says No New Coal
http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/08/19/harry-reid-says ...

Check out dispatches from the youth climate movement: http://www.itsgettinghotinhere.org/


]]> Comment #6 by Sage http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/ Sun, 26 Aug 2007 02:06:24 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/6 Jobs

In some parts of Appalachia, coal mining is responsible for up to 15% of employment.
That's why it's treated as so important that the mining industry continues. Its demise means putting tens of thousands of people on the streets. If you want coal mining to be treated with less deference, your interests would be better served by pushing to diversify the economies of places in coal-rich areas. More people working outside the mines means less resistance to ending coal use.

]]> Jobs

In some parts of Appalachia, coal mining is responsible for up to 15% of employment.
That's why it's treated as so important that the mining industry continues. Its demise means putting tens of thousands of people on the streets. If you want coal mining to be treated with less deference, your interests would be better served by pushing to diversify the economies of places in coal-rich areas. More people working outside the mines means less resistance to ending coal use.

]]> Comment #7 by GreyFlcn http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/ Sun, 26 Aug 2007 04:18:06 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/7 OMG IT CREATE JOBS SO WE NEED SUBSIDY

In some parts of Appalachia, coal mining is responsible for up to 15% of employment. That's why it's treated as so important that the mining industry continues. Its demise means putting tens of thousands of people on the streets. If you want coal mining to be treated with less deference, your interests would be better served by pushing to diversify the economies of places in coal-rich areas. More people working outside the mines means less resistance to ending coal use.

A similarly related jobs versus subsidy issue:

Doesn't Ethanol Usage Create Jobs and Provide Cash for Midwestern Communities?

Of course it does. But how are jobs created? If we mandated that everyone had to consume a pound of potatoes or a pineapple each week, it would also create jobs and revitalize communities. So why don't we do this?

We don't do this because the jobs are created by flowing money out of one region of the country into another. If job creation had no impact on jobs in other regions, we could just enact one mandate after another, forcing us to buy various products until everyone was happily employed. But the economy doesn't work that way. The jobs that are created in Iowa are a result of money flowing out of the rest of the country.

Paul Rogers, a reporter for the San Jose Mercury News, gives the following account in which he asked Iowa governor Tom Vilsack why the rest of the country should be forced to use ethanol:

"Because it helps farmers from my state expand their markets, Vilsack explained. 'So I guess you'd support a new federal law to require everybody in Des Moines to buy a computer, to help people in Silicon Valley expand their markets?' I asked. He didn't concur."

That's a pretty good example of why job creation isn't free. Forcing people in Iowa to buy computers would result in less money to spend on other things. It is just less obvious with ethanol, because the money is extracted in smaller increments.
http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2007/08/ethanolalternativ ...

]]> OMG IT CREATE JOBS SO WE NEED SUBSIDY

In some parts of Appalachia, coal mining is responsible for up to 15% of employment. That's why it's treated as so important that the mining industry continues. Its demise means putting tens of thousands of people on the streets. If you want coal mining to be treated with less deference, your interests would be better served by pushing to diversify the economies of places in coal-rich areas. More people working outside the mines means less resistance to ending coal use.

A similarly related jobs versus subsidy issue:

Doesn't Ethanol Usage Create Jobs and Provide Cash for Midwestern Communities?

Of course it does. But how are jobs created? If we mandated that everyone had to consume a pound of potatoes or a pineapple each week, it would also create jobs and revitalize communities. So why don't we do this?

We don't do this because the jobs are created by flowing money out of one region of the country into another. If job creation had no impact on jobs in other regions, we could just enact one mandate after another, forcing us to buy various products until everyone was happily employed. But the economy doesn't work that way. The jobs that are created in Iowa are a result of money flowing out of the rest of the country.

Paul Rogers, a reporter for the San Jose Mercury News, gives the following account in which he asked Iowa governor Tom Vilsack why the rest of the country should be forced to use ethanol:

"Because it helps farmers from my state expand their markets, Vilsack explained. 'So I guess you'd support a new federal law to require everybody in Des Moines to buy a computer, to help people in Silicon Valley expand their markets?' I asked. He didn't concur."

That's a pretty good example of why job creation isn't free. Forcing people in Iowa to buy computers would result in less money to spend on other things. It is just less obvious with ethanol, because the money is extracted in smaller increments.
http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2007/08/ethanolalternativ ...

]]> Comment #8 by GreenEngineer http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/ Mon, 27 Aug 2007 02:25:29 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/dead-coal-a-live-option/8 For what it's worth

Submit comments on the MTR rule via Environmental Action here.

]]> For what it's worth

Submit comments on the MTR rule via Environmental Action here.

]]>