Tag: coal industry
Hey Kids! Meet 'Coalie,' New Mascot For The Trump Team's Climate Deniers

Hey Kids! Meet 'Coalie,' New Mascot For The Trump Team's Climate Deniers

Hey kids, it’s Coalie! He’s a cute and cuddly lump of coal wearing a hardhat, and he’s here to tell you just how great coal mining is and just how great the Trump administration is at mitigating the harms caused by coal mining.

Coalie made his debut Wednesday on the official government webpage for the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, a division of the Department of the Interior. OSMRE just dropped a listicle with the “10 Things to Know About How OSMRE Supports America’s Energy Legacy and Communities,” with Coalie as your guide.

This list is ostensibly about how OSMRE supports not only coal mining but also the reclamation efforts after coal mines are used up and abandoned. Sure, the amounts charged to coal companies to help pay for reclamation have plummeted over the years, and sure, there’s currently no pushback from this reclamation-loving administration over congressional efforts to strip money from a dedicated fund for mine cleanup and give it to the National Forest Service instead.

But just hear Coalie out, okay? Per the anthropomorphized talking lump of coal, one of the top 10 things OSMRE does is “evaluate potential environmental impacts of federal actions” as required under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA.

Well, Coalie—we have to admit that balancing “responsible stewardship with opportunities for public input” does sound pretty great. But Coalie apparently overlooked that the administration is fast-tracking and minimizing NEPA reviews of proposed mines as part of an overall push to limit public input on environmental issues and drastically restrict environmental review. That sounds much more like no stewardship at all.

Oh Coalie, how could you lie to us?

Coalie also wants you to know that the Trump administration supports coal miners and their families.

“Each year, OSMRE transfers more than $1 billion to the United Mine Workers of America Health and Retirement Funds to support health care and pension benefits for eligible coal miners and their beneficiaries,” the website claims.

“Transfers” is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence. That’s because the federal government does not provide more than $1 billion per year in pensions and benefits to coal miners.

UMWA receives some federal funding, but is largely funded by premiums that coal companies are required by law to pay. The government is also responsible for transferring interest from the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund to UMWA, but the AMRF is funded by fees assessed to coal companies for each ton of coal produced. So, what the administration and Coalie are bragging about here is quite literally just transferring the money collected from coal companies to the UMWA funds, as required by law.

Coalie, it sure feels like you’re trying to pull the wool over our eyes here.

Any attempt by this administration to say it prioritizes the health and safety of miners is undercut by its eagerness to make black lung disease great again by thwarting desperately needed regulations, such as one that would have restricted exposure to silica dust.

No one wants coal mining as much as President Donald Trump wants coal mining. Well, except maybe for Coalie.

Even coal companies don’t want coal mining as much as Trump or Coalie want coal mining. The administration has resorted to forcing energy companies to keep their aging coal plants open, even when they were already winding down operations and even though keeping them open would cost consumers more, not less. It also created a $625 million slush fund for coal plant owners to upgrade their aging plants rather than close them.

The Department of the Interior opened up a swath of public land to coal mining, eager to get cash from all those companies thrilled to pay for the privilege—only to find out that companies didn’t really want to do that at all and offered only a pittance for the land.

Apparently it is very hard to convince people—even coal industry people—that coal is super great. But hey, that’s just because they haven’t met Coalie yet. That cute little lump of coal is bound to turn things right around.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos

What's Behind Trump's Doomed Effort To Revive The Coal Industry?

What's Behind Trump's Doomed Effort To Revive The Coal Industry?

I’ve just gotten back from the Netherlands, which is famous for its picturesque windmills. But wind power in Holland is more than a historical curiosity. There are also modern wind turbines almost everywhere you look, both onshore and off. And the ground is covered with dead birds and whales.

OK, not really. Wind power is, in fact, far cleaner and safer than burning fossil fuels. And I personally like the sight of wind turbines. After all, I value the comforts of modern civilization and find it reassuring to see the power needed to provide those comforts generated without harmful emissions.

But Donald Trump, as everyone knows, hates wind power and loves coal. Both passions are deeply irrational. Yet they are shaping policy.

Trump is doing his best to kill wind power, going so far as to order work halted on a mostly completed wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island. (Orsted, the Danish company behind the project, has sued and gotten the stop-work order lifted.)

And the administration is trying to revive coal, opening federal land for mining, removing pollution limits and providing hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies. But why?Administration officials would have you believe that coal mining is an economically viable industry that has been sabotaged by liberals. On Monday Chris Wright, the energy secretary, declared — in a weirdly dated culture war cliché — that coal is “out of fashion with the chardonnay set in San Francisco, Boulder, Colorado, and New York City.”

The truth, however, is that coal is a dying industry for very good reasons, and anti-wokeism is unlikely to revive it.

Coal stopped being a significant source of jobs decades ago:

At this point there are only around 40,000 coal miners left. In case you’re wondering, vineyards and wineries employ around 130,000 people, three times as many as the coal industry.

Where did all the coal jobs go? The answers may surprise you.

As you can see in the chart above, there was an epic decline in coal employment between 1950 and the 2000s, from half a million miners to around 80,000. But this employment decline didn’t reflect an economy turning away from coal. In fact, use of coal to generate electricity rose steadily over the whole period, peaking in 2008:

So what happened to all the coal jobs? Basically, workers were displaced first by giant power shovels (strip mining), then by explosives used to blow the tops off mountains, exposing the coal beneath. By using these techniques, in 2008 coal companies were able to produce twice as much coal as they did in 1950, while employing 80 percent fewer workers.

Coal consumption finally did start declining after 2008. But if you look at the chart above, you can see that until recently coal was mainly replaced, not by renewable energy, but by natural gas — which became cheap and abundant thanks to the rise of fracking.

Solar and wind power have finally become important sources of energy in recent years. But the reason they have grown rapidly while coal has declined isn’t that the chardonnay set considers coal unfashionable. It’s the simple fact that coal is no longer cost-competitive, while wind and solar are.

Needless to say, Trump and company aren’t going to acknowledge these facts. They may not even be aware of them. In his speech at the U.N. General Assembly, Trump declared that the Chinese sell a lot of wind turbines to the rest of the world, “but they barely use them.” Ahem:

For the rest of us, however, the important thing to understand is that none of the ostensible justifications for promoting coal make sense. It’s not about saving jobs: Coal mining as a way of life vanished decades ago, not because chardonnay-sipping liberals sneered at it, but because corporations replaced miners with machines and explosives. It’s not about reducing energy prices: Trying to keep coal alive will make energy more expensive, not less.

What it’s really about is culture war. Trying to bring back coal is all about owning the libs. And if it damages the environment, well, from MAGA’s point of view that’s a plus.

Reprinted with permission from Substack.

Kamala Harris

New Iowa Poll Is 'Canary In The Coal Mine' For Trump

Ann Selzer’s Iowa Poll for the Des Moines Register came out Saturday, and it’s a political thermonuclear bomb:

Kamala Harris: 47
Donald Trump: 44

The previous poll had Trump up 47-43 in September, and leading President Joe Biden 50-32 in June.

And this matters far beyond saying “it’s just one poll.”

Selzer is one of the nation's most accurate pollsters, doing the vast majority of her work in her home state of Iowa.

Her track record is impeccable: (Actual results in parenthesis)

2022 Senate: R+12 (R+12)
2020 President: R+7 (R+8)
2020 Senate: R+4 (R+7)
2018 Governor: D+2 (R+3) — a rare miss
2016 President: R+7 (R+9)
2014 Senate: R+7 (R+8)
2012 President: D+5 (D+6)

I remember that 2016 poll like it was yesterday. At the time, Iowa was still considered a battleground state, with Hillary Clinton’s campaign heavily contesting it. When those results came back, we shrugged them off, as they were significantly out of line with other polling showing a close but steady Clinton lead. In hindsight, it was the canary in the coal mine.

And that’s what this is for Donald Trump now. It’s not just the trendlines. Trump won Iowa by eight points in 2020. Even a swing of a few points in a white, rural, midwestern state spells incredible danger for Republican chances across the entire midwest, and even into Nebraska, where independent Senate candidate Dan Osborn is trying to pull off a massive upset to unseat incumbent Republican Deb Fischer in that deep red state. Iowa also has two competitive House races, and if these numbers hold, Democrats could flip both of them on Tuesday.

The internals are downright brutal for Trump and his party.

“Independent voters, who had consistently supported Trump in the leadup to this election, now break for Harris. That’s driven by the strength of independent women, who back Harris by a 28-point margin, while independent men support Trump, but by a smaller margin,” the Register reported.

“Similarly, senior voters who are 65 and older favor Harris. But senior women support her by a more than 2-to-1 margin, 63 percent to 28 percent, while senior men favor her by just two percentage points, 47 percent to 45 percent.”

Harris is crushing it with white, older, rural women.

And who are the most reliable voters, not just in Iowa but the entire freakin’ country? Yeah, those white, older, rural women.

So the polling aggregators? Throw them out. Even Nate Silver admits that the data inputs for them—public polls—are garbage, with “herding” driving risk-averse pollsters into releasing the exact same numbers as their peers.

“Specifically, the odds are 1 in 9.5 trillion against at least this many polls showing such a close margin,” Silver wrote. Yet somehow he refuses to make the next leap—if the data is quite literally impossible, then how can his model still be of any insight given that it is based on that garbage data?

That goes for 538 and all the other aggregators. Throw them out. This is a different kind of election.

As I tweeted on Friday:

This Selzer poll proves my point, and it won’t be the only state in which the final results will be different than what the public polling and the aggregators claim.

I will say this: Harris is looking really good in the Blue Wall states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. And holy shit, the ground game is driving hard for that final victory.

The sunbelt states are tighter, and Trump has a real chance to win them. We don’t want that. We want to win everything and then some. Like Iowa. And the Texas and Florida Senate races.

So no, none of this is to say that Harris and Senate and House Democrats have it in the bag. We work hard for every last possible vote, everywhere.

But just like in 2016, Selzer has reset the expectations of the race.

Let’s freakin’ finish strong and bring it home.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Internet Slays Joe Manchin Over Dumb Comments That Fossil Fuels Can Produce Clean Energy

Internet Slays Joe Manchin Over Dumb Comments That Fossil Fuels Can Produce Clean Energy

United States Senator Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia) on Wednesday claimed that oil can be used to generate clean power as the nation transitions to renewables sources of energy.

"For us to be strong, to be the superpower of the world, we should develop here in North America a North American energy alliance with Canada and basically Mexico and the United States as one continent basically that could be the energy hub," Manchin told MSNBC's Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe.

"We can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can make sure that we produce the cleanest resources basically from fossil but also be able to segue into a cleaner environment with the technology and investments that it'll take to transition," Manchin continued.

"I think we can do both, but we have to maintain. You can't do just one and not the other and think we're gonna be fine. And that's what we're running into – the conundrum here. We should be ramping up production," Manchin added. "We should be out there doing everything we can to maintain our independence but be able to backfill everywhere we can. And if we don't get Europe up and loaded for next winter, for the summer when they've depleted all their reserves, there's gonna be a big problem coming."

Manchin – a wealthy coal magnate who drives a Maserati and lives on a yacht while representing one of the poorest states in the country – is a lone voice among the Democratic Senate caucus when it comes to retrofitting the American energy grid to tackle climate change. He killed President Joe Biden's Build Back Better plan in part because of its provisions that called for investments in renewables. Manchin also refuses to consider amending the filibuster, which Republicans used to obstruct the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.

Twitter blasted him for touting the very industry that is padding his pockets and poisoning our biosphere.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World