Skip to main content

About Coal and Coal Miners

ObamaWVEulogySteveHelber The Washington Post has an excellent, plangent photo gallery of the funeral for the 29 coal miners killed in West Virginia. The Post could really have foregone the ad, though.

---

Here is a bit of President Obama’s eulogy:

Even as we mourn 29 lives lost, we also remember 29 lives lived. Up at 4:30, 5 o'clock in the morning at the latest, they began their day, as they worked, in darkness. In coveralls and hard-toe boots, a hardhat over their heads, they would sit quietly for their hour-long journey, 5 miles into a mountain, the only light the lamp on their caps, or the glow from the mantrip they rode in.

Day after day, they would burrow into the coal, the fruits of their labor, what so often we take for granted: the electricity that lights up a convention center; that lights up our church, our homes, our school and office; the energy that powers our country and powers the world.

…

All that hard work; all that hardship; all the time spent underground; it was all for their families. It was all for you. For a car in the driveway. A roof overhead. For a chance to give their kids opportunities that they would never knew; and enjoy retirement with their spouses. It was all in the hopes of something better. So these miners lived - as they died - in pursuit of the American dream.

Read the whole thing. It’s very moving.

---

In West Virginia, Obama lost against Hilary Clinton in the Democratic primary two years ago and against John McCain in the general election. And West Virginia is a heavily Democratic state. Various reasons have been posited for Obama’s loss, but a major reason West Virginians vote or do not vote for someone comes down to coal.

"I think they [the federal government] want to outlaw coal mining," said David Baisden (D), a county commissioner in Mingo County on the Kentucky border, which gets half its tax revenue from coal. "We have the utmost respect for the president of the United States. But his policies . . . have us concerned that he's going to give America away."

To whom, we’re not sure, and writers David A. Fahrenthold and Michael D. Shear don’t say. And there’s more along the same lines.

"You'd be hard pressed to find a president whose actions have been more warlike on coal. There are those who say the president has parked his tanks on our front lawn, and it's hard to dispute that," said Luke Popovich of the National Mining Association.

That’s pretty stark. We went over to the National Mining Association to see what’s upsetting them. (Uranium miners are part of this group, too.) There’s this:

President Obama’s budget proposal, by increasing taxes for America’s most affordable energy source—coal—threatens good-paying mining jobs and jobs in small businesses and manufacturing that depend on reliable and affordable energy to meet payrolls and remain competitive in a global economy.

Which isn’t quite true.

The most interesting this about the energy budget request is just how hard hit the fossil fuel industry would be. About $2.7 billion in subsidies for oil, coal and gas would be canceled under this plan.

Ending subsidies may well have the impact the NMA outlines, but it’s not raising taxes. It is, however, exactly what was feared. Although the 2011 budget request continues with carbon capture and other coal related projects, there is a significant chill when it comes to coal-fueled electricity production where, say, renewable energy sources and nuclear energy are feeling considerable warmth. For the coal industry, it’s like watching a ship turn ever so slowly away while the industry bobs in shark-infested waters.

---

By the way, here are NMA’s pages on carbon capture and sequestration.

---

We expect there will be continuing news on Massey Energy and Upper Big Branch mine. There’s been a lot written about this incident and there will be a lot more. We’ll let coal bloggers follow up on all that and return to our nuclear energy brief presently. But as a local (to D.C.) energy-related tragedy, we didn’t want to let the event pass without note.

President Obama after delivering his eulogy. The lady is Linda Davis, the grandmother of deceased miner Cory Davis.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...