No matter who is elected, West Virginia will be flattened by mountaintop removal.

Joe Bageant writes:

No matter who is elected, West Virginia will be flattened by mountaintop removal. For instance, back in April when Obama was being escorted by the coal barons Rockerfeller and Hall in West Virginia, he promised to make West Virginia “The Saudi Arabia of the United States.” Translation: Stepping up mountaintop removal. Hillary’s position is that “coal is here to stay,” and says she is “strongly in favor” of auctioning 100%” of pollution permits to the highest bidder.

More at additional comments:

http://www.worldnewstrust.com/wnt-reports/commentary/breaking-the-beer-barrier.html

Kilowatt Ours. It's such a shame what is happening to the mountains.

I doubt he would be able to tackle big coal to that extent - just a politician, even if well meaning.
Up to us to push against it, and the many other reforms needed in mining and energy - as is almost always the case.

health insurance, the larger energy picture (oil, renewables, and coal), and won't get squat done with Iraq.

The coal coalition is small compared to the players in those games. If he can't get it done with coal, we should have elected someone else.

Unless you prefer he do it by presidential EO, and send them to gitmo - ahh, but he said he'd close gitmo...hmm.
I hope he can work with Congress to get it done, and the post below informs us that they are already on it, so that is something.

As to,"If he can't do it, he can't do SHIT about X, Y, Z..." -- well, same answer.
It is not just a presidential fiat that determines these things.

Your profile says you like to "fart in crowded buses" and I can believe it.
What a perfect metaphor for your attitude on discussion, especially considering the relatively neutral stance of my post.

I doubt there are as many people so publicly aggravated about MTR as there are about health care.

Just saying. :shrug:

to oil.

The coal companies are not in the business of clean coal, nor will they be.

They are oil companies with lumps, basically...

Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology: Obama will significantly increase the resources devoted to the commercialization and deployment of low-carbon coal technologies. Obama will consider whatever policy tools are necessary, including standards that ban new traditional coal facilities, to ensure that we move quickly to commercialize and deploy low carbon coal technology.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/

Brutal.

and Obama is on board. Check the clean water restoration act.

The whole point of the act is to restore regulatory jurisdiction for the Feds in "above the headwaters wetlands". This would be the place where the overburden (mountain top) is placed.

Helped along by Bush and his Justice (injustice) department and lackluster EPA appointees, SCOTUS decided a case that ended federal jurisdication this far up the hill. The claim to jurisdiction was never all that strong anyway, in that it was based on the notion that migratory birds were interstate commerce.

The Clean Water Restoration act cures this defect and re-establishes federal jurisdiction over mountain streams. What does all this mean? Environmental impact statements, alternatives analysis, public interest tests, public hearings, and possibility of redress of grievance through the courts. Without jurisdiction, all legal remedies are cut off because there is no agency action to petition, in short the miners get to do as they will without any federal say in the matter. With jurisdiction, permits can be denied, without it, none are necessary.

The reason the matter was pushed by Bush in the first place was to get environmental regulation out of the way of coal development. Democrats are working to put regulation back in place. Bush will veto it, McSame will veto it, Barack will sign it into law.

Of course, some folks in the mountains will not like this very much.

Wetlands regulation and enforcement is what I do for a living in the real world.

And thank you for your work in wetlands regulation.
I hope you will soon get more support for that - go get 'em, tiger.

1700 sq foot houses with electricity, ya gotta break a few eggs. Or top all the mountains of a few states.

Or starve parts of the population with the growing of food crops for Ethanol.

Our energy consumption is DIRECTLY tied to the complete rape of the environment and the war(s) and the coming starvation.

We are responsible.

The Chinese now directly compete for oil.

We need to change EVERYTHING about our energy supply and needs.

Before you say it:

My wife and I heat 240 sq feet.

We haven't had a car for 20 of the 25 years of our marriage.

I have had a car for 6 years of the last 40.

Right here. Why??

and a solar array, and a wood fired thermal 'battery' for heating in the winter....

Sustainable as far as possible....

middle class convenience and the Auto culture....

The Chinese had the great bicycle culture for the last 75 years. They are abandoning it for autos...if they succeed we are all fucked..Royally fucked.

Did you know they are setting up long term contracts with the Saudis for oil that was supposed to go onto the open market?? This is the Chinese government - not a for profit company....all that 'profit' can be used to buy more oil...

Their economic engine is going to be the largest and dirtiest in the history of the world...They have coal too.

So they can mimic the middle class in the U.S.

Cars, 2200 foot square houses, highways, Suburbs...

Obviously, this guy has his facts wrong.

But I think he's since backed off from that, and about the time that Hillary made statements to support strip mining, Obama came out and stated he was wanting to stop it. So I do believe we can persuade him to stop this train...

I think this is where Obama could put someone like RFK, Junior in a position to real help things. If he puts him in a position of authority to come down on the coal industry and make them pay for all of the environmental damage they are doing and work towards stopping the strip mining, mercury poisoning of the water supply, etc., then I think things will be made better.

the fix is in with barack or johnny boy

We're talking about things that are like 1500ft high and similar. Not like Hood, Taos, Ranier, etc.

Don't get me wrong - it's still totally bad to strip those hills down, and I'm not in favor of it at all.

But the characterization of these as "mountains" might confuse some folks who've never been out to see these hillocks.

Most of them aren't as large as out west but they certainly are mountains. I went up Mt. Rogers in Southwest Virginia last year and it's peak is around 5700 ft. That certainly isn't a hill. These "balds" and mountaintop removals are shameful. Once all the tops are gone, where are the jobs gonna be then? People keep saying we need to rape the land to keep our lifestyles up, but to what end? We need change and we need it now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_Mountains


My mountain chain is longer than yours, nanananana

:)

:rofl:

The mountain ranges out west are cooler and badass but theres nothing like the good clean air, scenery, and homestyle cookin' up in the blue ridge.

http://www.seattle.gov/light/tours/skagit/

For example.

Watch out for them grizzlies ;)

or even down through Lassen to Tahoe doable on bicycles I'd like to ride -

A combination of portions of the cascade 1200 and the Milly ride with some connecting roads that run you past Crater lake

And uncut...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascade_Range

The circumcized long one or the uncut big one... lmao

I sat in a bar parking lot in Portland and watched her go......looked like the end of the Universe....

:hi:

:rofl:

:hide:

:hide:

We call them ecosystems. People can live in ecosystems, rubble not so much.

EDIT: Subject typo.

I did think you were nicer though. Thanks for the snark, so glad I clicked through.