iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Michael Brune

GET UPDATES FROM Michael Brune

Big Coal Giveaway

Posted: 03/25/11 04:50 PM ET

This week, in the heart of one of the nation's best potential wind energy-producing regions, the Powder River Basin, the Obama administration handed away thousands of acres of federal land -- land owned by you and me -- to the coal industry.

Coal companies have been pushing to expand mining in the West, and they are no doubt uncorking champagne right now in celebration of this enormous gift. But for those of us who aren't coal executives, the giveaway comes at a high cost.

The new coal will spew nearly 4 billion tons of carbon pollution into our air -- the equivalent of building 300 new coal-fired power plants, or twice the amount of new coal plants proposed by the Bush-Cheney Energy Plan back in 2001. It's not just this pollution's contribution to climate disruption that's worrisome. Burning coal produces all kinds of other toxic chemicals linked to serious health problems. In fact, coal pollution contributes to four of the five leading causes of death in the United States, and is responsible for an estimated 300,000 preventable birth defects each year.

Just pause for a second and consider that last statistic. Coal pollution causes an estimated 300,000 birth defects every year. Imagine how you'd feel if you were the parent of one of those children, knowing that their suffering could have been avoided.

We know that there's a solution to coal-fired pollution. But spurring new coal development undercuts the good work President Obama has done to transition to a clean energy economy.

The West, in particular, holds so much promise for a healthy and abundant clean energy -- and the good, safe jobs that come with it. In fact, the West alone holds enough renewable energy potential to fully power our entire nation. But we need to get serious about developing wind and solar in the West. And we can't get serious about clean energy while continuing to let coal companies wreak havoc.

There is no greater enemy to our clean energy economy -- and our children's health -- than dirty coal . President Obama has shown he's committed to a healthy, prosperous clean energy future. Expanding coal development in the West -- or anywhere -- has no place in that vision.

 

Follow Michael Brune on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bruneski

This week, in the heart of one of the nation's best potential wind energy-producing regions, the Powder River Basin, the Obama administration handed away thousands of acres of federal land -- land own...
This week, in the heart of one of the nation's best potential wind energy-producing regions, the Powder River Basin, the Obama administration handed away thousands of acres of federal land -- land own...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 21
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jsgaetano
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus
06:36 PM on 03/29/2011
Obama is one of the best Republican presidents since George Dubai Bush.
photo
Ragnar Danneskjold
Defender of Liberty
01:36 PM on 03/28/2011
"Coal pollution causes an estimated 300,000 birth defects every year."

Key word is "estimated". More abortions occur each year that are not estimated, but actual. I would like to see proof of causation. This is the kind of tripe the environmental movement has been selling for years without evidence.
09:14 AM on 03/28/2011
I'm not sure I understand this "give away" thing. I'd like some land. A small corner of a national park would be fine. Will he give me some? What are the terms of this giving away? Why is he empowered to do this? Is there recourse against a President giving away ALL public land other than to later elect a president who wouldn't have done that?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jsgaetano
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus
06:37 PM on 03/29/2011
Nah.  See, according to the fascist ideology of conservatives, We The People are all servants of the corporations and the wealthy.
 
The land isn't for the people, it's for the corporations.
11:24 PM on 03/27/2011
I was furious when I read that Salazar had permitted this takeover of the PUBLIC lands that belong to you and me and not big coal.  Obama's "clean energy" promises are bogus.  He has absolutely no passion for much of anything and lets his toadies do the business.  Ken Salazar is two things...big energy and a rancher/farmer's dream.  And he isn't all that smart.  So we have more oil drilling, more fracking, more coal.  in the west which has been relatively free of that.  Big corporations again.  My heart sank and is still sinking.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
fireofenergy
Promote freedom AND science
02:54 PM on 03/27/2011
Can't we form an opposition group... I dislike coal and would rather see the big corps invest in solar and wind.
OBVIOUSLY the renewables would be MUCH, MUCH cheaper if they did!
BlackbirdHighway
Brawndo's got electrolites!
06:41 PM on 03/27/2011
There is an opposition group, it's called the Green Party.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:06 PM on 03/28/2011
...who supports a democratically-owned, decentralized approach, focusing on efficiency, conservation, passive heating/cooling and point of use clean energy production, not millions of acres of healthy carbon-sequestering ecoystem being permanently destroyed by Chevron for Big Solar, and greenwashed by Big Enviros...

Fireofenergy thinks that the fine folks who have consistently brought us pricing and supply manipulations, dead ecoystems, record profits, and legislative extortion are somehow going to ride in on white horses, wearing halos, and make our energy cheap and clean, despite the devastation and expense their projects are already creating.
photo
Ragnar Danneskjold
Defender of Liberty
01:37 PM on 03/28/2011
Yea, join it and vote for Nader!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jsgaetano
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus
06:39 PM on 03/29/2011
I'd rather see Real Americans build up wind and solar power, and lock the Pollution Industry out of any kind of future.
 
They've spent decades shutting down any alternative to creating pollution.  I say we force them to wallow in it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:23 PM on 03/27/2011
Ok, totally opposed to this, but the outrage over giving away "thousands of acres" of land belonging to "you and me" to Big Energy is EXACTLY what SC is trying to do - on a much bigger scale - so that BP Wind and Chevron Solar can permanently destroy MILLIONS of acres of public land, while the existing built environment bakes and sprawls with very little rooftop solar, no efficiency upgrades and no passive heating/cooling.

You can't have it both ways. Big Solar kills off exponentially more wilderness per kWh than Big Coal, emits enormous GHGs during manufacture, construction, and lost sequestration and SF6 in transmission, while re-enriching the same Big Energy pigs who have destroyed our wilderness and ripped us off for other power sources. Bad scene.

If you want to CLEAN up the grid, you do it in the built environment - not just paying lip service to PACE loans and feed in tariffs while rabidly pushing for hundreds of thousands of "pre-permitted" Big Solar dead zones and mile after mile of deadly SF6-spewing transmission. Rooftop solar produces the SAME net power in all the markets where Big Solar is being forced onto people's bills, only WE would see the financial benefits instead of money-grubbing mercenaries at Bright Source (Chevron, BP, Morgan Stanley, Google, etc.).

Your outrage is noted - now it's time to apply it across the board and fight ALL BIG ENERGY destruction of our wilderness for their private profits, and support LOCAL solutions!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
fireofenergy
Promote freedom AND science
03:08 PM on 03/27/2011
"Big Solar kills off exponentia­lly more wilderness per kWh than Big Coal".

How silly... Sure, the premise is true, that is takes it alot to make big solar. What you forget is that the energy pay back is like 30 to 1 with the awesome solar power towers and 10 to 1 with PV. There is no such thing with FF's as their promoters have to dig up ever more land just to emit ever more CO2.
Afterall, it is CO2 that is of utmost concern since humanity has upped the count by some 50%...
Did you know that coal is more dangerous than nuclear... well it is (but I still HATE the Light Water Reactor).

Local solutions won't work unless we go with the Molten Salt Reactor...Because there is not enough roofspace for solar PV on average across the country. There is about 800 sq mile of usable roofspace and we need like 30,000 sq miles or so (at 15% ef). This, then is no big deal...Simply form a corporation as big as one of the oil companies and call it "Global Robotic Solar" and make the cheapest form, whether by mirrors and molten salt (for storage) or PV and batteries. Place on the deserts (and in sunny cities) and cover that 30,000 sq miles. The CO2 spike would be noticeable, but then (our part of it) would go away!
GO BIG SOLAR! (If it ever gets here...)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:54 PM on 03/28/2011
UCLA just proved that LA County could easily produce 15 GW of rooftop solar, far more than it uses. This was also proved about San Diego 6 years ago. There is no question that the markets that are being forced to buy the deadly Big Solar power could easily produce far MORE of it within their borders and without killing anything, than Chevron can far away, and much more affordably. In fact, most cities could produce a majority of their daytime power from in-city PV, according to the DOE, so not to worry, that's already been determined.

Oh, and CSP towers produce the same capacity factor (~27% before transmission and heat losses) as tracking PV on the same site. Their ridiculous 40% capacity factor propaganda was disproven by Black and Veatch last year (hired to PROMOTE Big Solar by RETI), so you can stop with pretending it is the holy grail. It's no better than PV and steeply DROPS in production in hot weather (as in, deserts), and wastes billions of gallons of scare desert groundwater every year for mirror rinsing, none of which in-city PV does. After those heat-related losses and transmission losses, the built environment's PV (~17%) is just as efficient but far less destructive.

TRANSMISSION is a super-high GHG emitter too (research the EPAs position on SF6) and deserts are BIG CO2 sequesterers, so if you are even slightly worried about AGW, point of use solar is exponentially better for reducing GHGs.
photo
Ragnar Danneskjold
Defender of Liberty
01:41 PM on 03/28/2011
rooftop solar is not the solution, particularly in Northern climates. Existing buildings have ,snow and wind loads NOT designed to carry the impacts of solar panels. Upgrading these roof structures would not only be cost prohibitive, but extremely disruptive to the occupants and the business operations they perform (of course I am talking about commercial flat roof applications). Once again, a "solution" not thought through.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:43 PM on 03/28/2011
you better tell that to Ontario, Canada, and all of Germany, both of which have incredibly successful rooftop solar programs with worse weather than almost anywhere in the US. stop making excuses and telling everyone how it can't work and go and educate yourself about how it's already working, just not for you. your loss!

any structure built to code can carry the load of solar panels, including flat roofs. you have so little faith in american ingenuity to properly design these systems, which already work all over the world, it's really sad. you know cellphones and computers couldn't work, either, until they did. you can be a flat-earther if you want. the rest of us are building the future.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
07:15 PM on 03/26/2011
Obama charmed us. Obama lied to us. Obama is a corporatist sellout, DLC, Clinton, Reagan conservadem, pretending to be a progressive. Chu's official energy report, used 4 year old green energy numbers and 2016 future fantasy Nuke and clean fossil numbers. The fix is in. Our only chance it the Kucinich, Dean, Grayson Progressive Caucus real progressives in the Democratic party. Vote in the primaries! Conservatives and GOP folks, find Ike Conservatives!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
fireofenergy
Promote freedom AND science
03:13 PM on 03/27/2011
Let's just form coal opposition groups (somehow) and pro big (and cheap) solar groups!
Voting is not rigged, but who we vote for is... ALL parties suck (corporate bribes?)...
BlackbirdHighway
Brawndo's got electrolites!
06:44 PM on 03/27/2011
If you were paying attention then you would not be surprised by this. Obama always talked about "clean coal" during the campaign, even though there is no such thing.

The Democratic Party is controlled by corporate America just as much as the Republican Party. Try door number three.
05:33 PM on 03/26/2011
Reelection ain't cheap, but he's really fooling himself if he thinks this buys their support.
05:25 PM on 03/25/2011
What is Obama thinking? He has some really smart people around him (Holdren in particular) who know about climate change. Are those people being drowned out by the fossil fuel lobbyists?

Jeez..he has kids, too. Doesn't he get it?
11:27 PM on 03/27/2011
No he does not and that is on many issues.  He doesn't think anything he does or doesn't do is ever going to effect his children.  You would think that coming from Hawaii, he would "get it" but he does not.