Why we need to fight for affordable energy

As if we needed another reason to fight for affordable energy...

... a study released today says that American families faced the biggest increase in energy costs on record last year, driven in large part by costs for transportation fuels driven by global demand.

For the half of the U.S. families earning $50,000 or less, energy costs consumed 20 percent of after-tax income in 2008. The study also reveals energy costs consumed a quarter of after-tax income when families made $30,000 or less.

Click here to see the study.

Comments

[Jud Lindsay]

We do need to keep energy affordable in the current "financial crisis." Warren Buffett said that the US economy has gone over the cliff. Any attempt to move rapidly away from coal as a prime energy source will only add to the burden of those families focused on here. the USA has got lots of coal. Let's use it and sequester the carbon. That is doable. We need to explore it!

We have abundant natural gas also. Let's exploit it. It costs more to extract and burn than coal however.

[Brian]

Yes, let's talk about poor families. The poverty rates in states like Kentucky and West Virginia are 16-18%, up to 50% above the national average. What are we doing for these folks?

Well, for many, we're employing them in one of the dirtiest, most dangerous industries in the country: coal mining. Indisputably, coal miners sacrifice many years of life expectancy to earn a paycheck.

Others who live in these areas feel the effects of mining as well, when mountaintops are blown off to reach thin layers of coal and "waste" rock is dumped into previously-pure mountain streams, poisoning drinking water sources.

There can be no substantive discussions about energy affordability until groups such as the ACCCE stop taking such a narrow view of "cost" and consider all factors at work.

[may]

no such thing as "clean coal"

the marketing genius that came up with the term clean coal needs to get his head checked.

People see thru this bs in 2 seconds.

coal is devasting mountaintops in west virgina and destroying land owners property that abuts coal mines.

miners get black lung and die

so much for clean coal

[Megan from ACCCE]

Jud:
Thanks for your comment. We agree—we’re going to need all of our domestic energy resources to meet our growing energy demand and keep energy affordable.

Brian:
What about the affordable electricity that coal provides for residents in Kentucky and West Virginia? West Virginia has the second lowest electricity prices in the country due to coal’s abundance, which accounts for more than 97 percent of the state’s electricity. Kentucky is right behind West Virginia with the third lowest electricity rates, using coal to provide more than 92 percent of its electricity.
All of our energy sources have their challenges. But coal-based electricity is still one of our best options for producing affordable, baseload power for Americans.

May:
“Clean coal” actually refers to a suite of technologies used to reduce emissions from coal-based electricity. Congress coined the term more than 20 years ago. See for yourself.

[Cynthia Gallagher]

We should all be trying for solar, wind, geo thermal, algae powers and stop the political manipulations. It is taking down mountains, pulluting rivers, lakes and the air. Stop the greed, stop the lies and lets all work hard to work really clean. Hydro power is clean, so is solar power, there are so many other ways to approach this, not just to the large companies throwing money at obama to get their way and dont care about the people in the towns and cities near their mines. It is so wrong, dont be fooled by the spinning

[perry]

Brian, I guess that means that West Virginians and Kentucks can afford to die early with all the lights on.

[Brian]

Megan, I noticed you didn't address my points but rather rehashed yours. Folks in Kentucky and West Virginia have lower electric bills -- yes, we heard you the first time. But again, I challenge you to understand that "cost" means more than bottom-line dollars and cents. If my electric bill is low as a consequence of having my air and water poisoned, am I really coming out ahead?

I have heard nothing from "clean coal" organizations to address the points I raised. I want to hear you try to defend mountaintop removal mining and its effects on residents in those areas. If you can't defend it, then condemn it. The fact that no one on the pro-coal side of the argument has anything to say about it is telling.

[Joe Lucas]

Brian, since I happen to be from KY -- I'll address your comment. The FACT is, coal mining provides high-skilled, high-wage jobs to those employed in the industry (in the Appalachian parts of the state) which is contrary to what you seem to imply. However, there are not as many coal mining jobs as there were in the past due to advances in technologies (higher production with fewer workers). Another factor that has plagued the region forever has been the lack of available terrain for economic development (building factories etc.). For the rest of the state, KY has been able to attract industries like Toyota and others because of its low electricity costs. In fact, energy costs are 2nd only to labor costs in determining where a business locates. Your key issue appears to be what you refer to as mountain top mining. Keep in mind that this practice accounts for less than 5% of the coal produced in the U.S. I don't think you're suggesting that coal use overall should be halted because of a limited practice that is declining in use each year? That type of "throwing the baby out with the bath water" approach doesn't seem to make much sense from a policy stand point.

[Kimberly S.]

Joe Lucas, Thank You for being the voice of reason in this discussion. I support alternative clean sources of energy, but do not believe we can just halt coal production before the clean alternative are in place. I also do not believe we should devastate the coal industry with 'Cap and Trade' pollution taxes to get there.

[Brian]

Joe, appreciate the comment. It's certainly not my only objection to coal -- and yes, I do support halting the use of coal as an energy source, but that's a different, much longer discussion for a different day.

I "refer" to it as mountaintop removal mining because that's what it is. What nebulous happy phrase do you use? If it accounts for less than 5% of production -- and let's concede it's declining because we're running out of mountains to blow up -- then why not go ahead and bring that to zero? With advances and increased investment in renewable, truly clean technologies -- and hey, the ACCCE supports an all-of-the-above approach, right? -- the difference can be made up in no time.