During a campaign season in which climate change featured most prominently as a laugh line at the Republican National Convention, the low point was when CNN’s Candy Crowley addressed “all you climate people” in her explanation of why climate didn’t come up during the presidential debates. Who knew that human disruption of the global climate had become such a narrow, provincial concern?
But there’s important information in the fact that a senior reporter for a major network could dismiss climate change as essentially a special interest issue. It’s evidence, if more were needed, that “all us climate people” got our butts kicked in the battle for the narrative in the 2012 election.
And like the Republican Party, which is now undergoing the usual soul searching that follows a big electoral defeat, those of us who believe that inaction on climate is the greatest threat facing our civilization (never mind the economy) have some serious soul searching to do about our own defeat, which occurred long before any votes were counted.
Crowley’s explanation was consistent with the conventional wisdom on why the president didn’t make climate an issue. Because it was an “Economy election” and everyone in the DC press must accept that government action on climate change could do serious harm to the economy (because “it’s become part of the culture,” even if it’s not true), any discussion of climate policy by the president would have been off-message and worked against his chances for re-election.
The unconventional wisdom, popular among “climate people,” is that the Obama campaign failed to recognize the high level of popular support for action on climate change and missed a golden opportunity to seize a winning wedge issue when they chose the more politically expedient route of ignoring it.
There’s probably some truth to both of these explanations, but here’s a third one that is particularly useful in the context of a presidential election: the campaigns avoided talking about climate policy because they believed that raising the issue would be harmful in a few swingy areas of key swing states that would likely decide the election.
Look, it’s tempting to point to all the national polls showing popular support for climate policy and say, “climate is a winning campaign issue.” But a political strategist would find nothing useful in those polls because campaigns are not won by appealing to the sentiments of the average American. Similarly, when a presidential candidate is speaking to a national audience, it’s easy to believe they are speaking to us — all of us. But they’re not. By and large, the candidates’ speeches are written to appeal to a handful of undecided voters in a few swing states, with just enough partisan red meat thrown in to motivate the party base to volunteer for the campaign and turn out to vote.
Americans understand that those swingy areas are the “tail that wags the dog” of our national elections but don’t necessarily think about the logical conclusion of that fact; the concerns and attitudes of swing voters in swing states are the “tail that wags the dog” of campaign messages, media coverage, and thus public understanding of what issues are important in the campaign.
The problem is fossil fuel interests have figured out how to wag that dog. They know they can’t win public opinion nationally, but by focusing resources in key areas of swing states such as Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania, they can frame the local discussion of climate policy and environmental regulations to their advantage (i.e., as a “Job-killing war on coal“) and essentially neutralize those issues at the national level — at least during the election season.
If the Obama campaign’s pre-election polling looked anything like the maps of election results in coal-mining regions of southwestern Virginia and southern Ohio, it’s easy to imagine strategists telling the president, “Don’t exacerbate this ‘war on coal’ thing or it could hurt us in swing states” (see map):
Editor’s Note: Wendy Johnston is a sixth generation West Virginian from Mercer County and the granddaughter and great granddaughter of coal miners. Her post is the second in a series of guest blogs coinciding with our “No More Excuses” campaign on iLoveMountains.org, where we ask impacted Appalachians why President Obama should make ending mountaintop removal a priority in his second term. We’re happy to feature her story here.
***
“Oh the West Virginia hills how majestic and how grand, with their summits bathed in glory like our Prince Emmanuel’s land. Is it any wonder then that my heart with rapture fills, as I stand once more with loved ones on those West Virginia hills?”
That is a verse from the state song of West Virginia. As a child I can remember feeling so proud every time I sang this song. As a college student living away from my family this song made me feel closer to the hills that seemed so very far away, and as a young mother just moving home after a long absence I could not wait to teach my children the song that would be their state song. Little did I know that one day the words to this song may not be true, that our majestic mountain summits would someday be destroyed and that even our loved ones gone on before us would have their resting places disturbed.
Mountaintop removal has put in jeopardy more than just those mountain summits though. This form of mining has destroyed entire communities, poisoned water systems, polluted our air and caused one of the largest health emergencies in our nation’s history.
I live on a 168-acre farm in southern West Virginia, I look at beautiful mountains every day, it would be easy to pretend that mountaintop removal does not exist. I cannot see the destruction of the mountains and I cannot hear the blasting that many fellow Appalachians live with daily, but I can feel this very real and horrendous disaster in my heart and if I drive just a short distance from my home I can see and hear it as well.
I have chosen not to ignore this terrible thing that has come to our mountains. I have chosen to bring attention to this crime against the people of Appalachia, a crime against the earth and a crime against the future of clean water in America. I spend a significant amount of time educating others about the ill-effects of mountaintop removal. I have visited classrooms in our local schools and have addressed service groups who come to Appalachia from other states. My parents, my children and my husband are all involved in some way in our movement to end the blasting of mountains and communities. Making Appalachia a healthy and prosperous region is very important to me. I volunteer with several organizations that are active in this movement and hope that my work has helped to educate others.
As we enter a new era in the history of the United States I want to implore our President to visit Appalachia on more than just a campaign stop. Come and visit with people who live in the community of Twilight, W.Va., which is barely hanging on to its very existence. I implore him to visit the town of Appalachia, Va., where mountaintop removal has destroyed the mountains all around the town and people breathe poisoned air from the daily blasting of the mountains above them. I beg him to visit McDowell County, W.Va., where the largest amount of coal has been removed over the last 100 years of any county in state, but where the people are among the poorest in the nation. I implore him to visit Prenter Hollow, W.Va., a where there is a huge percentage of citizens dealing with cancer and many more whom have already passed away. The health concerns in Appalachia must be addressed by our state and national leaders. We must demand this as citizens of the Appalachian region.
But as citizens of the Appalachian region, we must also set our own example of how to build sustainable and healthy environments. If our state governments will not help us prepare for a greener and safer future then we must move ahead on our own. On our farm in southern West Virginia, my family raises a large portion of our own food and we also operate a vegetable CSA, providing vegetables for between 15 and 20 families each week. We raise beef cattle and sheep on a mostly grass fed diet and sell the meat from our farm. We are also involved in many other sustainable ventures, my husband repairs farm equipment and works as an auctioneer, my daughter and I operate an antique booth and sell collectible items online. In my state and in many other parts of Appalachia folks are planning ahead for a future not dependent on fossil fuels and the mono-economy created by the coal industry, and they are doing so without the help of their elected officials.
Appalachians provided for themselves for many years before the coal industry invaded their mountain communities and will be able to do so again. Our plea is this: please quit pitting neighbor against neighbor in a fabricated war against a finite resource, support our sustainable business ventures, invest in the future of our children so that they can stay in healthy Appalachian communities instead of moving away and address the results of health studies that show that the people living near mountaintop removal sites are some of the sickest in the nation.
We must move forward to provide clean air, clean water and healthy communities for everyone in our great nation.
Editor’s Note: As part of the “No More Excuses” campaign on iLoveMountains.org, we asked people whose lives have been directly impacted by mountaintop removal coal mining to contribute their thoughts on why President Obama should make ending mountaintop removal a priority in his second term.
The first in the series is a reflection by Nick Mullins, who was born and raised in southwestern Virginia and, until recently, worked at an underground coal mine there. Nick is now studying at Berea College in eastern Kentucky and blogs on the web site he created, The Thoughtful Coal Miner.
What are the Appalachian Mountains? Are they simply huge mounds of dirt and rock covered by forests? Are they containers for vast resources of energy and wealth? To my family — who have called the Appalachian Mountains home for ten generations — the mountains are much, much more. The mountains are our life, our heritage and our happiness. They are our shelters, our providers of clean water. They are a place where community and being a neighbor is more than just living beside someone.
Unfortunately, there are also those who see our mountains only as a source of wealth, rather than as part of our homes and our culture. They see them as obstacles to profit, and the people of Appalachia as the labor resource to harvest it.
Every day more blasts are detonated and more miles of freshwater streams are destroyed by mountaintop removal mining operations in the mountains where I was raised. The clean water that families once depended upon is now and forever stained and polluted.
I always wanted my children to grow up as I had: close to the forests, away from crime and amongst friends and family living in a community that believes giving is better than receiving. But like many who grew up in Appalachia, I eventually fell victim to the belief that coal mining was the only way to earn a decent wage. Like my father, grandfathers, and great grandfather, I took a job working in an underground mine and hoped to feel at least some pride in my work. Sadly, I found that the pride and heritage of the Appalachian coal miner had been twisted and skewed, so much that men had become greedy, selfish and even willing to let their homes be destroyed in exchange for a large paycheck.
The problem is that those who reap the profits off our mountains have no respect for the people of Appalachia. The stereotype of the poor, backward, Appalachian hillbilly is used by the industry to make us seem somehow less valued as people. Therefore our homes, our mountains and fresh water resources become less important too. For instance, the coal industry’s response to a study showing high rates of birth defects in counties with mountaintop removal mining was: “The study failed to account for consanguinity, one of the most prominent sources of birth defects…”
Blaming birth defects in coal counties on consanguinity, which is the scientific term for “inbreeding,” is not only inaccurate according to research showing that inbreeding is no higher in Appalachia than in other parts of the country, but it exemplifies the wanton disrespect that these wealthy industrialists hold for the Appalachian people. It is yet another mold, cast of prejudice, designed to increase the expendability of our lives and land.
To add to such injustice, the industry spends millions on organizations to convince the coal miner and his family that all is well and that they are cared for by the industry. They preach that the coal miner’s livelihood and heritage is threatened not by their own destructive practices, but by a “War on Coal” that is supposedly perpetrated by ruthless and corrupt politicians backed by environmental “Greeniacs.”
Coal industry funded organizations such as “Coal Mining Our Future” and Coalfield Education Resource and Development, Inc. (CEDAR) teach our children that coal and coal mining will be the only option for life in the mountains. Children are made to feel pride for the profession, some of which drop out of high school to work in the coal mines and enjoy the lifestyle a high wage allows.
All the while more explosives level more mountains and destroy more water sources, decimating the future health and livelihoods of generations to come.
Many Appalachian people fail to see that the coal industry needs two resources to make a profit — coal and coal miners. They fail to see that industry officials are always working to ensure easy access to both resources in ways that decrease their overhead and increase their profits. Production is their almighty goal and they do not care if it takes pushing men to the brink of their own destruction as we saw at Upper Big Branch mine only two years ago.
Change must come to Appalachia before it is too late, and change can come. Future generations of Appalachia are not destined to work in the coal mines and run equipment that destroys the land as we do today.
In the 1990s, before coal prices rebounded and the coal industry fired back up, great progress was made towards diversifying our economy. Money was spent on bringing in technology jobs, building and rebuilding infrastructure, and attracting tourism. Today, that has slowed to a trickle with the influx of high paying coal jobs and those dollars were repurposed to train more coal miners, even though those jobs will not last within the cyclical nature of the coal industry.
It is time to take to take steps toward a better future, to turn Appalachia into the pinnacle of reconstruction. It is time to bring Appalachia to the forefront of technology and education. It is time to remind the people that they are not destined for the choice of either poverty and drug abuse or the paychecks and destroyed health that comes from mining coal.
There is life left in the mountains, there is heritage and culture to be found. For God’s sake let’s do something to preserve them and move ourselves forward!
This week, the American people gave Barack Obama four more years to demonstrate his leadership of our nation. We congratulate the President on his victory, but also must hold him accountable to his promise to lead based on science and fact.
With that in mind, we’re reminding President Obama that there are no excuses to legitimize the destruction of the Appalachian Mountains — and there never have been.
After he was elected in 2008, President Obama said:
“Science holds the key to our survival as a planet and our security and prosperity as a nation… It’s about listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it’s inconvenient — especially when it’s inconvenient.”
But four years later, after more than 20 new scientific studies have been published linking mountaintop removal mining to health problems including significantly higher rates of cancer, heart disease and birth defects in Appalachia, the administration continues to approve permits for mountaintop removal mines.
Over the next few months, as the president begins his second term and a new Congress comes to session, we will be ramping up our efforts to put a definitive end to mountaintop removal coal mining. But we can’t do it without you.
This past Sunday, an Appalachian hero and a tireless warrior against mountaintop removal coal mining passed away. For decades, Larry Gibson stood up to threats and intimidation, spoke to thousands of people about the destruction of his homeland, and inspired a nationwide movement to take up his cause of creating a safe and prosperous future in Appalachia. In fact, if you are receiving this email, then directly or indirectly, you are one of the people Larry inspired.
Larry’s journey to becoming an Appalachian hero began in the late 1980s, when one of the largest mountaintop removal mining operations in Appalachia started up near his home on Kayford Mountain in Raleigh County, W.Va., adjacent to a cemetery where generations of his ancestors were buried. He could have made millions of dollars selling his land to the coal companies but refused every offer. Larry would often say to people who visited Kayford Mountain or attended his many speeches around the country:
“Let me ask you this: What do you hold so close to your own circle of life that you would not put a price on it? What would it be for you? For me, it is the mountains and the people of Appalachia.”
As the mountains around Larry’s home were systematically demolished, his land became an island in the sky, surrounded on all sides by tens of thousands of acres of a post-apocalyptic landscape left behind by a rapacious industry that cared only about its own bottom line. It was one of the few places where people could experience mountaintop removal up close and where reporters could take pictures and shoot videos for news stories. Thousands of people, including me, had their first life-changing glimpse of an active mountaintop removal mine while standing among the gravestones of Larry’s ancestors on Kayford Mountain.
Larry was wounded more deeply than most of us can ever understand by witnessing the slow destruction of the land on which generations of his family had played in the woods, hunted game, gathered herbs, raised their children and were buried when they died. And yet, remarkably, Larry never got discouraged — even after all the acts of intimidation and violence he experienced. Maybe the mountains, forests and streams near his home could not be saved, but he was committed to making sure that others’ homes would not suffer the same fate.
When we launched iLoveMountains.org six years ago, we encouraged people to spread the word to their friends and family with an animated map that showed the growth of the iLoveMountains movement. In honor of his inspiration and leadership, Larry Gibson’s home on Kayford Mountain was the center of the map from which the national movement spread. Today, more than 100,000 people have taken action to end mountaintop removal on iLoveMountains.org and the movement is still growing.
So you see, whether you knew him or not, Larry Gibson is part of why you have joined the struggle to end mountaintop removal. And if Larry’s dream of ending mountaintop removal and bringing a safe and prosperous future to the communities of Appalachia is to be fulfilled, it will be because you have taken up his torch and continued his fight.
In recent years, Larry and members of his family formed the Keeper of the Mountains Foundation, an organization that supported his speaking tours and maintains the community park he constructed on Kayford Mountain. We hope you will visit the Keeper of the Mountains website, read the tributes to him , make a donation if you can, and find out how you can help this important organization continue Larry’s work.
And after the elections in November there may be new opportunities to end mountaintop removal, or we may face new threats to the progress you have helped create in recent years. Whatever the outcome of the election, the people of Appalachia will need your commitment and your energy more than ever.
Tragically, Larry did not live to see the end of mountaintop removal coal mining, but together we can honor Larry’s memory and see his dream of a safe and prosperous Appalachia fulfilled.
For Larry Gibson and the Appalachian mountains and communities that he loved,
We’ve known for a long time that the coal industry will go to extreme measures to blow up mountains to mine coal, but this latest project is both ridiculous and really alarming.
Coal companies are trying to disguise a mountaintop removal coal-mining operation as a highway project in Southwest Virginia, allowing them to seize land and ignore environmental protections for local communities.
They thought they could get away with it, but an Environmental Assessment of the coal company-drawn route for what is being called The Coalfields Expressway is under review by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) and your comments to these agencies can help stop this environmental travesty.
If the Coalfields Expressway goes forward, more than 12 miles of streams would be buried, and hundreds of acres of privately held land would be condemned and handed over for King Coal’s profit. Worse yet, these contiguous mines would be exempt from standard surface mine permitting requirements, avoiding safeguards meant to protect communities from the worst effects of strip mining.
Because of your efforts, the Environmental Protection Agency is cracking down on water pollution from mountaintop removal coal mines. As a result, the coal industry is going to great lengths to squeeze every last ton of coal it can from our mountains.
A new poll commissioned by Appalachian Mountain Advocates, Earthjustice and the Sierra Club shows overwhelming support for ending mountaintop removal coal mining in Appalachian coal mining states. Conducted by two bipartisan firms, the poll has revealed that 57% of informed voters oppose the practice, versus 20% approving.
New Poll: Appalachian People Strongly Oppose Mountaintop Removal
A new poll commissioned by Appalachian Mountain Advocates, Earth Justice and the Sierra Club shows overwhelming support for ending mountaintop removal coal mining in Appalachian coal mining states. Conducted by two bipartisan firms, the poll has revealed that 57% of informed voters oppose the practice, versus 20% approving.
Something extraordinary is happening this week in southern West Virginia. For the first time in years, the United Mineworkers of America (UMWA), the largest union representing coal miners, has found common cause with environmental and community advocates who are seeking to end mountaintop removal coal mining.
Here’s a great (and brief) update on the march from the team at iLoveMountains.org that is well worth a watch:
In fact, the march to Blair Mountain is only one of several recent examples where the interests of labor and environmental advocates are closely aligned. For instance, last week’s buyout of Massey Energy was another recent event celebrated by environmentalists, community groups and organized labor alike. Massey was not only reckless, negligent and probably criminal in last year’s disaster at the Upper Big Branch Mine in West Virginia, but the company was by far the largest operator of mountaintop removal coal mines in Appalachia and a notorious scofflaw in regard to environmental laws like the Clean Water Act. Massey had also long been known for its union-busting practices.
A third – and by far the most important – factor linking the struggles of these groups is an almost existential crisis they are facing as a result of America’s recent, acute attack of what I like to call “Deficit Attention and Hypocrisy Disorder” (hat tip). The takeover of many state legislatures and governors’ offices by anti-government and anti-union ideologues last November has resulted in bills to strip collective bargaining rights of public employees in states from Ohio and Wisconsin to Florida and Tennessee — all of which, of course, is taking place under the false pretense of reducing the deficit.
Environmentalists got a similar wake-up call when the new Republican majority in the House sought to eviscerate EPA’s ability to enforce the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts through amendments to the House Budget bill last February. Again, this was all done under the false banner of reducing the deficit.
If we are going to avoid disaster in this next election cycle, then we need to break out of our circular firing squad and do our part to change the narrative – and thus the mandate of whoever controls the reins of government after the next election – away from “Deficit Attention and Hypocrisy Disorder” and back toward creating jobs and protecting the health and safety of workers and the environment in which they live.
Why can’t we all just get along?
Community organizers, environmental groups and the UMWA once worked shoulder to shoulder to pass regulations on strip mining. Those efforts culminated in the passage of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) in 1977. Unfortunately, a lot of resentment has developed between these groups over the past 15 years, mostly stemming from divergent positions on the environmentally devastating and job-destroying practice of mountaintop removal. While UMWA does not have an official position on mountaintop removal, a number of public statements by UMWA President Cecil Roberts have been explicitly supportive of the practice.
Ken Ward at the Charleston Gazette has written a lot about the complex balancing act that Cecil Roberts must perform in order to represent all UMWA members (a small proportion of which work at mountaintop removal and other types of surface mines in Appalachia) while not entirely alienating his union from other progressive causes and constituencies that are natural political allies of the union (see here, here and here). The problem is that stopping the destruction caused by mountaintop removal is among the top priorities of many progressive groups in Appalachia, whose feelings toward the UMWA now range from frustration to rage.
Of course, the attitude of some union miners toward environmental groups and community activists is equally venomous, but that does not appear to be representative of the feelings of most UMWA members (many of whom are retired). For instance, a 2008 poll of likely voters in the specific region where mountaintop removal occurs showed that opposition to mountaintop removal mining was even greater among union households than it was among the general population of the region. In fact, it’s well worth taking a look at the key findings of that poll, which was commissioned by my organization in advance of the 2008 elections [a portion of the results, summarized by the polling firm Gerstein and Agne, is available here]. According to the pollsters, the key results included:
Voters in the Appalachian region oppose mountaintop removal mining and are more likely to support presidential candidate who similarly opposes the method
Majorities of two key audiences – Independents and union households – oppose mountaintop removal
Voters reject jobs vs. environment frame of mountaintop removal supporters
Renewable energy seen as long-term key to energy security, economic growth, and quality of life of local communities
Overwhelming support for Clean Water Protection Act – even after opponents say it will mean an end to mountaintop removal mining in their state
It would not be fair, however, to put all of the blame for the sour relationship onto UMWA leadership. While most local opponents of mountaintop removal mining are not opposed to all coal mining, the attitudes and statements of some outspoken opponents of mountaintop removal have been distinctly anti-coal. That’s not a message that resonates well with rank-and-file members of the UMWA. Moreover, while there are a growing number of environmental and community groups promoting economic development around renewable energy and weatherization in the region, creating new jobs and new industries has never been the core strength of environmental groups.
That said, there is increasing evidence that moves by the EPA to rein in the permitting of the most destructive new mountaintop removal mines are creating jobs, not destroying them. It turns out that mining jobs have been a real bright spot in the national and regional employment picture since the start of the Great Recession. As shown in the graph below, the number of mining jobs in Appalachia has increased by 8.5% over the same time period that the overall US economy shed more than 5% of its workforce. In fact, the number of mining jobs has increased substantially since the EPA started it’s “enhanced review” of mine permits and since their new guidance on surface mine permitting went into effect in April of last year.
In short, it seems that much of the reason for the past friction between UMWA and environmental groups stems from false perceptions and poor communication rather than from fundamentally divergent interests. Following are my humble suggestions for a road map to repair and expand the natural alliance between environmental and labor organizations in Appalachia.
1. Get the facts
The perception created by the coal industry that the EPA is destroying mining jobs and causing an economic crisis in Appalachia is entrenched firmly enough in the public discourse to withstand a mountain on contrary evidence. However, the unions should know better than to believe this kind of rhetoric from coal companies and trade associations that have used the same “sky-is-falling” estimates of job losses to oppose every effort by the unions to strengthen workplace safety laws and strengthen the enforcement of those already on the books. The UMWA knows well that this rhetoric is false and that stronger safety laws actually create more jobs. They should also know that the same principle applies to health and environmental laws – and there’s plenty of evidence to show that strengthening them is already creating new mining jobs and helping to save existing ones.
On the other hand, environmental and community advocates have also been pretty loose with the facts at times. One particular example is a lot of counter-productive rhetoric about coal from mountaintop removal mines being mostly shipped overseas. This rhetoric is presumably used in an effort to play on the populist xenophobia that has won many an election for unscrupulous politicians, but it is simply untrue — almost all of the coal shipped out of eastern ports is metallurgical coal used for steel-making, which is mined almost entirely underground. Drumming up opposition to exports of metallurgical coal is counter-productive for environmental advocates – and anathema to unions and potential allies outside the region that depend on shipping revenues – because it undermines the most immediate opportunity to replace jobs in mountaintop removal mining.
While there are certainly environmental, health and safety problems at underground mines and processing facilities that produce metallurgical coal, the high price that met coal commands compared to steam coal (i.e., coal used to produce electricity) can support far more environmentally responsible mining and waste disposal practices. In addition, the sky-rocketing price of metallurgical coal can support bigger payrolls, safer mines, higher wages, and better benefits for miners. Ultimately, it may very well help the effort to unionize mines, which creates even more jobs and better safety practices.
2. Embrace the future
Shortly before he died, Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia wrote a powerful op-ed urging the coal industry in his state to “embrace the future.” As the late Senator wrote:
The truth is that some form of climate legislation will likely become public policy because most American voters want a healthier environment. Major coal-fired power plants and coal operators operating in West Virginia have wisely already embraced this reality, and are making significant investments to prepare.
…
The greatest threats to the future of coal do not come from possible constraints on mountaintop removal mining or other environmental regulations, but rather from rigid mindsets, depleting coal reserves, and the declining demand for coal as more power plants begin shifting to biomass and natural gas as a way to reduce emissions.
Whether or not one believes that stronger regulations on CO2 emissions and other coal-related pollutants are inevitable, there is one simple reality brought up by Senator Byrd that residents of Appalachian coal mining states cannot afford to ignore. America’s demand for Appalachian coal is going nowhere but down, not because of the EPA or environmentalists, but because the high cost of accessing dwindling reserves make it uncompetitive with alternative sources of energy (see graph below for historic and projected future trends).
Given that declining demand is the bottleneck for Appalachian coal production, as evidenced by the fact that existing mines are operating at historically low capacity levels, there is really nothing that the EPA or environmental groups are doing in regard to mining rules, or even could do, that would actually decrease coal production in the short term. For instance, consider the chart below, which summarizes information from the Federal Reserve about the productive capacity of already permitted and active coal mines and the level at which that capacity is being utilized.
This highlights the absurdity of blaming the EPA policies on mine permitting, or environmental groups working to end mountaintop removal, for recent declines in coal production. In fact the capacity of the US fleet of active coal mines has never been higher, while the proportion of that capacity that is actually being utilized has never been lower. I’ve written elsewhere about how this simple fact undercuts every argument made by coal industry supporters about how the EPA is threatening jobs, electricity supply and national security. But the point here is that the efforts of unions to eliminate permitting bottlenecks accomplishes nothing to increase production or mining jobs.
Environmentalists, on the other hand, also have some embracing of the future to do. Firstly, while most acknowledge that coal use won’t go away overnight, we haven’t really taken to heart the simple fact that this means coal will have to be mined somewhere. Supporting responsible mining practices can be as important as opposing irresponsible ones, and it could go a long way toward building bridges with unions and other potential allies. There has thus far been little enthusiasm among environmental advocates to wade into those difficult and controversial waters, and I’m as guilty as any for avoiding the issue, but perhaps the time has come for us to take a position on what responsible mining practices are, as well as irresponsible ones, and work together with unions to ensure that it’s the most worker-friendly and environmentally responsible mines that get permitted to meet the declining demand for coal.
As mentioned previously, we’d also be wise to acknowledge the fact that production of metallurgical coal in Appalachia is likely to increase in the next few years, even as overall production continues its precipitous decline. Is it really impossible to embrace that as a good thing, even as we work to improve the waste disposal practices of coal processing plants and reduce the damage caused by underground longwall mines?
3. Communicate regularly and collaborate when possible
I speak for many of my colleagues in saying we yearn for the day when we’re not in the midst of a pitched battle to prevent the immediate destruction of dozens of mountains and streams and can begin working on legislation that we half-jokingly call the “Central Appalachian Economic Diversification and Jobs Bonanza Act.” We spoke many times with Senator Byrd’s office about developing and introducing some such bill, and had Senator Byrd lived a little longer, one may actually have been introduced by now. But it’s pointless to work on an economic development and diversification bill that lacks the support of local workers and elected officials. Collaborating to promote worker retraining programs and federal and state incentives to bring new industries to Appalachia would be an excellent way for labor unions and environmental and community advocacy groups to work together to accomplish common goals.
But the most important thing, especially as we get into the next election cycle, is to ensure that the UMWA and environmental groups don’t unnecessarily work at cross-purposes and thus inadvertently play into the hands of the anti-government and anti-union radicals that are working to deepen our nation’s “Deficit Attention and Hypocrisy Disorder.”
This week’s march on Blair Mountain is a timely reminder of just how much organized labor, community advocates and environmental organizations have in common. And the stark post-November realities that we are facing should provide a lot of incentive to not forget it again.
To take action to help protect Blair Mountain and other mountains and communities threatened by mountaintop removal coal mining, visit iLoveMountains.org.
A new poll commissioned by 
