“Clean Coal” doesn’t exist
By Jackie Pontious
Its no surprise to most native to the area that on a drive through most suburban streets of Northern Virginia you will find rows of cookie cutter four bedroom family homes squeezed on to land space meant for maybe one. As populations boom in heavy commercialized areas such as Northern Virginia and Richmond, no doubt the demand for increased electricity parallels. Virginia power companies such as Dominion and American Electric Power struggle to meet the growing demands by increasing their production, which unfortunately to the residents of southwest Virginia means coal, and more of it. And coal to the folks in Appalachia doesn’t just mean the dirty black stuff that Santa brings when you’re naughty. Coal is King, don’t ask questions and do what he says.
In Appalachia, Virginia, coal means jobs, money, and a way of life. Coal also means good-bye mountains. Coal means dirt and danger. Speeding trucks carry coal so fast through these small side roads, human beings must constantly keep a watchful ear and eye out. Trucks don’t stop for pedestrians; there are no crosswalk policies in Appalachia. Not to mention the debris and dust that flies off the trucks onto houses on the sides of roads and in to the lungs of children playing in their backyards. Coal means dirty water and dirty air, and unnaturally high cancer rates and death.
Appalachian residents are mostly low-income households where no coal means no jobs, and that’s the way it is. However power companies in these areas aren’t mining for coal in methods that provide jobs or support their economy anymore. Mountain Top Removal mining requires three things. A mountain, dynamite to blow it up and machines to push the dirt into valleys where biodiversity and rivers become buried and destroyed. Want to walk on the moon some day? Check out Wise, VA in about 5-10 years.
So what does this have to do with clean coal? Here’s the point: it doesn’t exist. Even if we sequester and capture all of the carbon ever emitted by power plants burning coal, the extraction process is still dirty, dangerous and devastating. “Clean-coal” technology means the continuation of oppressing communities and exposing humans and wildlife to dangers and environmental injustices indefinitely. Clean coal is not an answer to solving climate change and should not be an option for America’s energy plans for the future. Oil ain’t lasting and coal ain’t clean. Time to embrace the alternative, green and CLEAN future folks.
Good editorial, but the lead could be improved. Maybe: Drive through the suburbs of Northern Virginia and you will find rows of cookie cutter homes squeezed onto impossibly small lots. As populatios boom..." Also, I question the link between population and expansion of electric demand. This "linkage" can be de-linked with conservation.
Power Shift Press Release
October 1, 2008 Contact: VA Power Shift Team
info@vapowershift.org
VIRGINIA TECH TO HOST LARGEST STATE CLIMATE SUMMIT IN HISTORY
One thousand students converge on Blacksburg to fight climate change in Virginia
Blacksburg, VA. — On October 10-12, 2008, The Environmental Coalition at Virginia Tech will host Virginia Power Shift 2008. 1,000 students from universities across Virginia will be heading to Tech's campus to educate and equip themselves to navigate Virginia's climate and political future. VA Power Shift will give students the tools to build a sustainable Commonwealth through education, grassroots political action, and campus leadership training.
This convergence is a direct follow up from the Youth Energy Summit (Y.E.S.) in the fall of 2006 and last year's Power Shift 2007, the first ever national youth conference to address global warming. (http://powershift07.org)
The convergence will kick off on Friday night of October 10, with an opening ceremony in Burruss Hall with keynote speakers Mike Tidwell, founder of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network and Jessy Tolkan, one of the leading voices in the national youth climate movement, and co-director of Energy Action Coalition. “With all the talk about global warming in the election, there is little talk about the real solutions and what opportunity there is for our generation in solving the problem. Virginia Power Shift is our chance to show politicians where we stand this election; for clean energy solutions, not more fossil fuels that pollute our air and water," said Peebles Squire, Virginia Power Shift planning committee.
On Saturday, students will attend trainings and speakers, equipping them with skills for political action and community and campus organizing for sustainability in Virginia. The day will also be filled with workshops on green living, anti-oppression, creative activism and green engineering and technology. A sustainability fair will take place simultaneously, where sponsors, businesses and organizations will showcase their efforts to promote a sustainable initiatives in the commonwealth. The conference will center on a panel discussion on Saturday evening, where civic, professional and environmental leaders of Virginia will be able to engage with students on the future and potential for climate change policies and sustainability in Virginia. Following the panel will be keynote speaker James Hansen, famed NASA Climatologist and Al Gore's science advisor. Hansen has been described by CBS' 60 Minutes as "arguably the world's leading researcher on global warming". He was recently quoted in the Guardian newspaper, calling on a million young people to demand real solutions to global warming this fall from presidential candidates. Musical entertainment from Trees On Fire, and The Never will close out the day's events.
VA Power Shift will wrap up on Sunday October 12, with school breakouts enabling students to channel their energy and new skills towards activism planning for their Institutions. A closing ceremony and keynote speakers will send excited youth back to their campuses, officially empowered to build a sustainable commonwealth of Virginia.
For more information to register for Virginia Power Shift 2008 and detailed agenda, please visit http://www.vapowershift.org or email info@vapowershift.org
This is good -- Could be improved by starting with some compelling bit of information -- NASA climatologist James Hansen will headline the Virginia Power Shift Conference to take place at Virginia Tech .....
The political system copes with climate change
The United States of America was founded on a basis of rebellion and revolutionary thought. Colonists and our founding fathers established our Constitution directly conflicting with the British centralized government system they were familiar with. Emphasizing citizen livelihood based on specific religious beliefs and practice along with adherence to a greater good, colonists found themselves eager for a more neutral system. Though inconsistent in our chronological history, our primary institution was established around fundamental individual rights along with a neutral government with respect to the individual, accompanying the notion of the unencumbered self. This liberal framework is what Michael J. Sandel argues has grounded our country. One prevalent topic today is climate change, and until recently was still publicly debated in our country. Nothing is more apparent of our founding roots, established in this idea of a liberal philosophy, as the current resistance of profound climate change and environmental legislation in our country. Its probably best to get to the point sooner than this.
Climate change, more commonly known as global warming, has struggled in our country to gain acceptance and positive attention in the political arena. We have struggled, but the concept of climate change has not struggled. The acceptance of increased catastrophic natural disasters, threats to human health, food shortages, and degradation of our natural ecosystems due to excessive human output of greenhouse gases has not been popular with the majority in writing and passing effective legislation. Climate change legislation demands sacrifice on an individual level, social cooperation, and choice making with regard to ultimate ends, proves conflicting with the liberal ideology of self-government and individual rights.
While small progress has been made, such as increased fuel mileage standards for automobiles, or National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) under the Clean Air Act, these accomplished regulations are set through long and drawn out collaborations of grassroots lobbying, civil suits and public interest as a result of self-interest pursuit. A government dictating thou shalt drive hybrid-electric cars, or thou shalt recycle, conflicts with the notion of freely choosing, unencumbered selves, because citizens would be lacking the choice to drive a certain automobile, or recycle or not. Key environmental statue milestones have been product of grassroots mobilization, where local communities and governments pressure federal representatives to introduce mandates on Capitol Hill. Good point -- make it more effectively by sharpening the contrast This is in effect, the utilization of our system in forms of decentralized entities of government. As a liberal idealogy, decentralization provides a neutral governing framework, and as Sandel describes, “The relation of the individual to the nation was not direct but mediated by decentralized forms of political association and participation.” (27) Specifically, most environmental legislation is carried out through a Cooperative Federal legislative process, where Federal regulation are set and states are given autonomy to carry out regulations, stricter or of minimum compliance. Within the Clean Air Act, the Federal government sets national standards (as previous mentioned as NAAQS) and then allows the states to regulate as they see fit to uphold these standards, enacting State Implementation Plans. An example of decentralization of government, the Clean Air Act is one embodiment of a liberal philosophical process.
The history of environmental statutes in our country have always followed a similar pattern, particularly in the realm of environmental law. Citizen outcry, in pursuit of self-interest and/or violation of individual right, has brought civil suits to courts, highlighting a need for profound legislation. The civil suits brought to the public eye are a choice of public interest, seeking injunctive relief for sed violations. For example, a famous case, Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Company (1970), involved a man who lived next to a cement company. Pollutant particulates from Atlantic were finding their way over to Boomer’s property and upon recognition of this, Boomer brought the company to civil court. While Boomer was exposed to dangerously toxic air pollutants, he brought a civil suit to court, reaching supreme court level, for damages to his property, seeking compensatory relief. Boomer felt his individual rights were being imposed on and his personal property was subject to damages from Atlantic Cement Company. The Supreme court ruled in favor of Boomer because his individual rights were infringed because of Atlantic imposing on his personal property. The case could have been treated as a guideline statutory implication for other plants and effects on employees for health concerns and exposure to toxins, however supreme court dealt with it strictly as rights violation and a case between conflicting parties. Granting meaningful compensation, such as relief for health injuries or guidance for future polluters, would be allowing questions dealing with morality to arise and thus conflict with liberal “bracketing” of this. Choosing to address the case in this manner, the courts would be applying a dissent with ends in sight. The Boomer Case is one example of how individual right, based on the perception of the individual, has been upheld through basic constitutional law in our country’s history, and court interpretation has upheld that philosophy.
Climate change legislation requires sacrifice from an individual. Any effective legislation to combat the resounding implications we face would require effective government imposition in to the daily lives of citizens. While in conflict with this however, public interest is pushing climate change legislation more than ever. Thus proving the dilemma between our liberal procedural republic, “Just as government may not favor one religious belief over others, so it must be neutral in its treatment of the various views its citizens may advocate” (Sandel , 71) While the self-interest and moralistic brackets of citizens is present, government still attempts to maintain neutrality of its institution. The importance here is separating the goals of public interest with the implementation of public law from government. The public emphasizes climate change legislation, taking on a conservative opinion of a means for governance, where as our government itself continues to uphold a liberal idealogy through rejection or overall slow processing of statutes to please the general public.
We examine the lack of success as well, and over all public discourse and an example that our government has strayed away from our predisposed notions of how it should and shouldn’t be functioning (within the liberal framework) with climate change legislation as well. As the American public interest is urging for renewable energy sources, efficiency, increased recycling and environmentally friend technology and lifestyles, the lack of passing effective legislation has caused more uproar and apathy in result. From such decentralized forms of government within our system it takes significantly longer time for legislation to pass than the public would like, “Americans find to their frustration that their control over the forces that govern their lives is receding rather than increasing.” (Sandel 201) The liberal self-image reinforces individualism and free choice without respect to ends, which again is the provisions that come with climate change and environmental legislation.
More evidence that we are ultimately grounded in a liberal procedural republic is the loss of our ability to govern collectively. Dispersed throughout the country you can find states that have effectively embraced the climate crisis to their capacity, such as California and Oregon, with strict pollution emissions laws, and air and water quality standards, and effective urban planning such as Smart Growth and sustainability. However other parts of the country, such as Virginia and others, are found to be emitting more greenhouse gases on average than majority of the states combined. Sprawl and a desire for isolation, i.e. the American Dream, has been triggered from a liberal philosophy has increased erosion of community and ultimately our surrounding environment. Therefore as a result of this we find apathy, discontent, and lack of faith in government, “Since Americans had traditionally exercised self-government as members of decentralized communities, they experienced the erosion of community as a loss of agency, a form of disempowerment.” (Sandel 205)
Our market system and economy is another example of the liberal procedural republic the United States can find root. Many businesses and corporations have begun to embrace the ‘Go Green’ movement in our country as global warming and climate change gain more public attention. Recognizing there is a greater market in environmentally friendly practices, these companies have started to switch emphasis on efficiency, and lower greenhouse gas emissions, making these tasks well-known and even sometimes elaborated, to gain popularity of public opinion. Through a nationwide embrace of a market system, the ‘Go Green’ business movement is an example of using this system freely with regard to constitutional neutrality and according to Sandel, “constitutional neutrality simply means that the Constitution does not favor any particular economic or ethical doctrine, and so states are free to enact whatever such doctrines they choose” (Sandel 46).
A core aspect of recent climate change legislation is using market forces for regulation, which is an effective way of embracing the liberal philosophy with regard to the economy. In the past, passing command and control statutes have directly pursued a republican process of regulation have proved most ineffective, an example being the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and enactment of ‘the God Squad’. The ESA, through a serious of sections ultimate restricts government and citizens from harming any animal listed as endangered, which extends to include habitat destruction. The government can officially allot a section of land as habitat for a particular endangered species an restrict public use. Causing political outcry and discontent with regard to the mandate being entirely too strict and imposing on many individual rights, particularly property, the ESA was amended to include a “God Squad” which is a committee of cabinet level members whom can allow certain exemptions. With this mandate in effect, it is arguable that is again another approach of our government to adopt a more republican process through regulation, that has failed to withhold over time. Restricting public use of a land for preservation of species or habitat is regulating with respect to a greater, “common good”and truly a republican mind frame. The God Squad Amendment, loosening the act, is the liberalism finding its way back in to our policy process.
Interesting topic -- One strategy would be to use a tighter outline to bring your points together quickly and efficiently. So the problem is that the political system supports individual liberty but the problem affects us collectively. Do we have such a hard time reacting collectively in an emergency? Not always. Moreover, some market / individual responses seem to work, so that's good. One issue I have with your essay is that the ESA is not as tough on people as they say it is. That's an old conservative line that has been over-used.
Adam Kokesh Visits Virginia Tech to Speak Out Against the Iraq War
This could have had an environmental angle in that he also spoke against depleted uranium bullets and their impact.
By Jackie Pontious
10/26/08
This past Thursday, The Global Justice Alliance, a student organization at Virginia Tech, hosted guest speaker Adam Kokesh, an Iraq War Veteran and member of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW). Honorably discharged in November 2006, Kokesh has dedicated his recent return from service to activism against the war through his tour in the name of IVAW promoting, “an immediate withdrawal of all occupying forces from Iraq, full benefits for returning veterans, and reparations for the Iraqi people.”
During his discussion, tears could be found around the room as he stood up in front of about 50 students and community members depicting images of his horrific experiences with death and destruction while serving his country. Through graphic depiction of his exposure to violence and dehumanization, the room was often left in echoes of silence upon his pauses between stories he told. “You can’t use a hammer to fix a computer” was one common metaphor Kokesh used to describe the status of US occupancy forces in Iraq.
“We’re building a G.I. resistance movement,” Kokesh highlighted, said works just as well “in that we’re not out there publicly protesting or holding banners and posters and any of that mess, we are supporting G.I. resistance and helping Veterans get out of the service.” He argued we are putting troops and innocent lives in danger as well as “gaining enemies faster than we can kill them.”
“I felt his speech was powerful. He really used imagery to portray his experience over there. It really is awful, the dehumanization that occurs among our troops towards our enemies,” said student Peebles Squire, “I don’t know if I am going to stop paying taxes but I am certainly rethinking how I see our government involvement in Iraq.”
Iraq Veterans Against the War, such as Adam Kokesh, speak out to promote awareness and education of the realities involved with the Iraq War. Their stance against the war centrally involves corruption and deceit of the U.S. Government, as well as corporate and political profiteering from occupancy in the country of Iraq.
More information about Adam Kokesh and IVAW can be found at Adam’s blog http://kokesh.blogspot.com/ or http://ivaw.org
STUDENTS TRAVEL TO WEST VIRGINIA TO FIGHT MOUNTAIN TOP REMOVAL MINING
December 2, 2008
http://environmentwriting.pbwiki.com/f/n6218074_39949618_7233.jpg
In the snowy mountains of Coal River Valley, West Virginia students from Universities across the eastern United States could be found huddled in an army tent plotting campaign tactics and training each other to fight Mountain Top Removal injustices. These students were attending the annual Mountain Justice Fall Summit, on November 21-23, 2008. The summit is held every year to bring together students and activists to empower, educate and train themselves on stopping mountain top removal mining for good.
On Friday night, students arrived at the local residence where the gathering was hosted. A series of houses and an army tent in the back yard was shelter for over seventy student activists, some traveling up to thirteen and fourteen hours to attend the weekend events. Joy and excitement could be seen as students greeted and recognized each other from other past mountain justice events held in different locations around the region. The summit kicked off with an extensive Anti- Oppression training, where students were prompted with tough questions such as “How do you oppress others in your daily lives?” and “Where do you see oppression on your campuses?” Dinner was offered on a donation basis, upholding the philosophy of the movement and consensus building organizing that is often a theme of the trainings.
Saturday morning students were greeted with a hearty oatmeal breakfast, coffee and “morning circle”. “Morning circle is where we gather all of the attendees together to talk about the day’s schedule, and what we hope to accomplish through trainings and education,” said organizer Marley Green. Students were told to head to the Coal River Mountain Watch campaign house and then to Kayford Mountain to see first hand the mountain top removal that was threatening their lifestyles and destroying their beloved mountains. Student attendees started the day with a training from other experienced student activists in their choice of one of the three offered areas, power and community organizing 101, campaign strategizing, and messaging and framing.
Coal River Mountain Watch is a non-profit organization based in West Virginia that is specifically fighting to preserve the mountains of the area and put an end to mountain top removal mining. Students were brought in to the office to learn about their current campaign against Massey energy, Coal River Wind, which is defending Coal River Mountain, the next on the list for MTR. The organization has started the Coal River Wind campaign, with much help from supporting non-profit environmental organizations such as Appalachian Voices.
“Coal River Mountain is one of West Virginia’s most treasure mountains,” the employee from CMRW stated, “we are fighting to preserve this mountain so that we can put a wind farm on top of it to power 150,000 homes from clean and renewable power.” Students were instructed on the current status of Massey’s permit process for blowing up the mountain for coal resources and that the demand for the electricity is actually coming from excessive growth areas such as Northern Virginia and Richmond.
“The impacts on the people and environment are inequitable, the demand and electricity is somewhere else and the sickness and destruction is left to the people of the coal fields,” Stated Colin Bennett, a student attendee from George Mason University in Virginia.
“The importance here is that we are providing an alternative and not just speaking out against the injustice. This is how you have to effectively work with the democratic system. The citizens are demanding a wind farm instead but now the governments aren’t listening. They’re partnerships lie with the special interests who have the money, and these communities don’t have money so their voices are being ignored,” said another employee of Coal River Mountain Watch.
After a lengthy hike, shock, awe and silence was the initial reactions of students that were witnessing the disastrous mountain top removal impacts. Looking over the edge of the mountain, one could see the neighboring flattened, empty and sparse lands, which were once Kayford Mountain.
“I’ve never seen anything more depressing. It really does look like a moonscape,” said attendee Carrie Ryan from Virginia Tech. It was her first time seeing Mountain Top Removal. Residents and long time mountain top removal activists of the area explained the procedures and process of the explosions for some students, while others chose to reflect on their own with pictures and video camaras. “This is truly horrific. It is literally in the back yard of the people that live on this mountain. I can’t imagine how dirty their water is and how loud the explosions must be all of the time,” said Bryce Carter, another student attendee and dedicated anti-MTR organizer from Virginia Tech.
Students hiked back down the mountain to head back to the host residences for a relaxing evening with dinner and socializing. Many conversations surrounded the issues that the communities in West Virginia were facing and how they could bring the issue and awareness back to their schools. Students retreated back to their tents and sleeping bags after gathering around a campfire singing inspiring and activist songs of hope for the future.
Sunday morning wrapped up with breakfast and another training session with the choice of planning the next retreat, how to get your University to help with water quality testing for residents of Appalachia and West Virginia, and a media workshop. Students trickled out and back to their campuses, feeling more depressed but empowered and inspired to stop the injustice that is MTR. “Things like this always get me really fired up to start dong something about the problem. I have a paper due next week and I am going to write about mountain top removal now just because I am so angry and inspired!” said Carrie Ryan.
For more information on how you can get involved in the fight against Mountain Top Removal visit http://www.ilovemountains.org or http://www.coalriverwind.org
Virginia Tech Needs a Student Green Fee to Further Sustainable Growth and Development
Sustainable development and progression requires conscious and educated efforts to mitigate personal impacts, combined with political and economical efforts to assure implementation of new initiatives. Student pressure for a more environmentally conscious campus and community has no doubt grown in the past few years, however a disconnect remains between the general student body and administration in terms of how to properly fund sustainable initiatives at Virginia Tech.
An innovative tool to raise funds for institution-wide sustainability projects and initiatives on campuses is a student green fee. This fee would be a monetary value, usually ranging from $5.00-$20.00, added to student tuition to specifically fund sustainability action at Virginia Tech. A student green fee at Virginia Tech would have the potential to raise large-scale funds due to the size of the University. Not only does the Green Fee provide immediate revenue to facilitate action on campuses but also empowers students as managers and directors of the trajectory of the fund. Projects created for short-term time period implementation, such as a Bike Share program on campus or creating an Office of Sustainability with a hired director would be ideal.
How does a green fee function? An effective green fee is a fund that is directly paid and managed by students. To implement a student green fee, there should be a Grant Making Committee created consisting of students and at least one faculty advisor serving as the Grant Coordinator, which may or may not be a paid position. The committee would be responsible for review of project proposals as well as allocation and management of funds. The Green Fee By Laws should be written (ideally by students) prior to enactment of the fee, accessible to all students whom are subject to the increase in their tuition. These By Laws should explicitly describe powers and duties of the Grant Making Committee, the role of the Grant Coordinator, the fund allocation and project selection process, as well as any other rules, accountability procedures or pre-designated funding that the University and student community see fit.
Specifically at Virginia Tech, a student green fee added to tuition prices would require a referendum by the Student Government Association as well as acceptance from upper level administration. Future use of these fees could incorporate a revolving loan fund, which would be a fund for projects that have quantifiable monetary savings or returns and capitalize on long-term profitability of sustainability projects. Therefore, a student green fee could also range to support mid and long-term sustainability projects depending on its implementation and managed use.
Other Universities with successfully implemented green fees include UC Berkeley, University of Oregon, College of William and Mary, Appalachian State University, UNC Chapel Hill and many others. In the Commonwealth, Virginia Tech would be one of the first Universities to implement and sustain a successful student green fee, showing joint initiative and cooperation between students and administration. Students in 2006 ran a student green fee campaign with an unsuccessful outcome, (did not pass at administration level) however with pre-written By Laws, and a designed grant making committee and proposal system combined with the increased popularity of “going green” we’ve seen just in the last few years, another attempt would definitely be a smart move for the students.
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.