Hundreds of Kentucky miners demonstrate against EPA, claim EPA is costing them jobs by putting permi - Polidicks

[QUOTE]FRANKFORT, Ky. — Hundreds of coal miners took part in a demonstration Tuesday in Frankfort, Ky., claiming that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's hold on 36 mine permits is costing them needed jobs in a fragile economy. Environmentalists, meanwhile, urged the EPA to stand its ground because they believe the proposed mining operations would pollute streams. The issue has produced heated rhetoric in Kentucky for two years. U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell added to it Tuesday in Washington, charging in a floor speech that his coalfield constituents are under siege by the EPA. "Like most of the country, Kentucky is suffering from very difficult economic times," McConnell said. "Far too many Kentuckians are unemployed and the prospect for future employment remains daunting. That's why it is especially irritating that this administration has blindly followed ideological policies that eliminate jobs in our communities. The people of Kentucky are amongst the hardest-working people on the planet but how can we be expected to compete if our own government is working against us?" More than 500 coal miners and supporters and more than 100 environmentalists held separate rallies in Frankfort before going into a public hearing the EPA scheduled to get public comments from Kentuckians on the stalled permits. State officials have approved the permits, but the EPA is holding them up because of concerns about water pollution. Coal miner Josh Jackson, a heavy equipment operator for Arch Coal in Hazard, said people in the industry are worried about job security because of the EPA's actions. "Our company alone has laid off 200 people since last fall," Jackson said. "It's a struggle. Used to, we'd load 30 to 40 trains a month, and right now 15 is about it." Environmentalists support the EPA's objections to the new coal permits. "All I'm concerned about is people's health, and that we have clean drinking water," said the Rev. Donna Aros, pastor of First United Methodist Church in Louisa, a town on the Big Sandy River in eastern Kentucky. "I can't even take my people down to the river for baptisms." Alex Desha, an organizer for the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign, said the EPA "is rightfully stepping in where the state has consistently failed to act." Haven King, a former Hazard coal miner who now is the Perry County clerk, said miners are angry that the EPA is blocking jobs that are badly needed in Appalachia, an impoverished region where about one person in 10 remains unemployed. "I don't think that people realize how important coal jobs are in Kentucky," he said. McConnell said 18,000 Kentuckians work in the coal industry and nearly 200,000 others rely indirectly on the coal industry for their jobs. They account for more than $1 billion in wages each year, he said. "Attacking an industry so important to Kentucky will only succeed in putting people out of work, impeding future job growth, and increasing energy prices," McConnell said. Matt Wasson, a spokesman for the environmental group Appalachian Voices, said coal operators and politicians are attempting to mislead the public by saying the EPA's hold on the permits is costing jobs. Wasson said demand for coal is low after an unseasonably warm winter that led to massive stockpiles of the hot-burning black mineral. "If EPA was to back off, it would not create a single new job," he said. "It would not allow East Kentucky to sell a chunk more of coal. But it would give a greater advantage to the most irresponsible operators in the state." Deborah Payne, an activist with the Kentucky Environmental Foundation, said in a statement the EPA should continue to guard against pollution from mining operations. "Our citizens are our most valuable resource. Kentucky legislators need to start acknowledging mine related health impacts and look for ways to mitigate them, not deny them," she said. "Allowing the EPA to do their job, preventing the pollution that contaminates our watersheds, ultimately damaging human health is a good first step." The environmental activists said coal operators, by sponsoring the mass demonstration in Frankfort, were attempting to bully the EPA to cave in on the permits. But even Kentucky Coal Association President Bill Bissett doubted that would happen. "I really don't believe, even with this tremendous turnout and these powerful voices for coal, that the EPA is going to change its mind, and that's very concerning," Bissett said. "The best we can hope for with this administration is status quo." [/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57448100/miners-environmentalists-flock-to-epa-hearing/[/url]

This is definitely one of those issues that has a massive grey area. The question is, what's more important to you, jobs or the environment? I cannot fully side with either.

Energy jobs are a big deal here, so naturally the EPA stepping in with all of this is going to put a lot of stress on people. I'm usually not a fan of McConnell, but putting tons of people out of work doesn't solve anything. It constricts our economy and causes problems in an already problem-ridden state. At the same time, coal is a filthy business and needs to be replaced with cleaner and more efficient tech. But that's not going to happen in Kentucky anytime soon. We love coal too much. I see "Coal keeps the lights on" stickers everywhere here, even on a dorm room door at my college. Either way, we have a bad enough problem with unemployment in the state, this is just going to make it worse.

[QUOTE=BananaFoam;36229819]This is definitely one of those issues that has a massive grey area. The question is, what's more important to you, jobs or the environment? I cannot fully side with either.[/QUOTE] It's going to be hard to fill those jobs when your workforce is debilitated by chronic sickness.

[QUOTE=The golden;36230206]I would say the environment should come first. Without a healthy environment there isn't any jobs to protect. (A good example would be the quickly collapsing fishing industry)[/QUOTE] How do these people get food onto their family's tables in the mean time?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36230255]How do these people get food onto their family's tables in the mean time?[/QUOTE] Exactly this. We need cleaner energy jobs. But you can't just wean off of coal and onto something else without tearing apart the state. People here, and many people I know personally, have been in coal for years, many for generations. They are loyal to coal, and will be horribly opposed to the idea of switching to another source. Meanwhile, being out of work will tear apart the economy and the families themselves. There is no easy solution.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36230255]How do these people get food onto their family's tables in the mean time?[/QUOTE] Working jobs that don't damage the environment?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36230287]Working jobs that don't damage the environment?[/QUOTE] We don't have a plethora of open jobs for all those put out of work to fill. You can't lay off such a huge number of people in a state that thrives on coal, and expect them to immediately have another job lined up. These are small towns with not many avenues for employment outside of their field.

I want to support the workers who badly need these jobs, but I also think we should be protecting the environment. Why work all your life only to be harmed by the job that you took to support yourself. And future generations. What we do now not only affects us right now, but the people who come after us, our future children, and theirs and so on.

[QUOTE=Bentham;36230300]We don't have a plethora of open jobs for all those put out of work to fill. You can't lay off such a huge number of people in a state that thrives on coal, and expect them to immediately have another job lined up. These are small towns with not many avenues for employment outside of their field.[/QUOTE] I don't expect them to have a job lined up and I don't expect this entire situation to be easy. If it was easy we wouldn't need the EPA. But the fact of the matter is we can't afford to be shortsighted when it comes to the places we get our drinking water from. What do you want, jobs now or health for generations?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36230323]I don't expect them to have a job lined up and I don't expect this entire situation to be easy. If it was easy we wouldn't need the EPA. But the fact of the matter is we can't afford to be shortsighted when it comes to the places we get our drinking water from. What do you want, jobs now or health for generations?[/QUOTE] Of course I want the health for generations. I'm not arguing against it. My only point is that we can't just magically wean off of coal like the EPA seems to assume. We can't just force all of these layoffs and expect people to say "okay, we'll go green!". It's just going to alienate the population against an agency that isn't popular to begin with, and people are going to dig in even further with their beliefs on the matter. We need a steady transition, not a massive layoff.

[QUOTE=Bentham;36230353]Of course I want the health for generations. I'm not arguing against it. My only point is that we can't just magically wean off of coal like the EPA seems to assume. We can't just force all of these layoffs and expect people to say "okay, we'll go green!". It's just going to alienate the population against an agency that isn't popular to begin with, and people are going to dig in even further with their beliefs on the matter. We need a steady transition, not a massive layoff.[/QUOTE] So you want a compromise? Some jobs and some pollution? That seems to defeat the entire point.

Someone has to nudge people along. We as a species love to resist change.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36230389]So you want a compromise? Some jobs and some pollution? That seems to defeat the entire point.[/QUOTE] How exactly do you expect change to come about? You can't magically replace coal refineries with cleaner energy facilities overnight. You can't expect to change people's opinions overnight. And destroying the economy and making everyone hate you isn't going to encourage them to agree with new ideas. Like it or not, the state is buried in coal. It's a secure job, there's plenty of it, and it keeps the economy going. Nowhere in my post did I speak like I was pro-pollution. You need to accept that it's not as simple as flicking a switch. A slow, steady change is the most efficient way to accomplish this without tearing apart the state and destroying livelihoods.

[QUOTE=Bentham;36230447]How exactly do you expect change to come about? You can't magically replace coal refineries with cleaner energy facilities overnight. You can't expect to change people's opinions overnight. And destroying the economy and making everyone hate you isn't going to encourage them to agree with new ideas. Like it or not, the state is buried in coal. It's a secure job, there's plenty of it, and it keeps the economy going. Nowhere in my post did I speak like I was pro-pollution. You need to accept that it's not as simple as flicking a switch.[/QUOTE] "Like it or not" is a pretty terrible attitude to take when we are considering the water health of an entire state. [editline]7th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Bentham;36230447] A slow, steady change is the most efficient way to accomplish this without tearing apart the state and destroying livelihoods.[/QUOTE] Slow and steady like cancer?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36230476]"Like it or not" is a pretty terrible attitude to take when we are considering the water health of an entire state.[/QUOTE] The water health of the state has other enemies as well, let's not pretend Coal is the only industry shitting all over the water. And I don't see any new points being raised. How do you propose we fix the solution overnight? Shut down all the plants and let the populace starve when they have no jobs? The people working in the refineries aren't the only ones affected by this. We have a massive rail industry that relies on coal as a product to ship. There's layoffs. With these layoffs, consumers buy less here. There's more layoffs. I'm going to say it again, because it's true. Like it or not, Coal runs through the veins of the state. You can't flip a switch and solve the problem.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36230476] Slow and steady like cancer?[/QUOTE] Yes because transitioning to a cleaner energy in an efficient way is totally cancer

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36230476]"Like it or not" is a pretty terrible attitude to take when we are considering the water health of an entire state. [editline]7th June 2012[/editline] Slow and steady like cancer?[/QUOTE] The Ohio River is already an ecological disaster and it's not like it's just the coal companies dumping their shit in there. There's tons of refineries and factories on the riverside that sure as hell don't help, and we've got the LG&E plants. Kentucky relies on coal, it's important to us just like tobacco farming and The Kentucky Derby.

[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;36230535]The Ohio River is already an ecological disaster and it's not like it's just the coal companies dumping their shit in there. There's tons of refineries and factories on the riverside that sure as hell don't help, and we've got the LG&E plants. Kentucky relies on coal, it's important just like Tobacco and The Kentucky Derby.[/QUOTE] AK Steel is a great example. They are just up the road from me. The whole area reeks of sulfur.

[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;36230535]The Ohio River is already an ecological disaster and it's not like it's just the coal companies dumping their shit in there. There's tons of refineries and factories on the riverside that sure as hell don't help, and we've got the LG&E plants. Kentucky relies on coal, it's important to us just like tobacco farming and The Kentucky Derby.[/QUOTE] "It's fucked anyway so lets ignore those scientists who say it will be worse" [QUOTE=Bentham;36230547]AK Steel is a great example. They are just up the road from me. The whole area reeks of sulfur.[/QUOTE] The irony being it probably ended up that way because someone a few decades ago said "But think of the jobs!" Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it and all that jazz.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36230557]"It's fucked anyway so lets ignore those scientists who say it will be worse" The irony being it probably ended up that way because someone a few decades ago said "But think of the jobs!" Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it and all that jazz.[/QUOTE] Give a solution then. You spent the whole time here trashing a smart solution, give a better one. I'm arguing FOR environmentally friendly energy, so I don't even know what you are arguing.

Slow and steady so we don't step on a god-damn landmine. I don't see whats hard to understand. It's not instant gratification like every other thing people seem to expect. RND takes time, and we shouldn't just toss our fellow countrymen/countrywomen out into the wolves because we want coal to magically go away.

[QUOTE=Bentham;36230574]Give a solution then. You spent the whole time here trashing a smart solution, give a better one. I'm arguing FOR environmentally friendly energy, so I don't even know what you are arguing.[/QUOTE] Your smart solution is basically the status quo so I don't know if I would call it smart nor a solution to anything. I don't mind coal mining. I understand it's importance not only to Kentucky but most states along the Appalachian mountains. But when the EPA says you aren't allowed to mine somewhere because it will damage the water table then it's probably a good idea to either find somewhere else to mine or get into a new line of work. [editline]7th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;36230604]Slow and steady so we don't step on a god-damn landmine. I don't see whats hard to understand. It's not instant gratification like every other thing people seem to expect. RND takes time, and we shouldn't just toss our fellow countrymen/countrywomen out into the wolves because we want coal to magically go away.[/QUOTE] Tossing our countrymen to the wolves is not the same as telling them they can't mine, drill, or hydraulic fracture an area that would harm the water we drink.

This needs to be gradual. Problem is, we don't have time to slowly change things anymore. Things needs to change fast or we'll suffer the consequences shortly. Coal is an horrible power source nowadays. Even if people are attached to it, they need to grow a modern mind and understand the consequences of this power source. Of course, changing it to what is completely out of my domain. I don't even know the assets of Kentucky. Siding with EPA on this one. Safety of the general environment is more important.

[QUOTE=Bentham;36230279]Exactly this. We need cleaner energy jobs. But you can't just wean off of coal and onto something else without tearing apart the state. People here, and many people I know personally, have been in coal for years, many for generations. They are loyal to coal, and will be horribly opposed to the idea of switching to another source. Meanwhile, being out of work will tear apart the economy and the families themselves. There is no easy solution.[/QUOTE] Even if there was, it would only be short-term at best. Let me rephrase that: there is no easy solution that will fix this long term.

[QUOTE=Feuver;36230698]This needs to be gradual. Problem is, we don't have time to slowly change things anymore. Things needs to change fast or we'll suffer the consequences shortly. Coal is an horrible power source nowadays. Even if people are attached to it, they need to grow a modern mind and understand the consequences of this power source. Of course, changing it to what is completely out of my domain. I don't even know the assets of Kentucky. Siding with EPA on this one. Safety of the general environment is more important.[/QUOTE] The problem is we have been talking about gradual change for literally decades now. Eisenhower was talking about clean energy concepts in the 50's. Everyone wants to take the slow and steady route and push the problem to the next generation. Not for no good reason, no one wants to see pollution. But because its genuinely hard.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;36230604]Slow and steady so we don't step on a god-damn landmine. I don't see whats hard to understand. It's not instant gratification like every other thing people seem to expect. RND takes time, and we shouldn't just toss our fellow countrymen/countrywomen out into the wolves because we want coal to magically go away.[/QUOTE] But it doesn't sound like they've been making the strives to actually clean it up, I mean look at all the signs they've had.

I support the miners, and it isn't because I'm from Kentucky. Mines have always been dangerous, you are blowing holes under tons of rock.

[QUOTE=Zarjk;36242161]I support the miners, and it isn't because I'm from Kentucky. Mines have always been dangerous, you are blowing holes under tons of rock.[/QUOTE] It was worse when they didn't have air filtration equipment, I've heard stories about my ancestors that died of horrible things like black lung. This compounded by the horrible pay and hours during the industrial revolution truly made it the shittiest job ever.

While it is awful that these people could possibly loose their well needed jobs we simply cannot keep jobs around that pollute the environment just because we need the jobs. As one industry dies another grows, there will be another industry with jobs ready to take the previous ones place in time.