logologo_light
  • News
  • Blog
  • States
  • Resources
  • Videos
  • About Us
  • Take Action
  • News
  • Blog
  • States
  • Resources
  • Videos
  • About Us
  • Take Action

Crippling Coal Will Cost U.S.

Via The Pittsburgh Tribune: 

Much has been written to bury America’s coal industry. The overriding presumption is that coal no longer is needed, soon to be replaced by breakthroughs in renewable power.

And although coal still provides 35 percent of total U.S. power generation, President Obama is pushing headlong with a fistful of policies to simply drive coal off our electric grid and out of business.

There’s a major conflict at work here, however. In attempting to “keep coal in the ground,” the president wouldn’t just be harming the coal and fossil fuel industries. He’d also be hurting the very people whom he has always publicly committed to helping: Main Street America.

This isn’t simply about the tens of thousands of coal workers whose livelihoods are at stake or even the additional workers in related sectors, like freight, rail and steel, whose jobs would be impacted. No, what’s really at issue here is whether America will continue to enjoy affordable, reliable power.

That issue will be discussed in Pittsburgh today when the U.S. Department of the Interior conducts a hearing on President Obama’s three-year moratorium on the leasing of coal from federal lands. This moratorium would have implications far beyond Western coal fields.

Here’s why: Coal mined on federal lands accounts for 42 percent of total U.S. coal production, the source of more electricity than any other fuel. Simply put, a halt to federal coal would pose very real consequences for affordable power generation in America.

Federal coal leases have generated more than $12.6 billion in royalties, rents and bonus payments over the past decade. So, not only would a moratorium eventually force families to pay more for electricity, but U.S. taxpayers would lose billions of dollars in revenues — and states with federal coal leases would lose much-needed income as well as high-wage jobs.

There are consequences for using higher-cost energy, and the biggest losers are always the low-income households that pay a greater share of their income for basic utilities. But costlier power also means higher prices throughout the economy — for retail goods and for America’s domestic manufacturers, whose one advantage in recent years against subsidized overseas competition has been low-cost power.

Despite these impacts, the president came to office vowing to address climate change by making fossil fuels more expensive and by forcing much of America’s fleet of coal plants into retirement. But making coal costlier will make electricity costlier, with little impact on global climate — a stubborn fact the EPA does not deny. Even if the United States commits to costly reductions in CO2, emerging nations like China and India are on course to vastly expand the world’s coal fleet, rendering any leasing moratorium — like other Obama policies — a costly and largely symbolic gesture.

We cannot bolster the middle class by raising the cost of energy. Nor can we create high-wage jobs and restore U.S. manufacturing while destroying the very industries that support them.

Hal Quinn is president of the National Mining Association.

See the article here.

  • On June 28, 2016
Popular Posts
  • Be part of the revolutionApril 14, 2015
  • Missouri Should Oppose Obama’s “Clean Power Plan”August 14, 2015
  • NMA Calls EPA’s Power Plant Rule a Reckless Gamble with the EconomyJanuary 7, 2014
Recent Comments
  • Clean Power Plan Facing Opposition in Missouri | Count on Coal on Missouri Should Oppose Obama’s “Clean Power Plan”
  • Death of a Shalesman: U.S. Energy Independence Is a Fairy Tale | SuddenlySlimmer on Voices
Tags
affordability baseload power Bloomberg California carbon capture utilization and storage China coal Department of Energy (DOE) electricity grid electricity prices Electricity Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) emissions energy addition energy transition Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Europe Fatih Birol Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) fuel diversity Germany grid reliability infrastructure International Energy Agency (IEA) James Danly Jim Robb Joe Biden Mark Christie Michael Regan Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) National Mining Association (NMA) natural gas New England North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) PJM Interconnection polling renewable energy Rich Nolan Southwest Power Pool (SPP) technology Texas transmission lines U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) United Kingdom Wall Street Journal wind power

Sierra Club Pressed EPA to Create Impossible Coal Standards

Scroll
Count on Coal
Recent Posts
  • Strengthening Energy Security: DPA Action Reinforces America’s Coal Advantage
  • PJM’s Power Crunch: Why Coal Is Critical to Closing a 60-Gigawatt Gap
  • China’s Coal Playbook Is Winning
  • Today’s Gas Glut, Tomorrow’s Price Shock
  • The Global Pivot to Coal Is About More Than Electricity
RECENT TWEETS
Tweets by @countoncoal
Privacy Policy | © Copyright Count on Coal 2024