Is Coal’s Political Heft Plunging? One State May Be Canary in Mine

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Is Coal’s Political Heft Plunging? One State May Be Canary in Mine

By KIRK JOHNSON and CORAL DAVENPORT NOV. 2, 2016

BELLINGHAM, Wash. — The American coal industry, with its billions of dollars and army of lobbyists, has a storied history of muscle and might. But in this northwest corner of Washington, people like Christopher Grannis, a 69-year-old building contractor and stalwart in local civic causes, are standing up to coal. ... And coal is losing.
....

American coal producers, suffering under the weight of Obama administration regulations, have sought to export their fuel to Asia, hoping that a new hub of proposed export terminals along a stretch of the Pacific Northwest could serve as their industry’s economic lifeline. Instead, local activists have shot down almost every project, adding a western blockade to what President Obama’s critics have called the “war on coal.”

And on Election Day, this state may go further, with a vote on a first-of-its-kind ballot initiative to tax carbon emissions — a policy that most economists say is the most effective way to tackle global warming. Across the country, both advocates and opponents of climate change measures are watching closely to see if the Washington ballot initiative will herald national efforts to fight global warming through higher taxation of fossil fuels.

To Yoram Bauman, a stand-up comedian with a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Washington, the combination of a freeze on coal export terminals and a carbon tax amounts to an attack on climate change from both sides of the market. “This is about supply and demand,” said Mr. Bauman, who spearheaded the ballot initiative. “The coal export issue is on the supply side — keeping coal out of other countries. The tax is about reducing demand.”

[Panich52]

1. Didn't read whole article, but detected pro-coal slant?

"suffering under the weight of Obama administration regulations" — reminds me of yard signs in my terribly Repub neighborhood in 2012 to stop "Obama's war on coal." What they get wrong is that Pres Obama didn't start that "war," Nixon did—by initiating environmental protection. Pittsburgh was known by CBers as "Smokey City" but the kicker was when the Cuyahoga River caught fire. With that, the worries about water and air pollution became a national concern. That led to the myth of "clean coal" and added expenses to power plants.

Then energy companies discovered the wonders of fracking. That gave power plants a cheaper alternative—natural gas. Add coal companies' penchant for during miners because razing mountains w/ machines is cheaper than having men dig under them and the only conclusion is that coal's demise was inevitable.

Heads of coal companies have talked about this for years. They have faced up to it but the coal culture that has arisen over more than 175 years is hard to overcome. Besides the miners' culture, the states which have benefitted economically (while their environments suffered) have done little in the past 45 years to face up to obvious trends and find alternative economic solutions for those increasingly unemployed miners.

Granted, Pres Obama's acceptance of climate change science may have ramped up that coal war, he has only looked forward. Coal magnets support the war myth only because they want to squeeze as much as they can out of those with full initiation in coal culture to line their own greedy pockets.

It's far past time for those who recognize we'd like a future to start electing state politicians who have positive plans for replacing coal-heavy economies with ones that fit into a positive future.