Debating coal's future

The residents of Meigs County, Ohio, live beneath the towering smokestacks of four coal-fired power plants. In the latest salvo in a battle over the way the U.S. gets electricity, a fifth plant could be built there soon. Some local people are organizing opposition to the proposed plant, while others are eager for the jobs it may bring. Learn more at www.poweringanation.org.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• coal
• electricity
• power plants
• Meigs County
• Ohio
• Mason County
• West Virginia
• American Municipal Power

[moreSmartLessStupid]

I like how they didn't mention nuclear power, hydroelectric, or geothermal.  Trying to justify coal plants is just moronic. I would love to put James and Greg out of work after hearing them speak.

[smpeach]

For the record, Mr. Sheets and Pastor Acree did talk about other forms of energy, including the ones you mention, in my interviews with them. It just didn't make it to the final cut. Thanks for watching!

[fieyr2002]

Even if they did, wouldn't that just mean there would be no one around to fight against the building of new coal burning plants?

What about people who can't afford to move? It isn't exactly cheap to move you know,

[tomrunsalot]

Replacing coal is the single most effective way to reduce global warming. It needs to be outlawed. The real rice of using coal is astronomical, many times more than sale price. Natural gas, nuclear sun and wind all can contribute today. Coal miners need to find another job, sorry.

[MuleKist]

Of course, a builder wants to keep on building, otherwise, what is he ?

[MuleKist]

Grow and burn HEMP!

[ElisaYoung33]

For what it's worth, my family went on geothermal and solar 30 years ago when the Carter administration made renewable energy a priority - promptly reversed during the Reagan nuclear era. Most people can't afford renewables because the vast majority of the subsidies are being put on finite fossil fuels, researching dead-end jobs to keep it on life support instead of making real solutions a tangible option. After you've watched your neighbors die, come back and we'll talk about it. ~ Elisa

[radimatt]

Elisa has a powerful story. This really brings our choices to the forefront - will we choose to live in a way that is economically and ecologically sustainable? Will politicians be leaders, or followers?

[Pandonodrim]

Every single option OTHER than Nuclear and Coal are more economically viable options. The only reason Nuclear and Coal are considered viable are because the nuke and coal companies are not held accountable for all their externalized costs. When you take them into consideration they are FAR more expensive than any alternative.

Even without taking externalizes into account, nuclear is still more expensive. Nukes are not an answer to coal. They weren't 30 years ago and they still aren't today.

[Pandonodrim]

What's more, Greg Sheets seems to be one of the most ignorant hicks I've ever seen, not to mention offensive. Calling Sierra Club, etc. terrorists? He should be arrested.

As for James Acree: please, PLEASE James, let me see you eat some coal. I will film it. I'll even buy the coal. I can get some Texas lignite for you cheap. Please let me feed it to you. And film it. I'd love that! Who takes these people seriously? How sad...

[Pandonodrim]

Nuclear is not a solution to coal. Nuclear power runs on coal. Both are devastating to public health and the environment, and both have viable alternatives: energy efficiency, solar thermal, concentrating solar, solar pv, wind, geothermal, tidal and wave power, energy storage, the list goes on...

As for "they can move." These people can't move. Having these terrible industrial facilities ruins their property value - they can't sell. Furthermore - why should they move? This is their home.

[Kermit4Prezident]

You know, there's a thing called "moving".

[dirtyoldman54]

WTF???

[dirtyoldman54]

And we complain about second hand smoke from cigs.But this is ok???