LISTSERV - IOWA-TOPICS Archives - LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG

Mime-Version: 1.0
References: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-911015660==_ma============"
Message-ID:  <a06240817c9b2f2a8be93@[192.168.1.3]>
Date:         Fri, 25 Mar 2011 21:33:54 -0500
Reply-To:     Chp & Grp Global Warming Energy Chairs              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Chp & Grp Global Warming Energy Chairs <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Don Ferber <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Packing it in?
To:           [log in to unmask]
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Precedence: list



--============_-911015660==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

http://www.grist.org/article/2011-03-23-obama-administration-announces-massive-coal-mining-expansion.

Is it just me, or shouldn't this have sounded much more of an alarm? 
This looks to me like Obama has sold out to the coal interests, and 
that he's totally decided to ignore any climate change effects. Yes, 
renewables are growing, but doesn't this signal that Obama has cashed 
it in and decided that fossil fuels are our future? Even if he has 
the intent of supporting stronger EPA regulations, doesn't this put 
all the more pressure on the EPA to somehow capitulate to, or at 
least accommodate, coal interests?

The Sierra Club's response to this is at 
<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=200421.0>http://action.sierraclub.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=200421.0. 
A reasonable response, but I see it as entirely too tepid in the face 
of this news. I don't see any reference to things like the Harvard 
study and the huge health costs that this will produce (at a time 
when Obama wants health care reforms and costs to go down), and the 
massive environmental damages, especially from climate change, that 
this will practically guarantee.

It seems apparent that economic interests have trumped environmental 
ones, and the way the coal industry won was to persuade enough people 
that coal is the lowest cost option and necessary to our economic 
well being. By the time we include health costs, direct environmental 
damage, climate change damages, subsidies, and tax write-offs, is it 
really? While I don't disagree with the content of the press release, 
I don't see how this cuts it in the face of this decision. Nor does 
Grist apparently. We also had the Gulf oil disaster and now they're 
issuing new drilling permits in the Gulf.

Am I reading too much into this that we need to make strong enough 
economic (or other) arguments to dissuade people that coal is in our 
economic and societal best interests? Do we need other tactics or 
stronger approaches or responses? Or are we just packing it in, 
congratulating ourselves on the battles we win while we're losing the 
war?

Don

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp







- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
 http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp








--============_-911015660==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 } --></style><title>Packing it in?</title></head><body>
<div >http://www.grist.org/article/2011-03-23-obama-administration-announc<span ></span>es-massive-coal-mining-expansion.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Is it just me, or shouldn't this have sounded much more of an
alarm? This looks to me like Obama has sold out to the coal interests,
and that he's totally decided to ignore any climate change effects.
Yes, renewables are growing, but doesn't this signal that Obama has
cashed it in and decided that fossil fuels are our future? Even if he
has the intent of supporting stronger EPA regulations, doesn't this
put all the more pressure on the EPA to somehow capitulate to, or at
least accommodate, coal interests?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>The Sierra Club's response to this is at <a href="http://action.sierraclub.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=200421.0" >http://action.sierraclub.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=200421.0</a>. A
reasonable response, but I see it as entirely too tepid in the face of
this news. I don't see any reference to things like the Harvard study
and the huge health costs that this will produce (at a time when Obama
wants health care reforms and costs to go down), and the massive
environmental damages, especially from climate change, that this will
practically guarantee.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>It seems apparent that economic interests have trumped
environmental ones, and the way the coal industry won was to persuade
enough people that coal is the lowest cost option and necessary to our
economic well being. By the time we include health costs, direct
environmental damage, climate change damages, subsidies, and tax
write-offs, is it really? While I don't disagree with the content of
the press release, I don't see how this cuts it in the face of this
decision. Nor does Grist apparently. We also had the Gulf oil disaster
and now they're issuing new drilling permits in the Gulf.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Am I reading too much into this that we need to make strong
enough economic (or other) arguments to dissuade people that coal is
in our economic and societal best interests? Do we need other tactics
or stronger approaches or responses? Or are we just packing it in,
congratulating ourselves on the battles we win while we're losing the
war?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Don</div>
</body>
</html>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
 http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp

--============_-911015660==_ma============--