shawnbuddy
Member
Edit: Oop, my "to" ended up in the wrong place in the title. Sorry.
As someone from Appalachia it has seemed to me for a long time that the only thing that could save coal in this region is a fat government subsidy package. Well, West Virginia Governor Jim Justice (the "Democrat" who recently switched parties at a Trump rally) is not above suggesting that. He's cast it as a national security issue and says Trump is intrigued.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...said-to-be-really-interested-in-coal-payments
A more in depth but paywalled Washington Post article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...d-security-initiative/?utm_term=.cfc50e1db563
As a resident of the area I guess it COULD work but I don't know if it should. Even Justice admits that coal's decline is inevitable. We should be preparing for it now instead of putting it on life support. And the homeland security argument is just hyperbolic FUD.
As someone from Appalachia it has seemed to me for a long time that the only thing that could save coal in this region is a fat government subsidy package. Well, West Virginia Governor Jim Justice (the "Democrat" who recently switched parties at a Trump rally) is not above suggesting that. He's cast it as a national security issue and says Trump is intrigued.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...said-to-be-really-interested-in-coal-payments
Justice, a coal and real estate mogul elected governor last year as a Democrat, announced at a West Virginia rally alongside President Trump last week that hes becoming a Republican. Justice has recently spent a goodly amount of time" meeting one-on-one with Trump and has liked the feedback to his pro-coal proposal. The plan calls for the Department of Homeland Security to send $15 to eastern U.S. utilities for every ton of Appalachia coal they burn.
Hes really interested. He likes the idea, Justice said in a phone interview on Wednesday when asked about Trumps reaction. Naturally, hes trying to vet the whole process. Its a complicated idea.
In Justices eyes, the coal payments will be necessary because Trumps moves to roll back regulations on the Appalachian coal industry wont be enough to preserve it. The Appalachian coal sector has been shrinking for years as companies are forced to spend more money to access harder-to-reach seams of the fossil fuel. Meanwhile, competitors in regions including the Illinois Basin and Powder River Basin of Wyoming and Montana have much thicker coal seams that are cheaper to get to.
Critics say such a proposal would be expensive and misguided. U.S. power plants burned at least 110 million short tons of Appalachian coal in 2016, according to Andrew Cosgrove, an analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence. A payment of $15 for each of those tons would cost at least $1.65 billion.
At the heart of his pitch, Justice argues that the country is becoming too reliant on natural gas for power and its not enough to supplement that with coal from the Midwest and West.
Justice rejects the notion that his plan amounts to a "bailout" or "subsidy" for Appalachian coal. Rather, its a matter of national security, he said, because terrorists could easily blow up important gas pipelines or derail freight trains shipping coal to the east, leaving large swaths of the country lacking power-plant fuel.
Can you imagine what would happen if we lost the power in the east for a month, or two months, or three months? Justice said. It would be like a nuclear blast went off. You would lose hundreds of thousands of people. It would be just absolute chaos beyond belief.
A more in depth but paywalled Washington Post article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...d-security-initiative/?utm_term=.cfc50e1db563
As a resident of the area I guess it COULD work but I don't know if it should. Even Justice admits that coal's decline is inevitable. We should be preparing for it now instead of putting it on life support. And the homeland security argument is just hyperbolic FUD.