The paradox at hand Over 2.3 million people live in the 20 parishes located in Louisiana’s Coastal Zone. According to the most recent National Coastal Population Report, a collaboration between the U.S. Census Bureau and NOAA, the rate of population increase in coastal Louisiana has doubled since 2010. Unfortunately, coastal land is disappearing as the population grows. A football field of wetlands disappears every 100 minutes (USGS). Restoration projects aim to preserve and rebuild the state’s beautiful wetlands, which provide ...

Read The Full Story

The post Understanding Social Vulnerability in Your Community appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

RT @dickmunson: FirstEnergy Solutions downgraded on bankruptcy expectation, FE parent seen as stable s.cleveland.com/KPn9MpW

The House has already passed this dangerous bundle of bills--but with your help, we can stop them in the Senate. Regional. C4.

The House has already passed this dangerous bundle of bills--but with your help, we can stop them in the Senate. Regional. C4.

The House has already passed this dangerous bundle of bills--but with your help, we can stop them in the Senate. Regional. C4.

By Lauren Navarro

The California State Assembly faces an enormous opportunity when they come back from summer recess today: to drive the state towards 100 percent clean energy by 2045.

It comes in the form of SB 100, a bill that would accelerate the state’s current Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirement from 50 percent to 60 percent by 2030 and set a statewide policy to get to 100 percent clean energy by 2045. In the wake of recent legislation to extend a cap and trade system for greenhouse gases, this effort will help us to reduce climate and air pollution from the electricity sector.

California is already ahead of schedule in reaching its goal of 50 percent renewables by 2030. In fact, according to the California Public Utilities Commission, utilities are already on contract for an average of 43 percent renewable energy by 2020 – a huge accomplishment worthy of applause.

The difficulty is that once these targets are met, we anticipate clean energy development and installation will slow, meaning fewer clean energy jobs and less investment in California. We need SB 100’s ambitious goal of 100 percent renewables to keep up economic growth.

Clean energy’s economic benefits

Right now, the RPS is responsible for the following economic benefits:

• Jobs: Solar employs over 100,000 people in the state and wind directly employs up to 4,000 people from development and installation. Solar alone added almost 25,000 jobs in California in 2016.
• More jobs: Once you include direct, indirect, and induced jobs, solar employs nearly 250,000 Californians. These jobs paid more than $16 billion in salaries, wages, and benefits and produced $47.9 billion in total economic activity for California in 2016.
• Investment: California is home to 12 wind manufacturing facilities with $12.5 billion in total capital investment.
• Local benefits: The RPS has created 29,000 direct jobs and $12 billion total economic activity in the Inland Empire and 31,000 direct jobs and $11.6 billion in total economic activity in the San Joaquin Valley.

It’s clear the RPS supports clean energy businesses, jobs, and investment in California. We don’t want this development to slow down, especially when clean energy technologies are already cost competitive with their fossil fuel counterparts and wind and solar costs are dropping dramatically, seemingly every day. What’s more, Californian’s bills are actually lower than those in most other states – meaning, although the price per unit of electricity may be higher, we pay less for electricity overall per month.

California can prove a clean energy economy is a strong economy with SB 100
Click To Tweet

Using all our clean energy tools

At the same time, we need to think about how a variety of clean technologies will work together, especially at higher levels of renewables on the grid. This is why SB 100 includes two critical components:

1. It broadens the technologies that qualify as “renewables” to include “zero-carbon” resources – a larger array that includes more options like existing large hydropower.
2. It requires the state agencies in charge of implementation to report back to the legislature every two years on progress and potential issues.

In addition to these steps, it is important that the agencies and the legislature take into account other tools that complement renewables on the grid, while creating jobs and new business opportunities. For example, we should continue to promote demand response, large and small scale energy storage, and smart electric vehicle charging. The California Public Utilities Commission should ensure the utilities develop balanced portfolios of diverse clean technologies like these during their planning and resource procurement processes.

Aiming for 100 percent renewables will continue to show the nation and the world what a strong, clean economy looks like.

Finally, our electric grid operator needs to be able to more easily trade clean energy resources across the Western U.S. when we produce more power than we need. Creating a larger market will help ensure the extra electricity doesn’t go to waste and California benefits from it economically, while helping other states run on more renewable electricity.

As California’s Assembly members return to Sacramento this week and start the hard work of finishing out this legislative session, we urge them to take action on SB 100 to continue the state’s clean energy leadership. Aiming for 100 percent renewables will continue to show the nation and the world what a strong, clean economy looks like.

The California State Assembly faces an enormous opportunity when they come back from summer recess today: to drive the state towards 100 percent clean energy by 2045. It comes in the form of SB 100, a bill that would accelerate the state’s current Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirement from 50 percent to 60 percent by […]

The California State Assembly faces an enormous opportunity when they come back from summer recess today: to drive the state towards 100 percent clean energy by 2045. It comes in the form of SB 100, a bill that would accelerate the state’s current Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirement from 50 percent to 60 percent by […]

By Lauren Navarro

The California State Assembly faces an enormous opportunity when they come back from summer recess today: to drive the state towards 100 percent clean energy by 2045.

It comes in the form of SB 100, a bill that would accelerate the state’s current Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirement from 50 percent to 60 percent by 2030 and set a statewide policy to get to 100 percent clean energy by 2045. In the wake of recent legislation to extend a cap and trade system for greenhouse gases, this effort will help us to reduce climate and air pollution from the electricity sector.

California is already ahead of schedule in reaching its goal of 50 percent renewables by 2030. In fact, according to the California Public Utilities Commission, utilities are already on contract for an average of 43 percent renewable energy by 2020 – a huge accomplishment worthy of applause.

The difficulty is that once these targets are met, we anticipate clean energy development and installation will slow, meaning fewer clean energy jobs and less investment in California. We need SB 100’s ambitious goal of 100 percent renewables to keep up economic growth.

Clean energy’s economic benefits

Right now, the RPS is responsible for the following economic benefits:

• Jobs: Solar employs over 100,000 people in the state and wind directly employs up to 4,000 people from development and installation. Solar alone added almost 25,000 jobs in California in 2016.
• More jobs: Once you include direct, indirect, and induced jobs, solar employs nearly 250,000 Californians. These jobs paid more than $16 billion in salaries, wages, and benefits and produced $47.9 billion in total economic activity for California in 2016.
• Investment: California is home to 12 wind manufacturing facilities with $12.5 billion in total capital investment.
• Local benefits: The RPS has created 29,000 direct jobs and $12 billion total economic activity in the Inland Empire and 31,000 direct jobs and $11.6 billion in total economic activity in the San Joaquin Valley.

It’s clear the RPS supports clean energy businesses, jobs, and investment in California. We don’t want this development to slow down, especially when clean energy technologies are already cost competitive with their fossil fuel counterparts and wind and solar costs are dropping dramatically, seemingly every day. What’s more, Californian’s bills are actually lower than those in most other states – meaning, although the price per unit of electricity may be higher, we pay less for electricity overall per month.

California can prove a clean energy economy is a strong economy with SB 100
Click To Tweet

Using all our clean energy tools

At the same time, we need to think about how a variety of clean technologies will work together, especially at higher levels of renewables on the grid. This is why SB 100 includes two critical components:

1. It broadens the technologies that qualify as “renewables” to include “zero-carbon” resources – a larger array that includes more options like existing large hydropower.
2. It requires the state agencies in charge of implementation to report back to the legislature every two years on progress and potential issues.

In addition to these steps, it is important that the agencies and the legislature take into account other tools that complement renewables on the grid, while creating jobs and new business opportunities. For example, we should continue to promote demand response, large and small scale energy storage, and smart electric vehicle charging. The California Public Utilities Commission should ensure the utilities develop balanced portfolios of diverse clean technologies like these during their planning and resource procurement processes.

Aiming for 100 percent renewables will continue to show the nation and the world what a strong, clean economy looks like.

Finally, our electric grid operator needs to be able to more easily trade clean energy resources across the Western U.S. when we produce more power than we need. Creating a larger market will help ensure the extra electricity doesn’t go to waste and California benefits from it economically, while helping other states run on more renewable electricity.

As California’s Assembly members return to Sacramento this week and start the hard work of finishing out this legislative session, we urge them to take action on SB 100 to continue the state’s clean energy leadership. Aiming for 100 percent renewables will continue to show the nation and the world what a strong, clean economy looks like.

By Lauren Navarro

The California State Assembly faces an enormous opportunity when they come back from summer recess today: to drive the state towards 100 percent clean energy by 2045.

It comes in the form of SB 100, a bill that would accelerate the state’s current Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirement from 50 percent to 60 percent by 2030 and set a statewide policy to get to 100 percent clean energy by 2045. In the wake of recent legislation to extend a cap and trade system for greenhouse gases, this effort will help us to reduce climate and air pollution from the electricity sector.

California is already ahead of schedule in reaching its goal of 50 percent renewables by 2030. In fact, according to the California Public Utilities Commission, utilities are already on contract for an average of 43 percent renewable energy by 2020 – a huge accomplishment worthy of applause.

The difficulty is that once these targets are met, we anticipate clean energy development and installation will slow, meaning fewer clean energy jobs and less investment in California. We need SB 100’s ambitious goal of 100 percent renewables to keep up economic growth.

Clean energy’s economic benefits

Right now, the RPS is responsible for the following economic benefits:

• Jobs: Solar employs over 100,000 people in the state and wind directly employs up to 4,000 people from development and installation. Solar alone added almost 25,000 jobs in California in 2016.
• More jobs: Once you include direct, indirect, and induced jobs, solar employs nearly 250,000 Californians. These jobs paid more than $16 billion in salaries, wages, and benefits and produced $47.9 billion in total economic activity for California in 2016.
• Investment: California is home to 12 wind manufacturing facilities with $12.5 billion in total capital investment.
• Local benefits: The RPS has created 29,000 direct jobs and $12 billion total economic activity in the Inland Empire and 31,000 direct jobs and $11.6 billion in total economic activity in the San Joaquin Valley.

It’s clear the RPS supports clean energy businesses, jobs, and investment in California. We don’t want this development to slow down, especially when clean energy technologies are already cost competitive with their fossil fuel counterparts and wind and solar costs are dropping dramatically, seemingly every day. What’s more, Californian’s bills are actually lower than those in most other states – meaning, although the price per unit of electricity may be higher, we pay less for electricity overall per month.

California can prove a clean energy economy is a strong economy with SB 100
Click To Tweet

Using all our clean energy tools

At the same time, we need to think about how a variety of clean technologies will work together, especially at higher levels of renewables on the grid. This is why SB 100 includes two critical components:

1. It broadens the technologies that qualify as “renewables” to include “zero-carbon” resources – a larger array that includes more options like existing large hydropower.
2. It requires the state agencies in charge of implementation to report back to the legislature every two years on progress and potential issues.

In addition to these steps, it is important that the agencies and the legislature take into account other tools that complement renewables on the grid, while creating jobs and new business opportunities. For example, we should continue to promote demand response, large and small scale energy storage, and smart electric vehicle charging. The California Public Utilities Commission should ensure the utilities develop balanced portfolios of diverse clean technologies like these during their planning and resource procurement processes.

Aiming for 100 percent renewables will continue to show the nation and the world what a strong, clean economy looks like.

Finally, our electric grid operator needs to be able to more easily trade clean energy resources across the Western U.S. when we produce more power than we need. Creating a larger market will help ensure the extra electricity doesn’t go to waste and California benefits from it economically, while helping other states run on more renewable electricity.

As California’s Assembly members return to Sacramento this week and start the hard work of finishing out this legislative session, we urge them to take action on SB 100 to continue the state’s clean energy leadership. Aiming for 100 percent renewables will continue to show the nation and the world what a strong, clean economy looks like.

The California State Assembly faces an enormous opportunity when they come back from summer recess today: to drive the state towards 100 percent clean energy by 2045. It comes in the form of SB 100, a bill that would accelerate the state’s current Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirement from 50 percent to 60 percent by […]

Written by Dominique Browning

Today, in the midst of the political and cultural turmoil sweeping this country, we watched as the moon eclipsed the sun: one of those breathtaking moments of terrifying beauty, courtesy of the fierce, gorgeous natural world in which we build our civilizations.

Last night, I spoke to my youngest sister, a teacher, about how she was going to protect the eyes of her third and fourth-graders. My sister lives in Lexington, Kentucky. Our conversation soon drifted into her anxiety about the announcement that racist, anti-Semitic, and heavily armed marchers were planning to stage a large protest in Lexington soon. Marchers who are determined to tear down our civilization.

How was she going to protect the eyes—and hearts and minds—of her school children against such hatred and fury?

Naturally, my thoughts turn to what we witnessed in Charlottesville, Virginia—and in the aftermath. A mother who will mourn, for the rest of her days, the deliberate murder of her beloved, principled, brave daughter, by a young American terrorist who used his car as a weapon. A president who says there are some very fine people among the Nazis and the White Supremacists—and no difference between those who come heavily armed to vanquish Jews and blacks, and those who resist them. Republican Senators who have buried their moral compasses in the dark, dusty closets of polling places. They are shoring up their base: playing to people who blame others for their woes, the blacks, the Jews. The Other.

We have a base, too. Our movement of over a million moms, narrowly speaking, uniting to protect our right to a livable planet. All of you. But more broadly: the base that is the majority of  people in this country, people whose families arrived from elsewhere around the globe, people who cherish peace and freedom and a right to pursue their dreams. People who face the world with kindness and compassion, not anger and hatred.

Our base, a base built on love and cherishment, will win. We will do whatever we have to do, and whatever we can do, to make sure that we don’t let our country descend for much longer into a place where white men can march the streets carrying Nazi banners, and inciting violence. Let’s not get confused here: Those marches aren’t about freedom of speech, which does not require machine guns. They are about declaring civil war.

I never thought I would live to see this. My mother, half of whose family was murdered at Auschwitz, was certain that she would live to see this, that the world would never be safe. She was right. That is why we can never forget. And we can never appease.

I hope that what we saw, out of Washington, D.C.,  was a brief moment of the total eclipse of our values, a fiery fringe burning on.

It is up to us to remember that the sun does not disappear. We should not panic. But this eclipse left me with a deep, vivid, and sad impression: we have much more work to do than we ever realized.

TELL CONGRESS: NOBODY VOTED TO MAKE AMERICA DIRTY AGAIN

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

By Priya Sundareshan

Jeremy Sterk / istockphoto

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is proud to sponsor a panel this week at the annual meeting of the American Fisheries Society (AFS) – the nation’s preeminent organization advancing fisheries science – that examines the role of science in federal fisheries management. Ten years ago, Congress gave science a stronger role in fisheries management. Today, overfishing has dropped significantly in U.S. waters and we have seen a number of fish stocks successfully rebuilt. Coincidence? Unlikely.

This week’s panel will examine what part the strong scientific provisions of the law have played in rebuilding fisheries, new scientific innovations needed to address remaining challenges, and whether any additional changes to the law could further strengthen management success.

For context, the federal statute that governs ocean fisheries – the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) – was first passed in 1976 and last reauthorized in 2007. The statute delegates responsibility for fishery management to regional councils and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The 2007 amendments mandated that managers impose catch limits based on the advice of science and statistical committees (SSCs), and implement measures to ensure accountability with those limits while accounting for scientific uncertainty.

We believe placing science at the root of fishery management decisions has resulted in the successful rebuilding of many fisheries. As of June 2017, NMFS has declared 43 fisheries rebuilt from a previously overfished status, 36 of which have been declared rebuilt since 2007.  Yet some policymakers question the validity of the science on which some decisions are based, including how scientists prioritize data and how decision makers respond to scientific input.

This session, Congress is showing a growing interest in another MSA reauthorization effort, perhaps because ten years have now passed since the last reauthorization and the pattern (although not a requirement) has been to reauthorize the MSA every ten years. In the House, several bills have already been introduced to amend and reauthorize the MSA. And in the Senate a hearing to begin the MSA reauthorization process was recently conducted in the Senate Commerce Committee.

Although some of the introduced bills take a constructive look at the role of science in the fishery management process and seek to improve fisheries data collection, there is real concern that MSA reauthorization could weaken the vital role science plays in U.S. fisheries management. In particular, the House majority’s reauthorization proposal, H.R. 200, contains provisions that would interfere in the scientific process, specifying which sources of data scientists should use instead of letting scientists use the scientific information they deem most reliable.

Under these circumstances, the AFS symposium will examine how fisheries management has changed since the 2007 MSA amendments and whether adjustments should be made. The symposium will include presentations by scientists, council members, and fishermen on topics such as the effectiveness of fish stock rebuilding plans and how to manage fisheries where data is limited.

We look forward to hearing how science has affected fishery management work in their experience, and to sharing lessons learned that can inform MSA legislation while ensuring that science maintains its critical role in fisheries management.

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is proud to sponsor a panel this week at the annual meeting of the American Fisheries Society (AFS) – the nation’s preeminent organization advancing fisheries science – that examines the role of science in federal fisheries management. Ten years ago, Congress gave science a stronger role in fisheries management. Today, overfishing […]

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is proud to sponsor a panel this week at the annual meeting of the American Fisheries Society (AFS) – the nation’s preeminent organization advancing fisheries science – that examines the role of science in federal fisheries management. Ten years ago, Congress gave science a stronger role in fisheries management. Today, overfishing […]

West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice just pitched a coal boondoggle to President Donald Trump. And boy oh boy, it’s a doozy. Justice, who made news recently for announcing at a Trump rally that he was switching from the Democratic to the Republican party, is a billionaire climate denier who owns a host of companies, including […]

By Jim Marston

West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice just pitched a coal boondoggle to President Donald Trump. And boy oh boy, it’s a doozy.

Justice, who made news recently for announcing at a Trump rally that he was switching from the Democratic to the Republican party, is a billionaire climate denier who owns a host of companies, including a golf course and casino and who put his children in charge of his empire while he is governor. Sound familiar?

He also owns several coal mines and was delinquent on $2 million in mine safety violations until a 2014 story by National Public Radio prompted him to start paying his fines.

So let’s have a closer look at the governor’s pitch. Turns out, it’s a really lousy deal for American taxpayers and coal workers alike – while doing nothing for energy security.

A $4.5-billion bill for American taxpayers

Justice wants Trump to play favorites not just with coal, but with coal mined specifically in Appalachia, which includes coal-heavy states such as West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and Pennsylvania. Eastern power companies would get a federal subsidy of $15 per ton of Appalachian coal they purchase to generate electricity.

Here's why putting more tax dollars behind coal is such a wasteful proposition
Click To Tweet

Doing so would cost taxpayers as much as $4.5 billion per year and benefit only the coal companies in Justice’s region. The West Virginia governor claims this is important because, in his view, the decline of Appalachian coal poses a national security threat – meaning a bomb could take out natural gas plants or trains carrying coal from Western states.

National security aside, let’s imagine for a minute what $4.5 billion could do for Appalachia if we spent it to really help this struggling region.

Lost opportunity: workers need retraining

Since he cares about jobs, Trump could take half of the $4.5 billion to create a life-changing job training program in Appalachia to retrain coal industry workers for 21st century jobs in the solar or energy efficiency fields, for example. The other half could pay each worker $65,000 a year while they’re in training.

Though unique, this approach puts hardworking Americans first while investing in our economy.

To put things in perspective, $4.5 billion annually is so much money it equals more than $130,000 a year for each and every coal employee in northern and central Appalachia, The Washington Post has reported.

Instead, Gov. Justice wants all of that money to prop up eastern coal which, even with the $15 per ton subsidy, would still be three times as expensive as coal from Wyoming’s Powder River.

Subsidies can’t help coal survive

Coal and other fossil fuels helped build out the U.S. energy infrastructure a century ago. But today, any tax break or direct subsidy to the coal industry is little more than a government handout to an industry that’s been steadily declining since the 1980s.

Coal has let our country down many times; does the 2013 “polar vortex” ring a bell?

In an effort to sidestep coal’s obvious economic problem, the industry – and even the new interim chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission who is a Kentucky native – have been touting coal as the fuel of choice for energy security and grid reliability. Such talking points ignore the fact that more coal will not improve the reliability of the electric grid.

Coal has let our country down many times; does the 2013 “polar vortex” ring a bell? There’s a robust body of research on grid reliability backing up this point, especially in recent years with renewable energy and natural gas loosening coal’s once-dominant stranglehold on the market.

The U.S. Department of Energy’s own draft study shows that more clean energy, and less coal, makes America’s electricity system more affordable and reliable.

Are we safer with coal? Answer is no.

But you recall that Gov. Justice is also pushing the national security angle, another argument we’ve heard from the coal industry since Trump’s inauguration.

It goes like this: The loss of an easy source of power such as coal would render the grid more susceptible to a terror attack. Energy Secretary Rick Perry and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt have both implied that coal will ease this threat.

Of course, if terrorists want to blow up a natural gas plant or take out a coal train from Wyoming they could just as easily blow up a coal plant.

On the contrary, a more diverse and distributed energy system that’s less reliant on any one source in one location, such as wind and solar, is a better defense against such a fear-mongering hypothetical.

We would applaud the president’s efforts were he indeed willing to invest in the economic revitalization of areas as hard-hit as Appalachia. But handing billions to a few coal mine billionaires as a result of a false national security claim won’t accomplish anything for working Americans or taxpayers.

This post originally appeared on our Voices blog.

By Jim Marston

West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice just pitched a coal boondoggle to President Donald Trump. And boy oh boy, it’s a doozy.

Justice, who made news recently for announcing at a Trump rally that he was switching from the Democratic to the Republican party, is a billionaire climate denier who owns a host of companies, including a golf course and casino and who put his children in charge of his empire while he is governor. Sound familiar?

He also owns several coal mines and was delinquent on $2 million in mine safety violations until a 2014 story by National Public Radio prompted him to start paying his fines.

So let’s have a closer look at the governor’s pitch. Turns out, it’s a really lousy deal for American taxpayers and coal workers alike – while doing nothing for energy security.

A $4.5-billion bill for American taxpayers

Justice wants Trump to play favorites not just with coal, but with coal mined specifically in Appalachia, which includes coal-heavy states such as West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and Pennsylvania. Eastern power companies would get a federal subsidy of $15 per ton of Appalachian coal they purchase to generate electricity.

Here's why putting more tax dollars behind coal is such a wasteful proposition
Click To Tweet

Doing so would cost taxpayers as much as $4.5 billion per year and benefit only the coal companies in Justice’s region. The West Virginia governor claims this is important because, in his view, the decline of Appalachian coal poses a national security threat – meaning a bomb could take out natural gas plants or trains carrying coal from Western states.

National security aside, let’s imagine for a minute what $4.5 billion could do for Appalachia if we spent it to really help this struggling region.

Lost opportunity: workers need retraining

Since he cares about jobs, Trump could take half of the $4.5 billion to create a life-changing job training program in Appalachia to retrain coal industry workers for 21st century jobs in the solar or energy efficiency fields, for example. The other half could pay each worker $65,000 a year while they’re in training.

Though unique, this approach puts hardworking Americans first while investing in our economy.

To put things in perspective, $4.5 billion annually is so much money it equals more than $130,000 a year for each and every coal employee in northern and central Appalachia, The Washington Post has reported.

Instead, Gov. Justice wants all of that money to prop up eastern coal which, even with the $15 per ton subsidy, would still be three times as expensive as coal from Wyoming’s Powder River.

Subsidies can’t help coal survive

Coal and other fossil fuels helped build out the U.S. energy infrastructure a century ago. But today, any tax break or direct subsidy to the coal industry is little more than a government handout to an industry that’s been steadily declining since the 1980s.

Coal has let our country down many times; does the 2013 “polar vortex” ring a bell?

In an effort to sidestep coal’s obvious economic problem, the industry – and even the new interim chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission who is a Kentucky native – have been touting coal as the fuel of choice for energy security and grid reliability. Such talking points ignore the fact that more coal will not improve the reliability of the electric grid.

Coal has let our country down many times; does the 2013 “polar vortex” ring a bell? There’s a robust body of research on grid reliability backing up this point, especially in recent years with renewable energy and natural gas loosening coal’s once-dominant stranglehold on the market.

The U.S. Department of Energy’s own draft study shows that more clean energy, and less coal, makes America’s electricity system more affordable and reliable.

Are we safer with coal? Answer is no.

But you recall that Gov. Justice is also pushing the national security angle, another argument we’ve heard from the coal industry since Trump’s inauguration.

It goes like this: The loss of an easy source of power such as coal would render the grid more susceptible to a terror attack. Energy Secretary Rick Perry and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt have both implied that coal will ease this threat.

Of course, if terrorists want to blow up a natural gas plant or take out a coal train from Wyoming they could just as easily blow up a coal plant.

On the contrary, a more diverse and distributed energy system that’s less reliant on any one source in one location, such as wind and solar, is a better defense against such a fear-mongering hypothetical.

We would applaud the president’s efforts were he indeed willing to invest in the economic revitalization of areas as hard-hit as Appalachia. But handing billions to a few coal mine billionaires as a result of a false national security claim won’t accomplish anything for working Americans or taxpayers.

This post originally appeared on our Voices blog.

By Jim Marston

West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice just pitched a coal boondoggle to President Donald Trump. And boy oh boy, it’s a doozy.

Justice, who made news recently for announcing at a Trump rally that he was switching from the Democratic to the Republican party, is a billionaire climate denier who owns a host of companies, including a golf course and casino and who put his children in charge of his empire while he is governor. Sound familiar?

He also owns several coal mines and was delinquent on $2 million in mine safety violations until a 2014 story by National Public Radio prompted him to start paying his fines.

So let’s have a closer look at the governor’s pitch. Turns out, it’s a really lousy deal for American taxpayers and coal workers alike – while doing nothing for energy security.

A $4.5-billion bill for American taxpayers

Justice wants Trump to play favorites not just with coal, but with coal mined specifically in Appalachia, which includes coal-heavy states such as West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and Pennsylvania. Eastern power companies would get a federal subsidy of $15 per ton of Appalachian coal they purchase to generate electricity.

Here's why putting more tax dollars behind coal is such a wasteful proposition
Click To Tweet

Doing so would cost taxpayers as much as $4.5 billion per year and benefit only the coal companies in Justice’s region. The West Virginia governor claims this is important because, in his view, the decline of Appalachian coal poses a national security threat – meaning a bomb could take out natural gas plants or trains carrying coal from Western states.

National security aside, let’s imagine for a minute what $4.5 billion could do for Appalachia if we spent it to really help this struggling region.

Lost opportunity: workers need retraining

Since he cares about jobs, Trump could take half of the $4.5 billion to create a life-changing job training program in Appalachia to retrain coal industry workers for 21st century jobs in the solar or energy efficiency fields, for example. The other half could pay each worker $65,000 a year while they’re in training.

Though unique, this approach puts hardworking Americans first while investing in our economy.

To put things in perspective, $4.5 billion annually is so much money it equals more than $130,000 a year for each and every coal employee in northern and central Appalachia, The Washington Post has reported.

Instead, Gov. Justice wants all of that money to prop up eastern coal which, even with the $15 per ton subsidy, would still be three times as expensive as coal from Wyoming’s Powder River.

Subsidies can’t help coal survive

Coal and other fossil fuels helped build out the U.S. energy infrastructure a century ago. But today, any tax break or direct subsidy to the coal industry is little more than a government handout to an industry that’s been steadily declining since the 1980s.

Coal has let our country down many times; does the 2013 “polar vortex” ring a bell?

In an effort to sidestep coal’s obvious economic problem, the industry – and even the new interim chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission who is a Kentucky native – have been touting coal as the fuel of choice for energy security and grid reliability. Such talking points ignore the fact that more coal will not improve the reliability of the electric grid.

Coal has let our country down many times; does the 2013 “polar vortex” ring a bell? There’s a robust body of research on grid reliability backing up this point, especially in recent years with renewable energy and natural gas loosening coal’s once-dominant stranglehold on the market.

The U.S. Department of Energy’s own draft study shows that more clean energy, and less coal, makes America’s electricity system more affordable and reliable.

Are we safer with coal? Answer is no.

But you recall that Gov. Justice is also pushing the national security angle, another argument we’ve heard from the coal industry since Trump’s inauguration.

It goes like this: The loss of an easy source of power such as coal would render the grid more susceptible to a terror attack. Energy Secretary Rick Perry and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt have both implied that coal will ease this threat.

Of course, if terrorists want to blow up a natural gas plant or take out a coal train from Wyoming they could just as easily blow up a coal plant.

On the contrary, a more diverse and distributed energy system that’s less reliant on any one source in one location, such as wind and solar, is a better defense against such a fear-mongering hypothetical.

We would applaud the president’s efforts were he indeed willing to invest in the economic revitalization of areas as hard-hit as Appalachia. But handing billions to a few coal mine billionaires as a result of a false national security claim won’t accomplish anything for working Americans or taxpayers.

This post originally appeared on our Voices blog.