Students protest against coal
Write a letter to the editor
Around 3 o’clock this afternoon, the UVA Corner’s mid-afternoon scene was enlivened by an anti-coal protest organized by members of the Student Environmental Action. About fifteen University of Virginia students wore yellow surgical masks and held up cardboard signs painted with slogans like, “Bank of America funds dirty coal,” “Bank of America killing communities,” “coal kills,” “no coal is clean coal,” “death to coal,” and, “coal sucks.” The students chanted, “no more coal,” as they marched past Bank of America towards Mellow Mushroom and back again. They also passed out fliers detailing Bank of America’s alleged part in financing coal-fired power plants and coal companies. The local branch declined to comment and efforts to reach the bank’s headquarters were unsuccessful.
Write a letter to the editor
Carl Smith was one of the biggest coal operators/brokers in the country. They protestors should show their outrage by not going to anymore football games. Better yet, they ought to protest at football games where people would take them seriously. When natural gas goes out of vouge, they could continue to protest: Smith had considerable reserves in WV and Oklahoma.
Coal is here to stay until we find something cheaper and cleaner than oil… or just cheaper. And, to one degree or another, the wealth that coal built can be found in just about any community on the East Coast.
Why don’t they stop drinking starbucks… do you realize how much fuel is used shipping BEANS from south america????
Perhaps UVA should shut off the electricity since it is made with coal power. Then when they couldn’t spend the afternoon on Facebook they would change there tune.
Liberal girls are easy lays…
They love their e-gadgets and laptops but not the dirty coal…sigh, I guess clean nuclear is the answer? So long as they don’t bury the spent reactor fuel under TJ’s statue I guess. These kids ever think about trying to influence users of energy to conserve or producers of electricity (hello, Dominion Power?) to invest in renewable sources? I read the flyer, no mention of methane gas from landfills (almost free) or greater use of windpower (some wind farms are built on abandoned stripped mined mountain tops - a little irony for you). Send the kids back to class and get them off The Corner.
Let this be a rewarding learning experience for them so that they may develop a life-long interest in civic affairs. That’s why they’re in school. I do wish they’d spend some time protesting that nuclear energy thing looming, though.
I forgot to say “Please.”
OK so lets ban coal. Guess what, we would be importing more oil and Liquefied Propane Gas.
Coal can be burned clean. Modern use of coal is clean. Just like modern cars pollute very little compared to cars from 30-40 years ago.
Yikes, if you did more research, you would know that for the last couple of months SEA has been petitioning against Dominion and their proposition of building a new coal plant (which VA doesn’t need) in Wise county. Obviously we can’t tackle every aspect at one time, at talking about methane emissions and wind energy has nothing to do with what the protest was about in the first place. You can’t base all of your assumptions on one protest without knowing the background of the group and their efforts.
The point of the protest was to encourage the company, among others, to explore renewable and cleaner resources so that we DON’T have to be dependent on dirtier nonrenewables to such a great extent.
And Denver, what you said sounds really uninformed to me. It may be less polluting than it was in the past, but that doesn’t make it CLEAN.
Hey everyone, why all the animosity? As a participant in the protest, think it’s rather unfair to make assumptions that the people involved in this are your typical college students who spend their whole lives on facebook, drinking Starbucks and not concerning ourselves with anything outside the UVA sphere- clearly not the case, or we wouldn’t have cared enough to stage a protest (and for what it’s worth, I don’t drink Starbucks, nor does anyone else who took part in the protest as far as I know). I won’t speak for everyone, but not unlike the other protest participants, I try to be eco-conscious in many facets of my life, whether that be in energy consumption, being cognizant of how far food is shipped, trying to change University policy, etc. As a student organization we are involved in many projects on University grounds, most of which involve raising awareness and encouraging energy conservation among students; it’s not as if this protest is all we have ever done. Nor were we suggesting that the Bank of America no longer investing in coal companies would solve all the world’s problems, but raising awareness in any small way helps.
In response to suggestions that we address Dominion Power, we have. We’re involved in a campaign of college campuses across Virginia to collect 10,000 petition signatures against the new coal fired power plant Dominion is planning to build in Wise County, VA. These petitions, which we collected signatures for at the protest, will be presented at the committee hearing which determines whether or not they will get approval for the new plant.
As for comments about nuclear energy or a lack of alternatives to coal, the alternative we suggested is renewable energy- solar and wind. I don’t doubt I’ll get lots of comments about being naive or how I should ‘go back to the classroom,’ but in fact I am an environmental science major and do have background knowledge. These are forms of technology that are constantly being improved, and are, as far as I can see, the only way to a sustainable future that doesn’t rely on dirty, global warming contributing means of energy (much of which must be imported). Take Wise County: 25% the land has been strip mined, and the mountaintop removal method that is now largely implemented instead destroys the land at a much faster rate. With a growing population, growing demand for coal, and a more detrimental means of extraction, should we simply continue on this route until all the land is destroyed, the coal is gone, and the economy of Appalachia crumbles? Why should we not invest in clean, renewable energy now, if we know we will run out of our current, very detrimental energy sources? Yes, the technology could use some improvement, but it is certainly viable now. To a large extent that push towards higher efficiency of wind or solar power won’t occur until companies and consumers take an interest in it. Please note that this response is not intended in any way to provoke anyone or create argument, I am merely trying to clarify and defend my actions, and will say no more on the matter.
and Denver, you also failed to mention the exponential presence of these cars as well as facilities that burn coal as compared to 30-40 years ago, thus making the mitigation of overall pollution much less effective.
Personally, I’m all about shorter commutes, local food, public transportation, conservation and renewable energy. These are all energy reducing choices people can make now and show personal responsbility and create change. I applaud the protestors for one thing - raising the issue up for discussion and putting pressure on big business to address their energy consumption habits (or in the case of Dominion, their choices of energy creation). Dominion gives us about 38% of our energy from nukes, which is cleaner than coal today, but with all the risks and future uncertainties re: contamination. Solar is getting cheaper, but for now is not a viable source to replace coal, just reduce it’s use. And so far as our cars and trucks, well no perfect solution so maybe the only ethical choice today is to carpool if you have to commute a long distance in the near term. Honda’s zero emission car sounds great, but it still takes energy from coal or other to fire up those fuel cells:
http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/?from=fcx.honda.com
Re: Wise County - all great points. It’s a real shame that businesses are given the right by elected governments to spoil our natural resources and harm or eliminate the ability of the individual to live off of or make a living from their own land/community. I think the compass should be pointed at our officials and our system of government, however, and not the businesses (except from a moral standpoint), as they businesses are acting within the law.
Apologies if I’ve pissed anyone off by my tone in this or earlier post!
My (somewhat educated) opinion on solar is that it is very effective on a micro-scale for hot water heating, which can also home heating when heated water is run through a heat exchanger.
Solar photo-voltaic works, but can we really capture enough of the sun’s energy to create a meaningful amount of electricity?
More coal plants are a good thing (again in my somewhat educated opinion) as an alternative to importing more energy. I’m not lost on the fact “student” points out, that our appetite for energy keeps increasing. But, what if our appetite kept increasing without efficiency gains?
More coal plants are a very good thing if they replace older plants. And yes, GOD SPEED to more wind power! But you know what, NIMBY’s come out in full force against that, too. Look at what went on in Highland county. A very sparsely populated area, people came out of every nook and cranny to protest.
It’s my understanding that Germany is far ahead in its use of solar and wind power with current technologies available and the US is far behind.
Denver: the more we invest in greenhouse gas-intensive infrastructure–i.e. building more coal-fired plants–the more expensive switching to clean renewables in the future will be. Additionally, the more we invest in clean energy right now, the cheaper it will get over time. Besides, our foreign energy dependence has nothing to do with coal, it is all about oil. Coal is extremely abundant in the U.S. but it can’t fuel a vehicle. New coal-fired power plants will have no effect on our demand for foreign oil.
Also, I am really saddened to hear the image of students that so many respondents to this article have. I regret that typical college stereotypes have somehow been reinforced, and I urge everyone to take a closer look at what the environmental community at UVA has has attempted to address. I recycle everything I can, I wash dishes in the sink rather than the dishwasher, and I buy local food. And, most importantly, I do not patronize Starbucks.
First, it is incredibly naive to think that stopping the coal plant will stop the burning of coal. the only difference is that the coal will be burned elswhere, probably overseas, which means that not only will it be burned with less stringent emmison requirements, but it will also use millions of barrels of oil to transport it. The world is developing quickly and china and India will need fuel. The real answer IS renewable energy technology. This is what the University should be researching instead of having ribbion cutting ceremonies.
Second, and I know this will piss some off. You do not “destroy the land” when you top a mountain. You simply get the coal out in a more efficent manner (which uses less energy). The land then can be covered with fill dirt and ground cover.
Third, All of the oil, coal and natural gas will be burned, if not by us then by the rest of the world. The owrld needs energy and we cannot stop it no matter how hard we try. All of this crap about doomsday is just that. More people die from the cold then ever die in a heat wave. The crops will thrive in Canada and they will use less fuel for heat. The people around the equator will invest in Geo thermal a/c and survive. The world will adapt.
I support a full blown effort to fund renewwable energy research. I support fuel economy standards. I support local schools to get rid of as many 6 mile to the gallon school buses out there. But I also support the clean burn technology of coal and the power plant. It is needed.
Nobody knows what the world will be using for energy in the future, so get over your arrogant ignorance and discuss the issues more civilly with those that are honestly engaged in learning. Your vague answers are not impressing anyone with your “superior” knowledge. It wasn’t that long ago that everyone thought all homes would be heated with wood forever.
Spent fuelcell- No, stopping one power plant won’t stop coal. But you have to start somewhere.
As far as clean coal goes- no such thing exists. The technology will not be feasible until at least 2020 by most estimates, and at this point is mostly theoretical. Granted, the process prevents sulfur dioxide from being burned and emmitted, but it does not decrease CO2 emmissions- it merely calls for storing the CO2 underground, which has only been done on a small scale so far, and has a slew of potential problems. There are also no regulations on CO2 emissions for it to be “clean coal,” it’s largely a tactic by coal companies.
Secondly, you say mountaintop removal doesn’t destroy the land? Look at these pictures: http://www.ohvec.org/galleries/mountaintop_removal/007/
If this isn’t an example of destroying the land, what is? Yes, they pack some landfill back on when they’re done, but ecosystems are remarkably complex. Bare, lifeless landfill isn’t exactly an adequate substitute for the diverse ecosystem of Appalachia; not from from an environmental, aesthetic, or economic standpoint.
One thing we can certainly agree on, however, is the need for renewables.
I looked at the pictures of the mountain tops. What will it look like in twenty years? Cedar trees will grow almost anywhere. Just look at the rock outcroppings on the Blueridge Parkway.
And why is this picture of the Grand Canyon a “Natioanal Monument”
It looks pretty much the same to me…
http://www.singletracks.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/094-the-grand-canyon-arizona.JPG
I don’t see any similarity aside from the lack of trees. But regardless, the fact that they look the same (according to you) is irrelevent as far as what ecosystem they are part of and what life they can support- particularly because the Grand Canyon was formed by nature over thousands of years, while the mountaintop removal environment was formed by humans over the course of… a few months? Which ecosystems are present in which areas is influenced by innumerable variables including latitude, topography, altitude, temperature, and precipitation, which consequently determine flora and fauna. Southwest Virginia and the Grand Canyon don’t share these factors, thus they have different ecosystems. You could, in theory, make the whole world look the same-desert-like-by destroying and leveling all the natural environment and replacing it with dirt, but that doesn’t make the whole world a desert. It’s the environmental conditions that define this. Organisms that live in particular environments, like Appalachia, have spent the whole history of their species adapting to the environment, so when it is destroyed, they too are destroyed. Not that the environment resulting from mountaintop removal is even remotely similar to that of the Grand Canyon, but if it was, it’s not as if organisms from the Grand Canyon would just pop up at the mountaintop removal sites. True, trees could return eventually, and the ecosystem could, over many years, rebuild itself, but species would be lost in the process (not to mention it would provide the perfect opportunity for invasive species to take over), and the whole ordeal would still be extremely detrimental to the people and the organisms of the area. However, the mountains have been leveled, and the peaks will not simply reappear, so animals that are adapted to live at the higher elevations-which are environments all of their own-will not return. Mind you, we haven’t even addressed all the pollution and toxic sludge created by mountaintop removal which is harmful to the health of people in the area, and makes the environment’s chance of recovery even more slim.
A.J., check out “Fearless Planet” the next time its on TV.
The craters left in the ground where coal is mined can be used as landfills.
Everyone is so short sighted. In about 7 billion years the sun will explode and take the earth with it.
So why don’t we take a long-term perspective. Let’s Party!
Screw the Earth its gonna get blown up eventually. Why be short sighted, 7 billion years goes faster than you think.
So when a volcano blows up and destroys millions of acres that is ok because it was done by nature? Well we are a part of “nature” also.
Besides that what percentage of the mountains are mined? 1/100 of 1%? So what if it displaces some higher elevation plants and animals, It will give the lower altitude plants and animals a chance to flourish.
weather thru floods, hurricanes, cyclones, volcanic erutions, lightning,tsnamis, tidal waves, (with the resulting diseases of malaria etc) does so much more than humans do.
Humans are pissing into a hurricane and pretending we are responsible for it.
Volcanoes–like these other natural disasters you’ve listed–have been occuring for millions of years. Therefore, animals have been experiencing them for millions of years, and some have evolved ways to survive. There is a reason we have the term ‘natural disaster’: because there is in fact a difference between man made chaos and natural chaos. Humans arrived on the scene only recently, evolutionarily speaking, and thus animals are not equippted to deal with the destructive methods we use (since they are different from what has been present in nature since the earth was formed). Without this difference there would be no natural disasters, just ‘disasters.’ Most all humans inherently acknowledge this difference by using the term ‘natural disaster,’ whether they realize it or not. I agree that natural disasters, malaria, etc, can be horrible things that cause a good deal of hardship; but this is not what we are talking about. All the examples you gave were weather systems, aside from volcanic eruptions (which are also caused by environmental conditions out of our control). Mountaintop removal and weather systems are two different issues. Humans do not constitute a weather system, no matter how you slice it. If you find the loss of life due to these factors lamentable, why would you be so against the prevention of more loss of life caused by mountaintop removal? Since you don’t seem to have much sympathy for animals or the environment, keep in mind humans also suffer adverse health effects due to pollution and toxic sludge caused by mountaintop removal, and this can lead to death. Additionally, giving low elevation animals a chance to flourish is absolutely no justification for what is going on, since they were florrishing to begin with without our intereference, and the low elevation land is destroyed as well in this process. The process of having to recover from this certainly don’t allow them to flourish.
Yes, the percentage of land mined worldwide is relatively low (although probably higher than you think), but the problem is that a good deal of mining is localized in several small areas, ie Wise County, which has had 25% of its land mined. The fact that it is all clumped together makes a huge difference, because the life forms of the area have nowhere to run. Not to mention the people who live there.
I don’t think this is relevent to humans ‘pissing into a hurricane-’. If you want you could argue that was the case for climate change, for example (although I’d disagree with you), but this is a cut and dry situation. We ARE blowing up mountains. Companies ADMIT they are using dynamite to blow up mountains. Organisms that were there before CAN’T live there any longer. There IS a measurably larger amount of pollution present after mining. There is no ambiguity in this situation.
Since its already ruined, that would make Wise county a suitable location for a mega-landfill. WE NEED MORE LANDFILLS!
Humans have thrived through their own evolution…we have gotten smarter and used our cumulative knowledge to OVERCOME our NATURAL enemies. Those “enemies” are disease, cold, heat, drought, wild animals etc. Why are we less entitled to exploit our environment than a pack of wolves? How many extinctions of species occurred before man and regardless of mans presence in the area? All of the damage you sight is truly spit in a hurricane when you do the math.
The earth is a better place for 99% of inhabitants due to the progress of man. For every displaced deer in the suburbs there are at least 10 deer living off of the crops planted by farmers. Hunting thins the herds which allows those that do survive to have adequate food sources to carry them through the winter. The earth does not belong to everyone but man, it belongs to everyone including man. It confuses me that those who rail against creationism and profess darwin, feel that all the other species are allowed to enhance their situation, but man has to have his hands tied behind his back. what happened to survival of the fittest.
The earth is a better place with the use of fossil fuels, electricity runs MRI machines and defribulators, coal keeps people warm in chicago and oil keeps the ambulances, tractors and trucks running to feed the poor.
Clearing mountain tops may not be pretty but it sure is nice having lights and heat.
Why don’t we put windmills on all those leveled mountaintops?
2 words: Thermal Depolymerization.
Verbiage for and against coal-fired electricity generation, with computers powered by coal-fired electricity generation, is enough to make the electrons in your brain polarize.
I’m giving coal for Christmas this year. Beats shopping in the malls and saves those black-granulated-orbs from a hot fate in the stoker. Coal: Get um while they’re hot! Well, you know what I mean.
PETA: People for the Ethical Treatment of Atoms
SPCA: Save Precious Coal Annually
I am, for now, neutral on the subject and only make this post for a bit of humor; the subject is both deep and manifold. If you get a laugh great, if not, great! I might be a writer on strike, or I might be an evolved lump of coal; probably more latter than former.
If you toss a lump of coal at me, I will catch coal.
One thing I do have an opinion on with the cheesy jokes aside: Coal miners work their butts off and I appreciate all they do so that my world is illuminated, warm and cozy, so I can surf the Internet in comfort.
I also remember those brave coal miners that have died entombed in the mines that will never enjoy the benefits of their labor, or see their families again.
Which of the student protestors will adopt an orphaned miner’s child when their work is replaced by another form of energy? Seems to me a debate on energy is not really complete without some verbiage about what you are going to do with the people, the little doll carrying girls, the radio-flyer boys, and the families that are nourished by the current paradigm.
I like change, I like solutions, but if you are going to protest something please have the decency to address how the change in the paradigm will affect those suckling on the teat of their lively hood. And how they will transition to something else?
If you don’t think for others, you only think for yourselves!
Free Speech, doesn’t sound like Hollywood pap to me. i am glad you are not bashing the concerned youth and have imparted some of your wisdom (and humor).
It’s interesting that the EU is bashing the US for not agreeing to a 20 - 40% reduction in emissions as they are apparently willing to do, yet many are saying it will take an 80% reduction to make a difference. With uncertainties as this, there really isn’t any room for self-righteous indignation in this issue. Keep pushing the comprehensive approach to solving this problem. It reminds me of the celebrities who are trying to shut down all of the 3rd world manufacturing plants that hired children. They never ask if the children are working because they enjoy it, their parents are too lazy to work, or if they will starve if they don’t.
No, Civille Eye, I do not bash the Younglings, (much) misguided as they are without presenting the larger picture to the public. I love protests, I love debate, I love the exchange and issues and things that hopefully keep our government and public servants honest, (even crosswalk felons) but if you protest, please tell the public how you have solved the solution of those displaced by your outrage.
UVA Students: I do appreciate your protest in the community. My family has been in Virginia since Jamestown and our roots and ties to the Commonwealth are both deep and broad; your comments are both shallow and narrow. I even have to wonder if they (your comments) are a class project, or professor induced. Is your grade based on the level of your public discourse?
Solar and wind are your solutions? I’m feeling heat and hot air and really nothing new on the horizon. You have not even begun to emerge from the ferment of your beginnings. Much you still have to learn, younglings. Keep studying! Your writings contain none of the appropriate verbiage that even suggest you are on the cutting edge of change.
Snnnnnnzzzzzzzzzzz
Hint: You will not be taught in college about energy that can power the world. You need to think outside the Corner!