That’s the first ad of our new campaign targeting the world of higher education: Coal is too dirty – even for college.
Did you know that many of our country’s colleges and universities – places that are supposed to be a source of higher-education and leadership – get their electricity by burning coal? And sometimes those coal-fired power plants are even on the campuses?
I think many of us look back in disbelief at some of the things we did in college. We’re seeing that same sense of disbelief from current college students when they learn that their campuses are still powered by coal.
This ad launches a campaign that will use print and online advertising (two more video ads to come) to highlight that some things are just too dirty, even for college.
The ads play off stereotypically “dirty” college behavior, becoming progressively more “dirty” throughout the series. Though college life allows for leniency in the socially acceptable, coal still crosses the line.
The ad campaign targets schools in 11 states which currently rely on coal power.
Indiana University-Bloomington
Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Lewis and Clark
Ohio University
Penn State University
SUNY-Binghamton
University of Colorado - Boulder
University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill
University of Georgia
University of Iowa
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
University of Missouri-Columbia
University of North Dakota
University of Southern California
University of Washington
Virginia Tech
Washington University-St. Louis
If you attend one of these schools, you can sign a petition asking your university president to kick coal off your campus – the list and the petition are on this website: http://www.2dirty4college.com/
The Campuses Beyond Coal Campaign is working nationwide to wean all campuses off of coal-generated electricity and replace it with clean energy options. With organizers on the ground in several of the more than 60 campuses with on-site coal plants the Campaign is working to help universities achieve the zero carbon emissions targets set forth in the Presidents Climate Commitment.
We know students want a cleaner, healthier future, and so they're organizing on campuses coast-to-coast to make that vision a reality.
The ad campaign will run through the end of October, with the remaining two videos to be released in the next few weeks. It’s time to kick coal off campus!
This post was co-written by Bruce Nilles and Mary Anne Hitt, director and deputy director, respectively, of the Sierra Club Beyond Coal Campaign.
The Obama Administration announced steps to end the fast-tracking of certain mountaintop removal coal mine permits and to add tougher enforcement in Appalachia, important steps that -- with additional actions -- could greatly reduce the devastation to communities, waterways and mountains. However, these new policies alone will not necessarily improve conditions in Appalachia unless additional steps are taken and enforcement is stepped up significantly, and hundreds of mountains remain in peril.
That is why the Sierra Club is launching a new website called "What's At Stake," where you can track all the mountaintop removal permits now before the Obama Administration and learn more about the mountains and communities whose fate hangs in the balance.
After a West Virginia court ruled against it recently, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed revoking the nationwide "one-size-fits-all" permit it had used to authorize the dumping of coal mining waste into hundreds of miles of Appalachian headwater streams. The bad news, though, is that the Obama Administration says it will continue to allow mountaintop removal mining to bury streams under tons of mining waste.
There is too much at stake in Appalachia for the administration to only go this far. Without a significant change in policy, mining companies will continue to destroy our mountains and bury our streams on the Obama administration’s watch. If the Obama Administration fully enforced the Clean Water Act, which would prohibit filling streams with mining waste, and closed regulatory loopholes created by the Bush administration, mountaintop removal coal mining would become nearly impossible.
The coal industry continues to find ways to pollute and use its influence to strong-arm its way around environmental regulations. They are more interested in profits than people, and in setting up roadblocks to progress on clean energy. We must all work together to clean up the coal industry.
This is also why you should check out our new “What's At Stake” mountaintop removal tracker website. Actor Ashley Judd has once again teamed up with Sierra Club to help launch the website.
In the next few months, if the Obama Administration allows the hundreds of mountaintop removal coal mining permits that are currently in the pipeline to go forward, it will result in the outright destruction of hundreds of miles of streams, the leveling of over 60,000 acres of diverse hardwood forests, and a new round of blasting, flooding, and water contamination for the communities of Appalachia.
The true test of these new policies -- and of President Obama's legacy on this issue -- will be whether they change the terrible situation on the ground in Appalachia. You can tell the Obama Administration to stop MTR.
Recent studies have shown that the Appalachia Mountains could support commercial scale wind energy facilities, which would bring long-term, sustainable jobs to the region -- but only if the mountains are left standing. We must stop this destructive practice now.
The bulldozers are already rolling. Check out the Sierra Club's "What's at Stake" website and urge the Obama Administration to take bold action to end mountaintop removal coal mining before it is too late.
This week’s blog post is co-written by Mary Anne Hitt, deputy director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign.
This week, friends of big oil and coal fired one of their first shots across the bow of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the agency’s power to set limits on global warming pollution. The frenzy that followed in Washington and in the media should serve as a wake up call to anyone who has not yet weighed in to support EPA’s proposed finding that global warming pollution endangers public health and welfare.
By pulling one line out of an obscure government document and circulating it out of context, Republicans in Congress tried to make the case that they had found a “smoking gun” revealing that the Obama White House predicts economic collapse should the EPA regulate global warming pollution. The White House quickly issued a statement making it clear they had said no such thing, in a statement with the fitting title “Clearing the Air.” A hat tip to David Roberts at Grist for unraveling how this non-story became national news.
Fortunately, you now have the chance to weigh in and counter the fear mongering by demonstrating that Americans want strong action on global warming.
Monday marks the first of two public hearings on EPA’s draft endangerment finding issued in mid-April, a historic finding by the agency that global warming pollution endangers public health and welfare. The endangerment finding is a comprehensive science based review of expected threats that our nation faces from global warming, including more severe heat waves, disease epidemics, water shortages, and crop failures.
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is now obligated to issue rules regulating global warming pollution from all major sources, including cars and coal-fired power plants. The law specifically states that EPA “shall” (i.e. must, not may) regulate dangerous pollutants once they are found to endanger public health or welfare.
Now there is no longer a question of if or even when the U.S. will act on global warming. This bold action shows that President Obama is following through on its campaign promise to show American leadership on global warming.
This endangerment decision, ordered by the Supreme Court in April 2007 and based upon years of scientific research and analysis, will speed the shift toward the clean energy economy and complement the other elements of President Obama's sweeping clean energy jobs plan.
South Carolina is on the front lines of global warming, being that they are in the path of the more fierce hurricanes and rising sea levels. So it should be no surprise that a coalition has formed against the latest planned coal-fired power plant there – a 660-megawatt near the Pee Dee River area.
If built, this plant could be the single largest new destroyer of Appalachian mountains in the United States. Why? Because the plant would use coal sourced from the states where the coal industry is busy blowing off the tops of mountains to get the coal out.
For a state with such wind and solar potential, and no coal reserves, it is downright bizarre that a state agency (yes, the state runs power plants) to be stuck in such 19th century thinking about energy options. Unfortunately, this is not uncommon across the U.S. – many states with great clean, renewable energy options are busy chasing energy sources of the past.
This is a great day for clean energy and people's health: Today the Environmental Protection Agency overturned the state of South Dakota's approval of the massive Big Stone II coal-fired power plant. The EPA's decision comes after the state failed to require state-of-the-art pollution controls for the coal plant -- controls that would address harmful soot, smog and global-warming pollution.
Today's decision is also a victory for the rule of law -- with the EPA signaling that it is back to enforcing longstanding legal requirements fairly and consistently nationwide and that it's concerned about pollution and global warming.
As the first major coal plant decision by the EPA since President Barack Obama took office, this signals that the dozens of other coal plant proposals currently in permitting processes nationwide will face a new level of federal scrutiny.
The proposed Big Stone II 500-megawatt coal plant would have emitted more than 4 million tons of pollution annually. The Sierra Club and Clean Water Action have been working to stop the Big Stone II project and ramp up clean-energy investments for more than three years.
This decision also likely spells the end of Otter Tail Power's Big Stone II coal plant. At a minimum, Otter Tail Power will have to go back to the drawing board and redesign the project to incorporate the best and maximum available control technology for pollution like soot and smog.
This post is co-written by Bruce Nilles, director of the Sierra Club National Coal Campaign, and Lyndsay Moseley, associate Washington representative for the National Coal Campaign.
Today the Sierra Club will put the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) on notice for its negligence surrounding the tragic December 22 coal ash spill at the Kingston Fossil Plant in Roane County, Tennessee. In collaboration with more than a dozen neighbors whose property was directly affected by the spill, along with a coalition of other environmental organizations, we are requesting that a federal court oversee the cleanup and remediation and that the responsible parties compensate local residents.
On December 22, 2008, an earthen dam for a coal ash waste impoundment failed at the Kingston Fossil Plant, releasing a billion gallons of coal ash sludge and contaminated water into the Emory and Clinch Rivers and onto more than 300 acres around the community of Harriman.
We have Sierra Club members, staffers and volunteers living in this area and who grew up near Harriman - and we've also had some of our staff visit the spill site (including today’s blog co-writer Lyndsay Moseley). The feedback we’re getting from the people there is heart-breaking.
We've seen overwhelming sadness at the loss of their homes and their peaceful way of life. They are concerned about the health threats, and said that, with a few exceptions, they'd received very little information about the real threats from the coal sludge around their homes.
The residents say they are getting mixed signals. The TVA has issued delayed warnings on the health effects of the ash sludge, and cleanup workers are wearing hazardous material suits. The TVA is also telling people the water is fine, but the news reported that the schools will be preparing lunches with bottled water and the schools are encouraging parents to send bottled water with their kids.
The hints came down in December, but today it is confirmed: Dynegy is abandoning its plans to build five new coal plants as a joint venture with LS Power. Without its larger partner, LS Power will have a very difficult time developing and financing the proposed plants, even though the company has said it will try.
These abandoned plants are in Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Iowa and Arkansas, and this is a major victory for the Sierra Club, our partners, and the thousands of people who stood up to Dynegy's dirty plans. Dynegy had been the largest developer of new coal-fired power plants in the country, but due to our efforts the company has now recognized that new coal plants are an economic mistake and the wrong direction for their shareholders and the country. We applaud them for taking this major step forward in securing a clean energy future.
In February 2008 we launched our "Clean Up Dynegy" campaign in response to the two companies' joint venture to build seven coal-fired power plants. Our Dynegy campaign focused on the six states where Dynegy proposed their coal plants - AR, IA, GA, MI, NV and TX. We even set up a website specifically targeting Dynegy: http://www.CleanUpDynegy.org/
Our staff and volunteers in those states worked tirelessly in this effort. They ran a national letter-writing and phone call campaign targeting Dynegy's CEO. In addition to thousands of letters, emails, and phone calls, we organized numerous local protests in the states, including a major rally on May 14th with a broad coalition outside of Dynegy's annual shareholder meeting in Houston. We also met with Dynegy's CEO twice -- once in their Washington, DC, lawyers' offices and once in Sierra Club's Chicago office.
If LS Power decides to continue with these plants, they stand alone. We encourage them and their potential customers to shift their investments into cleaner and lower-cost alternatives like wind, solar, and efficiency that can create new jobs and economic opportunity while cutting pollution, improving public health, and helping solve global warming.
We are thrilled to see the success of this campaign, and we thank our coalition partners as well: Public Citizen, Co-Op America, Rainforest Action Network, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, our own Sierra Student Coalition, and all of the activists and other groups that worked together to make this victory possible.
Even though we enjoy this victory, there is still more work to be done. We will continue to challenge Dynegy's remaining proposed plants in Texas (Sandy Creek) and Arkansas (Plum Point #1). The construction of more coal-fired power plants would be a giant step backward, so we will encourage remaining utilities to abandon their dirty plans and to invest instead in clean energy solutions.
Reports are that the rush of mud, ash and water now covers 400 acres and is several feet deep in some areas – this coal ash spill is also many times more massive than the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The cleanup is expected to last weeks, but some lives have already been altered forever - and the full environmental impact is not yet known. Fly ash is known to contain numerous toxic chemicals and it’s being reported that some of the spill made it into the Tennessee River – a water supply source for the city of Chattanooga as well as people in Kentucky and Alabama.
And now we have to wonder if the Tennessee Valley Authority is being fully open about what’s in that fly ash water – bloggers are already taking notice, including the Knoxville Sentinel blog and in these two posts here and here. The second post links this an excellent article about the risks.
This post is co-written by Mark Kresowik, Corporate Accountability Representative for the Sierra Club's National Coal Campaign.
Shortly after the credit markets crumbled this fall, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Yvo De Boer, suggested that it was a good time for banks to review the financial risks of global warming: "We're in this pickle in the first place because these banks made unwise loans. Giving a loan that doesn't take climate change into account also is an unwise loan."
As UN Climate Change Conference talks in Poznan, Poland wind down, the incoming U.S. administration is gearing up plans to restore the flow of credit and stimulate the economy, led by creating millions of new green jobs through energy efficiency and clean energy.
This is great news for our economy and the environment. But it also means banks and credit rating agencies rushing to green light as many as 100 massive coal-fired power plants. Banks like Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Moody's, Standard and Poor's, and Fitch Ratings are betting against the next President of the United States and making a new round of subprime loans.
Coal plants cost billions of dollars to build, and this requires bank loans. In turn, those banks are expecting us to buy power from the utilities for decades, at a high enough price to cover operating costs and pay back the loans.
Coal plants are also very dirty, spewing millions of tons of global warming pollution and toxic particles into the air. So far we have given companies a free pass, letting them emit as much carbon dioxide as they want. But with President-Elect Obama and Congress committed to strong action on global warming, the free pollution days are over.
So if companies build new coal plants - 100 plants currently proposed at a cost of more than $250 billion - we will be paying higher electricity prices for more pollution.
In short, we aren't going to need the power from new coal plants. Just like we didn't want gas-guzzling cars, we don't want pollution-spewing coal plants.
Americans want energy-efficient technology. So when banks and utilities are suddenly without customers willing to buy coal power, expect banks and utilities to be next in line for bailouts.
As energy demand drops further, companies that build risky new coal plants will only have two options - default on loans or raise energy prices even higher. Defaults on loans hurt the banking system and local communities. Higher prices hurt residential consumers and chase businesses away. We've seen this cycle before.
"In the 1970s and 1980s, (the federal government) provided financing for several (utilities) that had invested in the construction of large nuclear and coal-fired generating power plants. Several of these plants were completed late and over budget. In addition, an expected increase in demand for electric power did not materialize, and as a result, several of these (cooperatives) became financially troubled and could not meet their debt-servicing requirements. In turn, the federal government incurred several billion dollars in loan losses."
We can't afford to repeat the same mistakes, but the credit rating agencies and investment banks have put their heads in the sand when they really need to see the efficient, clean energy future ahead. We hope Congress will urge the same, as we taxpayers are tiring of the bailouts.
Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers is the self-appointed coal industry leader in the green game -- he even got a nice spread in the New York Times earlier this year on his big ideas for climate legislation. And yet even the greenest of coal groups, Duke Energy isn't even taking basic steps to control harmful emissions like toxic mercury, much less global-warming-causing carbon dioxide.
This week a federal judge rejected Duke's attempts to build its new Cliffside coal-fired power plant in North Carolina without modern mercury and other pollution controls. Now Duke must submit this plan for a state process to review its mercury emissions.
As the first coal plant sent back to drawing board after the D.C. circuit court rejected lax Bush administration mercury rules earlier this year, this case sets a precedent. From an excellent North Carolina Business Journal article on the case:
The utility, a unit of Charlotte-based Duke Energy Corp., got an air-quality permit from the state in January without that kind of review. The Environmental Protection Agency had for some time said plants such as Cliffside did not have to perform such reviews for a state permit.
In February, the federal courts struck down the EPA ruling as contrary to the law's intent. Duke had received its air permit just weeks before.
And of course, Duke Energy is fighting against cleaning up their plants by appealing this case. But for now, we are thrilled with the decision because it is a statement for cleaning up dirty coal-fired power plants.
This case shows yet again that the many corporations pushing for more coal power claiming they can make it clean are instead planning more coal-fired power plants that don't even meet basic pollution emission requirements.
That's the reality. (And speaking of reality -- did you see this week's launch of the new Reality Campaign all about realities of clean coal?)
With dozens of new coal plants across the country now on hold because of last week's ruling requiring a second look at carbon emissions, the coal industry is stepping up its game. Already in Kansas they've sued the Sebelius administration in an attempt to prevent states from acting to fight global warming.
We're stepping up our game in response and need your input.
Already through our new website and online video at CoalIsNotTheAnswer.org, tens of thousands of people have learned the truth about coal -- revealing the reality behind the coal industry's slick $40 million advertising campaign that masks the harmful and polluting nature of coal-fired power plants.
With the weak enforcement of environmental and health regulations by the Bush administration -- and the ever growing list of last minute rollbacks -- it is no wonder that many states continue to take action into their own hands. Related to new coal plants, the Attorneys General in both South Carolina and New Jersey have spoken out against new coal-fired power plants in their state.
But more recently -- a consortium of Northeastern states have found an interesting way to make the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) enforce Clean Air Act rules in other states: use the Clean Water Act to go after mercury emissions.
Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and New York are filing a provision "which requires the EPA to craft agreements to resolve multistate pollution issues, triggers a mandatory process for the EPA to control the atmospheric deposition of mercury that makes fish throughout the Northeast unsafe to eat."
We've heard this argument before in different ways -- but the basics are that even if one state is making great strides in utilizing clean energy to fight global warming and protect their air and water, other states' inactivity or further use of coal-fired power plants can negate that work. And many states have made the argument before that building a coal-fired power plant in one state will affect the quality of life in others.
So this move by the Northeastern states is not only a great way to force the EPA to do its job, but it also highlights how the problem of mercury emissions affects all Americans, no matter where the coal-fired power plant is.
Coal-fired power plants emit 42% of the country's industrial mercury pollution. When coal plants release mercury into our air, it rains down into our lakes, rivers and streams. The toxic mercury then makes it into our bodies via contaminated fish.
Mercury pollution causes brain damage and other developmental problems in unborn children and infants, and has been linked to a greater risk of coronary heart disease in men.
Yet coal-fired power plants keep resisting mercury regulations, claiming that mercury pollution sources can't be tracked.
But wait just a minute -- there are scientists also working now to discover the exact power plant and coal sources of mercury emissions -- as explained in this interesting article from the Christian Science Monitor. One article highlight:
"The new method relies on the ratio of mercury isotopes -- mercury atoms with differing numbers of neutrons -- to find where the mercury originates. Scientists gather coal from fields around the world, burn it, capture the escaping mercury, and determine its unique isotopic 'fingerprint,' says Joel Blum, a professor of geological sciences at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor..."
Building new coal plants will only increase mercury pollution. -- yet another reason to oppose new coal plants and instead focus on increasing our reliance on clean energy. It's also another reason to push for more mercury regulation, much like the Northeastern states are doing.
p.s.- Want to know how much mercury is in your body? Which fish are safe to eat? Sign up to get tested and download our mercury survival guide: www.sierraclub.org/mercury
This week's post was co-written by Mary Anne Hitt, the new deputy director of the National Coal Campaign.
Wow -- what an amazing and transformational time to be an American. Whether you have been voting for decades or you have just voted for the first time, the election of Barack Obama marks an incredible new chapter in the history of our nation, our planet, and our energy future.
In the midst of this renewed spirit of possibility and hope, it is worth noting that in the 11th hour of the Presidential election, as John McCain and Sarah Palin were making their last-ditch attempt to win swing states in America's heartland, they picked one final issue that they hoped would turn those states red. Of all the issues facing the nation -- the economy, health care, the war in Iraq -- which issue did the McCain campaign choose as its Hail Mary, its last hope to win the election?
Coal.
Did you notice something else?
It didn't work.
When the votes were counted, McCain lost critical coal-producing states he hoped to win over with his last-minute coal blitz -- Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Virginia, to name a few.
The coal industry spent millions this election season, sponsoring the debates and the conventions and blanketing the nation with so-called "clean coal" ads. But I imagine it didn't fool you, and if the election of Barack Obama taught us anything, it's that the American people are ready for honesty and integrity, not spin from well-funded industries. While we heard a lot about clean coal during the election, you know the facts:
In local elections coal also took a beating, because citizens understand the economic benefits offered by clean energy and demanded that America move beyond coal.
Here are just two examples: In Missouri, a state with a long history of coal burning, voters by a margin of 2:1 passed a statewide initiative requiring the state's utilities to turn away from coal and meet 15 percent of their energy needs with clean energy. With its strong manufacturing base and great potential for clean energy, Missouri is now racing to catch up with other Midwest states, such as Minnesota and Iowa, to be a part of this clean energy revolution.
In Sevier County, Utah, voters overwhelmingly approved an initiative that gives local residents the right to reject zoning for dirty coal plants. This is likely the end of a long battle over plans to build a new coal plant in that county.
Clearly, the next four years presents us with an incredible, historic opportunity. We can halt the runaway global warming, restore clean air across America, and swiftly end mountaintop removal mining, by moving America beyond coal. This is a challenge that America is ready to face with creativity and ingenuity, and we will need the help of each and every one of you to ensure we create a truly independent, clean energy future for our nation and our planet. Please join us and sign up here to support the Sierra Club's campaign to move America beyond coal.
And then there were none...The Stream Buffer Zone Rule, the last remaining legal impediment to devastating mountaintop removal coal mining is now just one step away from being abolished, thanks to an Office of Surface Mining decision announced late last week.
On Friday, the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) released its assessment of stream buffer zones - basically giving mining companies the environmental green light to dump mining waste in or near streams.
For years the OSM has failed to enforce the Stream Buffer Zone Rule, which prevents mining within 100 feet of streams, in communities across Appalachia. So instead of enforcing the current law, the OSM decided to just get rid of it - saying this is best possible protection for the environment. In fact, OSM failed even to consider the concept of enforcing the current rule to protect streams and limit the size of mining waste disposal areas in its decision making. All the alternatives considered involved mining in and around streams.
This decision seems to only aim for expediting mining without regard to environmental damage. And considering how frequently the Sierra Club and others keep finding coal mining companies conducting illegal mining (see Ison Rock, VA; Jellico, TN; and Fish Trap Lake, KY) and releasing unsafe amounts of toxic selenium (see Zeb Mountain, TN; and Hobet and Fola, WV) - you can see how this is just another excuse for these companies to avoid environmental regulations.
There is no doubt that mountaintop removal coal mining is devastating to water quality - one Environmental Protection Agency study found that 93 percent of streams downstream from mountaintop mining waste sites were unfit to support aquatic life.
The Environmental Protection Agency is now the only one standing between the mining companies and our waters. The Stream Buffer Zone cannot be repealed without EPA approval. A poll released today shows that two out of three people opposed repealing the rule, so contact the EPA today and demand that they to side with the American public.
EMAIL
PRINT
10 COMMENTS
PERMALINK
