Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Kudos to GQ for Revealing the Coal Industry's Dirty Secrets

Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet at 5:08 PM on June 8, 2009.


The mag takes on the 'clean coal' myth and highlights coal's toxic legacy.
d0dae3d3f1ed4a01b7e2c1f5ffa08a38

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Water in your
mailbox!

 

While lots of mainstream glossy mags take on some green issues, like Elle, Sports Illustrated, and Glamor, none that I've seen so far has picked a more important topic and done a better job at it than GQ's new feature on coal by Sean Flynn.

The narrative of the article focuses on the TVA coal ash spill in December in Tennessee, which we've reported on at length. It tells the story of a few of the folks who made their home, some for generations, around the area where the Emory River hits the Clinch -- a spot where TVA built their Kingston Fossil Plant to burn coal. For most of the people living there, the TVA plant was a neighborhood fixture, a big employer and a means for cheap electricity. Few questioned the potential hazards until the December catastrophe.

Here's a great quote from the story:

You assumed, when you live next to one of the largest coal-fired plants in the world, that it would not harm you, and that is not as irrational as it might first appear. You assumed that coal was at least relatively clean because you've been told that it is, and the air is clear and the water, nothing but beautiful water, is clean and there is a wildlife sanctuary in the big plant's shadows. You assumed that a green levee engineered by federal employees would not fall down. You assumed that the place you always wanted to live because it was so much prettier than anywhere else you'd ever lived wouldn't, in an instant, turn gray and poisoned.

And when you discover all of those assumptions were false, what more are you willing to believe? What more should you believe?

While the (quite lengthy) piece provides great reporting about the effects of the spill, which has been deemed the largest manmade environmental disaster in our country's history, and its narrative is sustained by stories of the folks who lived there, loved their homes, and lost it all -- the best part of the Flynn's article is how he confronts the myth of clean coal. Here's a part where he writes about the Hawthorn Group, a marketing firm hired by coal companies to convince the American people that coal can somehow be clean:

Obama still talks about it, and he gets cheers every time. Because the public now believes in clean coal. Hawthorn polled what the firm considered "public opinion leaders" in September 2007 and again at the end of 2008 on, among other things, whether they favored burning coal to generate electricity. The first go-round was a split: 46 percent in favor, 50 percent opposed. But after a year of Hawthorn bleating "clean coal" over and over, support rose to 72 percent--and opposition nose-dived to 22 percent.

Results such as these would be impressive no matter what the issue. Yet they are especially so in this instance, because the idea Hawthorn is selling -- Coal is clean! - -is complete horseshit.

Thank you Sean Flynn! Clean coal is horseshit, indeed. I hope Obama reads GQ.  Kudos to Flynn and GQ for a story that takes on all the aspects of why coal isn't clean -- from the extraction to the burning -- and all the hazards of what happens to the toxic waste at every stage.

And here's one last bit from the piece to give you something to think about while you click over GQ's site to read the whole story:

In a sense, then, our appetite for coal--our want and need for lights and televisions and toasters--is a slow-motion suicide pact, no different really from that of a two-pack-a-day smoker: It's all very pleasant and satisfying in the moment, but sooner or later...

Digg!

Tagged as: coal, mtr, clean coal, mining, coal ash spill, appachia, mountain top removoal min, tva spill

Tara Lohan is a managing editor at AlterNet.


PETA Teams Up With Glenn Beck to Bash Al Gore
Apparently Beck thinks PETA is as rad as the NRA. Who knew?
Post by Tara Lohan. November 6, 2009.
Join Me for the No Impact Week Challenge
Take part in a week-long project to learn about your environmental footprint and reduce what you use and buy.
Post by Tara Lohan. October 12, 2009.
Wait, We Just Bombed the Moon?
Doesn't anyone else in the universe get a say in this?
Post by Tara Lohan. October 9, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Where is the proof
Posted by: Liberalandproudofit on Jun 9, 2009 3:52 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yet they are especially so in this instance, because the idea Hawthorn is selling -- Coal is clean! - -is complete horseshit.

Having lived a significant portion of my life in Missouri, I would love to see the proof. So many people say it is wrong - Clean Coal does not exist - But no one is providing any proof. Honestly, if there is "clean coal" it will be just a small portion of the available coal and much more expensive (law of supply and demand).

I also am friends with a group that works in a coal power plant. They recently upgraded the pollution controls at the plant. The new controls work properly, only when the plant is fed a specific grade of coal - Is that "clean coal"?

Still - no proof clean coal exists, and no proof clean coal doesn't exist!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» prove a negative??? Posted by: jcalhoun
» prove a negative??? Posted by: jcalhoun
Stop focussing on what comes out of the smokestack
Posted by: lwolf on Jun 10, 2009 8:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at the whole coal picture CLEAN??? NOT!!Let's scrape off a few more mountains and ruin more entire ecosystems, poison more people and make their land, homes uninhabitable, pollute water supplies to an extent and toxicity unknown...and probably permanent. Sing me no 'proof', it's already there. PS I understand and empathize with the people who work at these plants...there usually is no other game in town...but don't ask them for realistic opinons. Sadly,they are helping to destroy their childrens future. Sadly, an animal chewing its own leg off to escape a trap, is what comes to my mind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Orgy of Uncanny Wealth and Power
Posted by: LIzzyD on Jun 28, 2009 12:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is corruption so deep in the mining industry and all the places its tendrils go, that I doubt that anything but a new revolution can "change" it. Speaking in the metaphor of whose "in bed" with whom, it's an orgy.

I, myself, at age 67, am about to go lie my body down in front of the dragline. And they won't be able to accuse that I am a stranger sent in to make trouble. I live here.

Whoever wants proof that there is no clean coal might want to take another look at that photograph, might want to take a little trip down here to "coal land" and see for him- or herself, might want to come to a "public meeting" held by the Office of Surface Mining or read the Environmental Impact Statement they concocted for revising the buffer-zone rule to allow those bastards to dump all the rock waste right into our valley headwaters streams.

Whoever thinks that there is clean coal might want to breathe some coal dust, swim in some ash sludge, drink some water containing heavy metals. But, oh...gee whiz, then, for all practical purposes, you would be dead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]