By the people, for the people. Anybody remember when those simple words were used to describe a democracy? Back when you voted for an individual because you expected them to be your voice and look after your interests in politics. Well, my friend, those days are long gone. Now it is all about who has the most money and support goes to those who contribute.

Manchin to meet with Obama on economic crisis

http://dailymail.com/News/statenews/200811260118

CHARLESTON, W.Va. — Gov. Joe Manchin is meeting with President-elect Barack Obama and most of the nation’s governors Tuesday to discuss the economic crisis.

A spokesman says Manchin plans to travel to Philadelphia for the meeting, which will focus on how the economic crisis is affecting states and their budgets.

The discussions are being hosted by National Governors Association Chairman Ed Rendell and Vice Chairman Jim Douglas.

Douglas said 40 governors and governors-elect plan to attend the group discussion, which was put together this week, at the city’s famed Independence Hall.

West Virginia has a relatively healthy economic picture, as one of only nine states not facing a current budget deficit. But state leaders warn the souring national economy is starting to be felt here.

I read the article above and the first thing I thought about is all of the different hollows fighting for clean water. Peachtree/Drews Creek - 23 years, Prenter - 13 years. If West Virginia is not facing a budget deficit - then what is the problem? Or could it be that West Virginia is not facing a deficit because of their lack of action in installing basic infrastructure? I think it shows how ignorant people like Joe Manchin, Bill Raney, Steve Walker are when they promote mountaintop removal for future economic development all the while unwilling to run clean water to people affected by MTR.

What I mean is this - if you plan on economic development of MTR sites then wouldn’t you be one step ahead of the game by running clean water to the hollows surrounding the site? Access to clean water is imperative for any type of development. Maybe the problem is they don’t want to run clean water to people they don’t want there to begin with. If you make it as hard as you can for people to live comfortably in an area, they tend to move out. Maybe that is what the coal industry wants - the entire southern part of the state. I know this - our mis-representatives in the state government appear to be all for letting the coal industry have southern WV.

The second thing I thought about - the coal industry sent it’s representative, Governor Joe Manchin, to meet with Obama.

This next article also came from the Charleston area news network.

Clean coal reduces plant emissions

http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/dec/01/clean_coal_reduces_plant_emissions63522/

Q: What is clean coal or clean-coal technology? Does such a thing exist and why aren’t we using it all the time?

A: Environmentalists frequently scoff at the notion of clean coal. While they say there’s no such animal, President-elect Barack Obama and lots of others say clean coal does exist, and they are pushing for the United States to invest potentially billions of dollars in electric power plants and potentially motor fuel refineries that produce far less pollution than existing coal-fired generators.

Proponents such as coal producers, big electric utilities and coal states such as West Virginia say clean coal is key to helping America achieve energy independence.

Arguably, clean coal isn’t such a new notion. Clean coal supporters are always quick to point out that coal-fired power plants have slashed sulfur, nitrogen and particulate emissions over the years.

Lately the focus has shifted to emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, and clean-coal supporters argue that technology can provide a solution to that problem as well.

Environmentalists say one key to stopping global warming is to quit using coal. That’s a tall order for the United States, however, which gets about half its electricity from coal-fired power plants.

Energy companies and energy-producing states argue the country can continue to burn coal by using technology to capture carbon dioxide before it gets loose in the atmosphere, then pump it underground for permanent storage. That’s not such a far-fetched notion.

The oil industry has been pumping carbon dioxide into aging wells to increase production for decades and the ability to keep the gas underground is being tested in several large-scale projects.

The other big area of interest for clean coal is the production of motor fuels. That’s old technology used by Germany during World War II and South Africa, which turned coal into fuel first during Apartheid.

Several U.S. developers hope to build coal-to-liquids plants. Theoretically, those plants can capture much of the C02 generated in the process before it enters the atmosphere, then store it. One plant proposed for West Virginia is considering mixing wood with coal to further attack the CO2 problem.

The problem with coal-to-liquids plants and so-called clean-coal electric plants has been financing.

First of all - clean coal does not reduce emissions as the title would suggest but instead is meant to capture and clean emissions. Articles like this tend to piss me off because this is a local news network calling residents enviromentalists. It also pisses me off that they don’t support MTR directly but more by way of proxy. Coal-to-liquids = more mountaintop removal, clean coal = license to kill Appalachia.

Side note - I noticed the article above is Q & A based and I wondered if the reporter was asking the question to himself. I like how everybody is an expert on clean coal and yet nobody knows a damn thing about it, except for what the coal industry has told them.

Q&A with Jay Rockefeller

http://www.wvobserver.com/december08/rockefeller1208.html

OBSERVER: In October, after almost 10 years of fundraising and organizing, you opened the Blanchette Rockefeller Neurosciences Institute on the West Virginia University campus in Morgantown. Why was this important to you?

ROCKEFELLER: This will be the only research institute in the world working on memory and Alzheimer’s. The plan is to try and find a predictor for Alzheimer’s, a test people can take. Right now it can only be done post-death. It is important to me personally, because I saw my mother gradually eroding as a human being for 12 years, and then finally dying. There are so many people faced with this, millions across the country.

It is extremely hard to talk about, even as many times as I have. You have certain memories . . . it is very, very hard, and it is important that it be hard. My mother died in 1992, and that feels as if it was yesterday. I bring great passion to this. We are trying to cure human suffering around the world. This is a stunningly motivating and intense process. I am very optimistic and proud that is in West Virginia.

OBSERVER: You talk about developing the coal in West Virginia and you support the dramatic reduction of greenhouse gasses by as much as 65 percent of 1990 levels by 2050. How is it possible to have both?

ROCKEFELLER: We all want to solve climate change. I have put myself in a very interesting position in West Virginia. There are only 16 states that produce coal. You say the words “coal” or “clean coal” and people laugh at you. I don’t. I start with the assumption that we do not have clean coal, and that the object is to make coal clean by virtually eliminating CO2 emissions. It can be done, like the moon shot by [President] Kennedy. We could do it in three years. It would be a huge national project.

OBSERVER: If clean coal was found to be not commercially viable, would you declare that West Virginia should not pursue a future in coal?

ROCKEFELLER: I am not willing to grant that first point. I am absolutely confident we can. Coal can be clean. We have 250–400 years supply of it. We can wipe out the use of Middle East oil.

OBSERVER: Given your urgent commitment to reduce emissions that cause climate change, what happens if it takes more than three years to make clean coal commercially viable?

ROCKEFELLER: If it doesn’t [take three years], we will have to spend more time. Because it is worth it. It produces well over 50 percent of the electricity that people use. We can’t say that it is not worth it. We have to do research to clean it up, spend a lot of government money, as much as 12 or 13 billion dollars.

OBSERVER: You voted in favor of the 2005 Energy Bill which called for increased electrical capacity in the Mid-Atlantic region. Are you in favor of the PATH transmission line project?

ROCKEFELLER: I look at it two ways. If we were starting the world all over again and we wanted to put the lines up, I would say no. But then look at it the other way. If we have brownouts, which I guarantee we will, particularly as it gets warmer in the summer and cooler in the winter, we will have shut-downs and enormous electricity shortages—which I promise is going to happen—I don’t think people want that either. In this imperfect world in which nothing is entirely fair, and in which not all things are solved, we must be willing to sacrifice.

OBSERVER: I have heard you say before that this is part of our history, West Virginia being dumped on by the rest of the country.

ROCKEFELLER: You know what I think, states are defined by elections and football teams, but if took those two things away you have something called America. It is not a question of what happens in West Virginia compared to Colorado, but what is happening to us, the American people. Things can’t be sorted in total equality. We must sort out the problems that will kill us, like Alzheimer’s, or freeze us, like the total inability to heat [our homes].

OBSERVER: If it is a national problem, why must West Virginians pay for it?

ROCKEFELLER: Because this is going on around the country. We tend to focus on what happens in our own backyard, but this is happening all over the country with the same kind of problems. Everyone has their fights. That is why I like to think of America as a country, and West Virginia is a hugely important part of that country.

Referring to the red highlighting - you will hear this a lot from our mis-representatives and at the same time another defense mechanism for mountaintop removal is that MTR is the only viable way to get the thin seams of coal near the top. If we have so much coal - why are we hellbent on taking the tops off the mountains for 6 inch seams of coal? Something here is just not adding up. With the rate mountaintop removal is occurring now, we could take the entire top layer off of West Virginia in a lot less time than 250 years. I think 250 must be a magic number, they’ve been saying it for 20 years.

This next part directed at all of West Virginia’s mis-representatives.

Do you want to win the battle against those pesky enviromentalist? I know a way you can wipe out a lot of them with one move… STOP MOUNTAINTOP REMOVAL COAL MINING!!!!