on that note, I think there’s a lot of work before all of us….

here’s a statement that many organizations in the coalfields support (its not entirely inclusive or close to perfect but encompasses the broader picture while ending with issue specificity):

The cradle-to-grave effects of the current approaches to mining, transporting, processing, and burning coal, and the disposal of coal ash are incompatible with a sustainable energy future.

Those effects include deforestation, burial of streams and wetlands under mining waste, acid mine drainage, community destruction, land and stream subsidence, loss of aquifers, climate change, mercury contamination of the Nation’s waters, and other forms of toxic pollution of water and air.

Any global warming and energy policy that does not fully take into account these devastating environmental and community impacts is incomplete and unjust.

To reduce our dependence on coal and to move the United States away from our dependence on extreme mining methods like mountaintop removal, we support the implementation of a structured transition towards renewable energy sources and public investment in job-creating renewable energy technologies and energy conservation measures. Catastrophic climate change is not inevitable and destruction of the Appalachian Mountains is not necessary. We have a choice. There are better options for our economic and environmental future, and we should choose those options.

Mountaintop removal, while an atrocious poster-child of the anti-coal movement, sometimes overshadows the work the rest of the country is doing. I was actually really disappointed by the decision to limit the scope of this delegation to mountaintop removal, though I guess it was viewed as a strategic choice.

It’s just that, to me, the problem here is the life cycle of coal, not just mountaintop removal.