[outdoorsman43]

I'm just going by his article. You're the expert, the weight falls on you. I trust that the EPA knows more than me.

Enough said. You have nothing stand on, no valid points (actually no points at all). I have given you plenty of information and numbers.

I'm done arguing with you until you have any sort of an argument.

[TheRealVille]

Enough said. You have nothing stand on, no valid points (actually no points at all). I have given you plenty of information and numbers.

I'm done arguing with you until you have any sort of an argument.

I've provided just as much, if not more, argument as you. I've been going by your article. You all posted that article as your evidence, I didn't.

[Old School]

Just saying what his article is saying. So, you are more worried about the money than your kids, kids water supply?

What article are you referring to?

As most on here know I've worked in the mining industry for 30 years and the excess dirt and rock we place in the valley fills are no different than the dirt and rock that was moved to build the four lane highways you travel every day or no different than the dirt and rock moved to build the Wal-Marts, K-Marts or any other earth moving projects.

As per water being discharged in to the stream. here an example, your city water system is allowed to maintain higher limits of selenium in your drinking water than we are allowed to discharge into streams. We also test for PH, Iron, and Manganese.

[TheRealVille]

As per water being discharged in to the stream. here an example, your city water system is allowed to maintain higher limits of selenium in your drinking water than we are allowed to discharge into streams. We also test for PH, Iron, and Manganese.

From the article above, it looks like the EPA is worried about at least a 100 of those permits and stuff getting into the water supply. Maybe some aren't as concerned about the water as your company. Are you defending all companies and claiming them to be upright at all times?

The EPA last month said it would scrutinize more than a hundred mining permits because of concerns over the effects on water quality.

[TheRealVille]

If that makes you feel good, fine...
And I'm not for letting companies pollute all they want. There are much better ways to fight pollution than another huge tax.

BTW, it's not a tax. It's a cap on emissions, with the option to buy credits from from lower emitting companies. If a company wants to or has to pollute more it would cost them more, as it should. This really isn't about coal companies as much as it is about powerhouses and the such that emit pollution from their stacks. Though, the coal fired powerhouses would have to pay more because they pollute more, or clean up their act to save more money.

Emissions trading (or emission trading) is an administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants. It is sometimes called cap and trade.


A coal power plant in Germany. Due to emissions trading, coal may become less competitive as a fuel.A central authority (usually a government or international body) sets a limit or cap on the amount of a pollutant that can be emitted. Companies or other groups are issued emission permits and are required to hold an equivalent number of allowances (or credits) which represent the right to emit a specific amount. The total amount of allowances and credits cannot exceed the cap, limiting total emissions to that level. Companies that need to increase their emission allowance must buy credits from those who pollute less. The transfer of allowances is referred to as a trade. In effect, the buyer is paying a charge for polluting, while the seller is being rewarded for having reduced emissions by more than was needed. Thus, in theory, those that can easily reduce emissions most cheaply will do so, achieving the pollution reduction at the lowest possible cost to society.[1]

There are active trading programs in several pollutants. For greenhouse gases the largest is the European Union Emission Trading Scheme.[2] In the United States there is a national market to reduce acid rain and several regional markets in nitrogen oxides.[3] Markets for other pollutants tend to be smaller and more localized.

[jetpilot]

BTW, it's not a tax. It's a cap on emissions, with the option to buy credits from from lower emitting companies. If a company wants to or has to pollute more it would cost them more, as it should. This really isn't about coal companies as much as it is about powerhouses and the such that emit pollution from their stacks. Though, the coal fired powerhouses would have to pay more because they pollute more, or clean up their act to save more money.

The more you post, the more you show you don't know anything about this issue. It's a tax, and everyone but you seems to know that.
What do you think will happen to your electric bill? You must not realize that you will be paying for this...

[outdoorsman43]

The more you post, the more you show you don't know anything about this issue. It's a tax, and everyone but you seems to know that.
What do you think will happen to your electric bill? You must not realize that you will be paying for this...

You hit the nail on the head. People would look a lot smarter on this site if they posted on only topics they know about.

[TheRealVille]

I guess you republicans have it all under control. :eyeroll: We go from some of the most prosperous years in a long time under Clinton, to Bush bringing this country to it's knees and the biggest recession we have saw in quite some time. Not to mention the financial shape this country is in. I'll take my chances with another democrat.

[FOX SPORTS]

I guess you republicans have it all under control. :eyeroll: We go from some of the most prosperous years in a long time under Clinton, to Bush bringing this country to it's knees and the biggest recession we have saw in quite some time. Not to mention the financial shape this country is in. I'll take my chances with another democrat.

Stay on topic please AND Drop the political party sh**...this is not a republican thing versus democrat.

The thread is about Obama and the coal industry, not the nation's recession.


This is about the death of eastern Kentucky's economy.

Do you enjoy this website?
Do you enjoy air conditioning?
Electricity?
television???

Thank a Miner.

Do you realize what will happen to OUR EKY area if these disguised TAXES go through?
Do you realize what a huge part of OUR EKY area depends on the coal industry?

If the coal industry is taxed out of business, all that will be left in eastern KY will be hospitals to care for the elderly, banks to cash the government checks once a month, and of course, Eric C Conn to get the remaining on some sort of draw...those that are too lazy to move out of the area.

[mcolem00]

Coal is the way of life to most people in Eastern KY, and All of the appalachia...but wait...who of the BIG POLITICIANS care, because we are all "hillbillies, inbred, and can't make a living for ourselves anyways"...so who cares if our families have jobs and half of our nations ability to have electricity has to go away because coal mines can't afford to operate.

[beasy_bo]

What do you think will happen to your electric bill? You must not realize that you will be paying for this...

exactly people don't understand you take if out of the big dog's pocket they'll take it back from the lil dog. the only person who benefits is the the people who make the money :kneel:

[TheRealVille]

Stay on topic please AND Drop the political party sh**...this is not a republican thing versus democrat.

The thread is about Obama and the coal industry, not the nation's recession.


This is about the death of eastern Kentucky's economy.

Do you enjoy this website?
Do you enjoy air conditioning?
Electricity?
television???

Thank a Miner.

Do you realize what will happen to OUR EKY area if these disguised TAXES go through?
Do you realize what a huge part of OUR EKY area depends on the coal industry?

If the coal industry is taxed out of business, all that will be left in eastern KY will be hospitals to care for the elderly, banks to cash the government checks once a month, and of course, Eric C Conn to get the remaining on some sort of draw...those that are too lazy to move out of the area.

You do realize that this nation can't afford to "tax coal out of business". The coal-fired powerhouses HAVE to be allowed to operate. There is no other feasible way to energize this country right now. And if you don't think it is a political party agenda to put these scare tactics out, you just don't see the big picture. KY coal WILL go on because there is no other way right now. Don't let the scare tactics get to you, they need our coal and will get it.

[jetpilot]

You do realize that this nation can't afford to "tax coal out of business", the coal-fired powerhouses HAVE to be allowed to operate. There is no other feasible way to energize this country right now. And if you don't think it is a political party agenda to put these scare tactics out you just don't see the big picture. KY coal WILL go on because there is no other way right now.

Bless your heart...what you just posted is the REPUBLICAN position...

[TheRealVille]

Bless your heart...what you just posted is the REPUBLICAN position...

No, it's just the facts. It has nothing to do with the Republican position. The nation can't and WONT do without coal. If anyone says Obama can afford to put the coal out of business, they are lying. They WILL use KY coal until there are other energizing means. There aren't enough nukes and no new ones being built. Windmills can't provide what the nation needs. They have to have us, so don't buy into the political scare. FoxSports posted in the op that Obama is trying to kill the coal, Obama can't because he needs coal. This is the type of stuff we hear on FOX news everyday, and don't think they aren't on one side.

[FOX SPORTS]

You do realize that this nation can't afford to "tax coal out of business". The coal-fired powerhouses HAVE to be allowed to operate. There is no other feasible way to energize this country right now. And if you don't think it is a political party agenda to put these scare tactics out, you just don't see the big picture. KY coal WILL go on because there is no other way right now. Don't let the scare tactics get to you, they need our coal and will get it.

Wrong...I do see the Big picture. However, this thread is not about republican or democrat.

BTW, the scare tactics aren't getting to me.

Obama's administration is what scares me...Our government getting into the car business and the banking industry and the insurance industry, and so on and so on.

This is NOT what our country is about.

[TheRealVille]

Wrong...I do see the Big picture. However, this thread is not about republican or democrat.

BTW, the scare tactics aren't getting to me.

Obama's administration is what scares me...Our government getting into the car business and the banking industry and the insurance industry, and so on and so on.

This is NOT what our country is about.

If this thread isn't about the parties, why did you just type what I bolded above?

[outdoorsman43]

If this thread isn't about the parties, why did you just type what I bolded above?

That was probably the best reply you could come up with to FOX's post.

You know why? Because, there is no argument to be made against his post.

Kudos to you for at least trying to reply to the post.

[TheRealVille]

That was probably the best reply you could come up with to FOX's post.

You know why? Because, there is no argument to be made against his post.

Kudos to you for at least trying to reply to the post.

It started before Obama, so we can't lay it on him.

To answer the OP. Obama isn't going to hurt the coal business, because he can't. He needs us.

[outdoorsman43]

It started before Obama, so we can't lay it on him.

To answer the OP. Obama isn't going to hurt the coal business, because he can't. He needs us.

Well, do you have an explanation to why he is putting a hold to all Mountain-Top Mining permits? I'm betting no. If you do, then it won't be convincing. Why not you might ask? Because, there is no reason for it. As I have said time and time again, most mining companies do everything they can to minimize pollution as much as possible. I will tell you right now, I'm all for minimizing pollution and I'm for all the guidelines, rules, and regulations that go with the D.E.P.

Absolute clean coal practices will never exist, so what good does it to stop all mountain-top mining? What people also forget is that this stops a lot of deep mining too. Deep mines dump their slurry (coal waste products) into the same slurry pond that Mountain-top mines do. An EPA permit is required to dump the slurry into slurry ponds. Since all EPA permits have been held up, then a good deal of deep-mining has been stopped as well.

I wish people would quit beating around the bush and understand that there is absolutely no good ever going to come out of this permit hold. It is only making things worse. The act is not penalizing mining companies for not following the guidelines, it's just ignorance.

[TheRealVille]

Well, do you have an explanation to why he is putting a hold to all Mountain-Top Mining permits? I'm betting no. If you do, then it won't be convincing. Why not you might ask? Because, there is no reason for it. As I have said time and time again, most mining companies do everything they can to minimize pollution as much as possible. I will tell you right now, I'm all for minimizing pollution and I'm for all the guidelines, rules, and regulations that go with the D.E.P.

Absolute clean coal practices will never exist, so what good does it to stop all mountain-top mining? What people also forget is that this stops a lot of deep mining too. Deep mines dump their slurry (coal waste products) into the same slurry pond that Mountain-top mines do. An EPA permit is required to dump the slurry into slurry ponds. Since all EPA permits have been held up, then a good deal of deep-mining has been stopped as well.

I wish people would quit beating around the bush and understand that there is absolutely no good ever going to come out of this permit hold. It is only making things worse. The act is not penalizing mining companies for not following the guidelines, it's just ignorance.

The EPA is doing it. According to your very own article, it has to do with the "rubble" that is going into the water. From what I understand from the article, they aren't stopping mountain-top mining, just checking out about a 100 permits to see if they are abiding by the "clean water act".

[TheRealVille]

Wrong...I do see the Big picture. However, this thread is not about republican or democrat.

BTW, the scare tactics aren't getting to me.

Obama's administration is what scares me...Our government getting into the car business and the banking industry and the insurance industry, and so on and so on.

This is NOT what our country is about.

Fox, if you will notice, I was answering jetpilot in the post you quoted me in. Your OP was the scare tatcic agenda I was addressing.

BTW, Bush started all of the bailouts you mention.

[TheRealVille]

Barack Obama has called climate change “one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation” and has proposed investing $150 billion over ten years to research and develop renewables, biofuels, efficiency, “clean coal,” and other clean technologies. Despite his insistence on the importance of low-emissions coal plants and developing clean coal technologies, Obama does not support a moratorium on new coal development until these technologies are viable.[1] He has stated, however, that he “will consider whatever policy tools are necessary, including standards that ban new traditional coal facilities, to ensure that we move quickly to commercialize and deploy low carbon coal technology.” Obama claims a “stringent cap” on carbon will render it uneconomic to build new, traditional coal facilities and will discourage the further use of existing but “inefficient” facilities. Existing coal plants would be retrofitted with coal capture and sequestration technology if and when it becomes available.[2]

Obama has historically been a proponent of the coal industry, and is a staunch supporter of "clean coal" technologies. In 1997, he voted to use sales taxes to help reopen closed coal mines and create "incentives to attract new businesses that use coal." In 2001, he voted for legislation that provided $3.5 billion in loan guarantees to construct coal-fired power pants with no means of controlling carbon emissions. Before voting for the bill, Obama said, "I am a strong supporter, I think, of downstate coal interests and our need to prop up and improve the outputs downstate." In 2003, Obama voted to allow $300 million in bonds for the construction and expansion of coal plants. When he ran for U.S. Senate in 2004, he announced that "there's always going to be a role for coal" in Illinois.[3]

On January 4, 2007, Obama helped introduce the Coal-to-Liquids Fuel Promotion Act of 2007. The bill was intended to help grow the coal-to-liquids industry through tax incentives and public-private partnerships. However, while the bill may have appealed to the coal industry in his home state of Illinois, he was strongly criticized by environmentalists.[4] Obama then qualified his position by saying he would only support liquefied coal if it emitted 20 percent less carbon over its lifecycle than conventional fuels. [5]

On June 19, 2007, Obama voted in favor of an amendment to establish a loan program for projects to produce syngas from coal and other feedstocks, while working to lower greenhouse gas emissions.[6] The amendment did not pass.

On October 8, 2007, Obama reaffirmed his support for "clean coal" technology but stated his support for "a ban on new traditional coal facilities":
And we must find a way to stop coal from polluting our atmosphere without pretending that our nation's most abundant energy source will just go away. It won't. It will also require taking steps to ensure that China's coal emissions are curbed as well. Already, some coal pollution from China's dirty plants is making its way to California. That's why we must invest in clean coal technologies that we can use at home and share with the world. Until those technologies are available, I will rely on the carbon cap and whatever tools are necessary to stop new dirty coal plants from being built in America - including a ban on new traditional coal facilities.[7]
Below is a list of statements made by Barack Obama and his campaign about coal issues.

It seems Obama isn't as against coal as FOXSports would have you believe.

"Clean coal technology" are scrubbers and sulfer recovery units(SCR's) that have began being installed on powerplants for the last several years.

PS. Don't tell me I don't know about clean coal technology, I build coal fired power houses and scrubbers and SCR's that go on them. I know of 2 new coal fired units just built in my area, along with 4 new scrubbers. Those plants will still have to use the same amount of coal to fire them, the emissions will just be cleaner coming out of the stacks. I also know of 2 more coal units to be built starting later this year. Coal will be used as long as there is coal in the ground to use.

[jetpilot]

^^You need to study cap-and-trade and get back to us.

[TheRealVille]

^^You need to study cap-and-trade and get back to us.

You need to know that I've been building new coal fired powerhouse units and scrubbers for the last 2 years. It takes coal to run them. I will be helping to build the other 2 new units to be started later this year. [U]It will take coal to run them also[/U]. I don't need to study cap and trade, I know the units I built take coal to run them. They use clean coal technology so they will benefit from any cap and trade because they are now clean coal units with lower emissions, because of the scrubbers I helped put on them.

[jetpilot]

I don't care what you build, you better study up on cap-and-trade, which Obama is FOR. Not going to try to educate you any more...

Study.cap.and.trade. --- Until you do, you don't know what is going on, even in your own business.

[TheRealVille]

I don't care what you build, you better study up on cap-and-trade, which Obama is FOR. Not going to try to educate you any more...

Study.cap.and.trade. --- Until you do, you don't know what is going on, even in your own business.

Do you dispute the fact that all these new coal fired units will take KY coal to fire them?

[COLOR="Blue"]Cap and Trade[/COLOR]

[jetpilot]

Do you dispute the fact that all these new coal fired units will take KY coal to fire them?

You still don't get it...start here...and don't waste any more of my time until you know what cap-and-trade and/or the carbon tax is...

[TheRealVille]

Are these 4 new units going to use coal to fire them? Where is that coal going to come from? Very simple questions.

[jetpilot]

Do you dispute the fact that all these new coal fired units will take KY coal to fire them? Simply put, Obama is for cleaner emissions, as am I also.

Cap and Trade

Obviously you don't know what Obama's definition of clean coal is and what the cost to the industry and consumers will be. You are going to have to dig a little deeper than Cap and Trade 101, lol...

[TheRealVille]

Will you just answer my questions above? Of these 4 new coal units I am involved in building, what will fire them and where will it come from?