[Old School]

I wont doubt at all that some of the people opposed to MTR where some odd characters, I've met many of those myself. Redneck just used that one example to cast a stereotype on an entire group of people, which is completely wrong. They're are people that are completely off base on both sides of this issue, which is common to any situation.

The meeting at hazard also had a biologist, I don't recall a lawyer speaking, but I didn't stay long. The biologist I heard made some very good and correct points, which where never answered by those from the coal supporters.

As far as the business people coming in, my guess would be that a lot of those business are owned by miners, or mining companies, or have deals with mining companies such as the car dealers. But as I stated, I'm not calling for an end to all mining, just MTR. All they where trying to do is strike up fear in people, just like the misleading videos of the region in the 60's caused many people to have sympathy for Appalachians. Both sources of info are very misleading about the reality of the whole situation.

I will never switch sides on this issue, i'm completely against MTR, and my mind will never change. I believe what we are sacrificing is not worth the reward. The damages caused to this region by MTR will never be repaired. I'm sure coal companies can come up with a way to mine the coal that is safe for the environment, but that wold probably make them think, and spend a little money. MTR is just a cheap way to mine coal, companies don't give a **** what they do to the environment and people of this region because most of them don't live here. It's all about profit, nothing else, but thats the way life is in this capitalistic economy.

The more and more I drive around this region, the more I realize time is quickly running out to save these mountains. I know of at least 7 huge MTR sites that I must look at everyday when I drive from my home to school (The worst one is really a series of jobs that spreads about 7 miles from big branch to Carr Creek lake. It just fuels the fire of hatred I have for MTR.

Here are some energy solutions that I have mentioned before Nuclear, Wind, Solar. Some sources are saying that in 5 years solar power will be cheap enough to compete with carbon generated electricity. One source that is really interesting is artificial photosynthesis. We talked about this in physics today. AP is really the same process plants use. They use sunlight, which produces UV rays, and visible light, (which comes in a form of pure energy called photons), to split water to get carbon and hydrogen, and use the hydrogen to produce clean energy. It's a good idea, but it still early in development.

Bio-diesels and ethanol fuels are becoming very popular, and are gaining a lot of support from companies and countries across the world.

All of these ideas really don't matter, because we all know that politicians have been bought by oil, and coal companies. Profit comes first, while public opinion, and public health come in a distant second. Instead of reliable and renewable future energy sources we get BS ideas like clean coal, or coal to gas. So to be honest it really doesn't matter what energy sources I mention, unless a major change happens in government, they will all mean nothing.

Coach, I ran across this article about Ethanol Fuel, earlier today and thought you may want to check it out.

http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacob...ST0207.pdf