Please do not overlook Washington caving in on coal - - - strip-mining, total environmental destruction!

Visualize a big mountain, overgrown by a forest of thousands of trees!
Now clear-cut the forest, then blow the top off the mountain, and dump the debris into stream beds. This turns forests into moonscapes, pollutes the air with coal and rock dust, and poisons water supplies!

Coal strip mining, including the destruction of thousands of trees, is an environmental disaster. Is it because union members are doing the destruction that Washington is supporting it? CLICK HERE for a more detailed blog.
I give permission to copy this entire blog to send it to President Obama, members of Congress and Senate.

Automotive pitfalls: If you had to buy a new car, with only two choices - - hydrogen or plug-in - - with which one would (as we see it) the consumer Rip-Off continue. CLICK HERE for details.

Please contact your Washington representatives to point out the need for initiating a strong conservation program; 30% less imported oil, 30% less CO2 produced, 30% less of (total trade deficit) US sold to foreign interests! Nothing wrong with that! CLICK HERE for details.

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of PickensPlan to add comments!

Join this Ning Network

Comment by Steve at work on June 19, 2009 at 7:47am: Strip mine reclaimation is a crap shoot at best. I have ran cattle on reclaimed stip mine land and it is uneven in production and you occasionally lose a cow to her falling into a sinkhole. After every spring thaw you have tons of rock on the surface that has heaved up. Another great theory that in real life does not work out all that well.

Comment by Joy Montgomery on June 17, 2009 at 3:24pm: It seems much like the destruction shown in the May National Geographic in the pursuit of oil from the Canadian oil sands when there's a less costly, more efficient, less destructive way that could help during the transition. It's short-sighted.

Comment by Dr. Hans J. Kugler, PhD on June 17, 2009 at 2:02pm: Essentially I agree.
As we have shown in calculations posted at www.ElToroEXPOSED.com, in order to bring nature back to an equilibrium where it can recover (and not keep dying, as clearly established with the facts that presently trees can only balance 54% of CO2 produced, and in scientific publications dealing with the tremendous increase in dead zones in oceans; acidification, H2O + CO2 -----> H2CO3), we need to reduce CO2 production by around 20 billion pounds of CO2 per day. This level can never be reached - - - even if all cars were electric, all trucks would be NG/Hybrid electrics, and airplanes would be built with carbon-polymers to make them as light and fuel-efficient as possible - - - without REDUCING by at least 70% the use of coal-fired electricity stations. At that level not even (very questionable) CO2-sequestering could be effective. Would you feel comfortable being close to any CO2 sequestation site, with billions and billions of pounds of liquid CO2 buried, knowing that a simple earthquake could open Pandora's box and release the (heavier than air) CO2????????
This then brings us back to basics:
a) Why increase use of coal? We need to, GREATLY, decrease coal usage.
b) Why destroy mountain forestation when deforestation is the # 1 preventable cause of CO2 increases?
And, yes, CO2 taxation is good for a transition period, and WILL help to decrease sources of CO2, and support clean energy projects.

Comment by Jim Martin on June 17, 2009 at 1:08pm: Coal surface or strip mining is not as bad a problem as some try to make out that it is. It does create a temporary loss of farm or forest land, but the land can be reclaimed. Often, the reclaimed land is more useful than the original, and there is little long-term loss to the environment.

The real problem with coal is the high carbon content. It creates more carbon dioxide greenhouse gas than almost any other energy source. There are programs called "clean" coal that put CO2 in storage, but I can not see how such programs can lead to successful long-term use of coal without greenhouse problems.

If there is a way to "tax" creation of CO2 and other pollutants, then the use of coal and other polluting energy sources would be on an equal footing with renewable sources. That tax could take the form of credits that can be traded or many other options. It can also be revenue neutral. Getting some nations to follow suit and adopt such programs to reduce their pollution will not be easy, but it will be impossible if we do not have a program.

Comment by W. Dan Chance on June 17, 2009 at 12:06pm: I don't know how much more stress I can take. When will this nightmare end? What is it going to take to stop this madness? It is too much.