Hi all, hope you’ll read my latest climate deep dive for the L.A. Times and let me know what you think. Here’s how it starts:
>*In the early morning light, it’s easy to mistake the towering gray mounds for an odd-looking mountain range — pale and dull and devoid of life, some pine trees and shrublands in the foreground with lazy blue skies extending up beyond the peaks.*
>*But the mounds aren’t mountains.*
>*They’re enormous piles of dirt, torn from the ground by crane-like machines called draglines to open paths to the rich coal seams beneath. And even though we’re in rural southeastern Montana, more than 800 miles from the Pacific Ocean, West Coast cities are largely to blame for the destruction of this landscape.*
>*Workers at the Rosebud Mine load coal onto a conveyor belt, which carries the planet-wrecking fuel to a power plant in the small town next door. Plant operators in Colstrip burn the coal to produce electricity, much of which is shipped by power line to homes and businesses in the Portland and Seattle areas. It’s been that way for decades.*
>*“The West Coast markets are what created this,” Anne Hedges says, as we watch a dragline move dirt.*
>*She sounds frustrated, and with good reason.*
>*Hedges and her fellow Montana environmentalists were happy when Oregon and Washington passed laws requiring 100% clean energy in the next two decades. But they’re furious that electric utilities in those states are planning to stick with coal for as long as the laws allow, and in some cases making deals to give away their Colstrip shares to co-owners who seem determined to keep the plant running long into the future.*
>*“Coal is not dead yet,” Hedges says. “It’s still alive and well.”*
>*That’s an uncomfortable reality for West Coasters critical of red-state environmental policies but not in the habit of urging their politicians to work across state lines to change them — especially when doing so might involve compromise with Republicans.*
>*Instead, California has prioritized in-state wind and solar farms, bowing to the will of labor unions that want those jobs.*
>*It’s hard to blame Golden State politicians, and voters, for taking the easy path.*
>*But global warming is a global problem — and whether we like it or not, the electric grid is a giant, interconnected machine. Coal plants in conservative states help fuel the ever-deadlier heat waves, fires and storms battering California and other progressive bastions. The electrons generated by those plants flow into a network of wires that keep the lights on across the American West.*
>*Also important: Montana and other sparsely populated conservative states control two U.S. Senate seats each, and at least three electoral votes apiece in presidential elections. Additional federal support for clean energy rests partly in their hands.*
>*Those are the practical considerations. Then there are the ethical ones.*
Again — that’s just the beginning. Really hope you’ll read the whole story and tell me what you think!
mhornberger on
>>What do big cities owe those towns and tribes for producing our power and living with our air and water pollution?
These coal-producing areas were paid for that coal. They also have lobbied and used their political weight in the Senate and elsewhere to slow the transition from coal, and fossil fuels in general, as long as possible. *Also*, any programs for job training, relocation etc will be fought tooth and nail by many in these areas. We can’t force help on them. Even if they’re simultaneously rejecting job retraining and whatnot while also complaining that no one gives a shit about their community.
>>If they refuse to join the transition, how should we respond?
Ignore them and just move to clean energy despite their complaints. How did we respond when economic change hit other populations before them? You move to where the jobs are, change to fit a changing economy, or don’t. Rural towns [often have to](https://archive.ph/QmkpZ) resist change, because by definition a small town is a smaller economy, and will be dependent on fewer sources of jobs. That sucks, but the world is going to keep changing. “But they’ll be mad” is true, but they were already mad. “But people are suffering” is true, but it was ever not true.
3 Comments
Hi all, hope you’ll read my latest climate deep dive for the L.A. Times and let me know what you think. Here’s how it starts:
>*In the early morning light, it’s easy to mistake the towering gray mounds for an odd-looking mountain range — pale and dull and devoid of life, some pine trees and shrublands in the foreground with lazy blue skies extending up beyond the peaks.*
>*But the mounds aren’t mountains.*
>*They’re enormous piles of dirt, torn from the ground by crane-like machines called draglines to open paths to the rich coal seams beneath. And even though we’re in rural southeastern Montana, more than 800 miles from the Pacific Ocean, West Coast cities are largely to blame for the destruction of this landscape.*
>*Workers at the Rosebud Mine load coal onto a conveyor belt, which carries the planet-wrecking fuel to a power plant in the small town next door. Plant operators in Colstrip burn the coal to produce electricity, much of which is shipped by power line to homes and businesses in the Portland and Seattle areas. It’s been that way for decades.*
>*“The West Coast markets are what created this,” Anne Hedges says, as we watch a dragline move dirt.*
>*She sounds frustrated, and with good reason.*
>*Hedges and her fellow Montana environmentalists were happy when Oregon and Washington passed laws requiring 100% clean energy in the next two decades. But they’re furious that electric utilities in those states are planning to stick with coal for as long as the laws allow, and in some cases making deals to give away their Colstrip shares to co-owners who seem determined to keep the plant running long into the future.*
>*“Coal is not dead yet,” Hedges says. “It’s still alive and well.”*
>*That’s an uncomfortable reality for West Coasters critical of red-state environmental policies but not in the habit of urging their politicians to work across state lines to change them — especially when doing so might involve compromise with Republicans.*
>*One example: California lawmakers have* [*refused to pass bills*](https://www.desertsun.com/story/tech/science/energy/2018/09/06/california-approves-100-climate-friendly-energy-punts-other-bills/1204451002/) *that would make it easier to share clean electricity across the West, passing up the chance to spur renewable energy development in windy red states such as Montana and Wyoming — and to show them it’s possible to create construction jobs and tax revenues with renewable energy, not just fossil fuels.*
>*Instead, California has prioritized in-state wind and solar farms, bowing to the will of labor unions that want those jobs.*
>*It’s hard to blame Golden State politicians, and voters, for taking the easy path.*
>*But global warming is a global problem — and whether we like it or not, the electric grid is a giant, interconnected machine. Coal plants in conservative states help fuel the ever-deadlier heat waves, fires and storms battering California and other progressive bastions. The electrons generated by those plants flow into a network of wires that keep the lights on across the American West.*
>*Also important: Montana and other sparsely populated conservative states control two U.S. Senate seats each, and at least three electoral votes apiece in presidential elections. Additional federal support for clean energy rests partly in their hands.*
>*Those are the practical considerations. Then there are the ethical ones.*
Again — that’s just the beginning. Really hope you’ll read the whole story and tell me what you think!
>>What do big cities owe those towns and tribes for producing our power and living with our air and water pollution?
These coal-producing areas were paid for that coal. They also have lobbied and used their political weight in the Senate and elsewhere to slow the transition from coal, and fossil fuels in general, as long as possible. *Also*, any programs for job training, relocation etc will be fought tooth and nail by many in these areas. We can’t force help on them. Even if they’re simultaneously rejecting job retraining and whatnot while also complaining that no one gives a shit about their community.
>>If they refuse to join the transition, how should we respond?
Ignore them and just move to clean energy despite their complaints. How did we respond when economic change hit other populations before them? You move to where the jobs are, change to fit a changing economy, or don’t. Rural towns [often have to](https://archive.ph/QmkpZ) resist change, because by definition a small town is a smaller economy, and will be dependent on fewer sources of jobs. That sucks, but the world is going to keep changing. “But they’ll be mad” is true, but they were already mad. “But people are suffering” is true, but it was ever not true.
Yes we can – there are alternatives.