He was willing to make a deal

Climate Progress promulgated an op-ed by Senator Robert Byrd published in West Virginia’s MetroNews, yet omitted my snarky comment, so I will try to recall the expressed viewpoint without as much of my biting wit. No promises.

As I recall my comment was mean to an old gray fox. To his credit, Senator Robert Byrd was one of “a trio of West Virginia’s top politicians, who blasted Massey Energy’s arrogance and blatant disregard for human life, after the company stubbornly refused to assist the Raleigh County School District” in relocating the school. The school is located next to a toxic coal prep plant, toxic waste pond and MTR (Mountain Top Removal) site, all owned and operated by Massey Energy.

Kids on Horizontal Bars
Just some kids on a school playground, Citizen, move along! Except that, as HuffPo contributor sparki reminded us: this is the Marsh Fork elementary school.

I had begun my snarky comment by agreeing with CP commentator JR, who expressed concern about Byrd’s op-ed. JR points out that promoting clean coal is deception; and, thus, it is fallacy to compromise with coal state senators and “funnel massive amounts of money to… something that ultimately will not work” for the sake of garnering their vote “on a Cap and Trade regime.”

If the climate issue is a dire one and we have few chances to get it right, does it pay to cut a deal with the “coal devil” if 40-50% of the alternative energy money goes toward sequestration and new coal plants? The reality to me seems to be that this is going to be a lot of wasted time / effort down a false path initially as we find out 1) that coal is still toxic in its extraction and 2) still a finite fossil fuel subject to the same “peaking” 20-30 years from now as oil.

While the seemingly “conciliatory” tone to the op-ed may have stunned some, this blog remained quite concerned about the rhetoric, and its use to advocate for “easing emission standards and time lines.” Especially worrisome was his insistence that we continue to use coal. The sly old fox has been in a few chicken coops in his day.

When Senator Byrd wrote, “the notion of holding the health care of over 300 million Americans hostage in exchange for a handful of coal permits is beyond foolish; it is morally indefensible,” was he also implying in the op-ed a willingness to hold hostage the health of all life on the Planet for the sake of coal company profits? How can such behavior be morally defensible?

Let’s speak much more truth. What “vexes some in the environmental community,” Senator, is a strategy by the fossil fuel industry that precludes equal development of alternative energy to supplant “the use of coal for base load power generation in America.” This is policy enacted by their minions that represent the coal industry in Washington, D.C. Without any serious attempt to reduce degradation of the atmosphere brought about by emissions from coal-fired power plants, Congress fails the public trust.

Caution. Climate Destruction Ahead.
“Greenpeace activists rappelled off of a Pittsburgh bridge with a massive banner displaying our message to G20 leaders. The banner, a stylized “road sign,” warns of the political maneuvering and delays that have put an international climate treaty in jeopardy as the world enters the final stretch on the road to Copenhagen.”

Howsoever, when you speak truth to power, the power elite gets twitchy, particularly about “fear mongering, grandstanding and outrage as a strategy.” Yes, human caused emissions that raise greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to such a level that the average global temperature will rise 6 degrees C is something to fear greatly. Yes, the scale and scope of the problem warrants our best attention; tipping points happen at a global level. And, yes, Green Peace Keepers, outrage at U.S. recalcitrance will grow after COP15 adjourns.

It is “ironic” (read ecocidal) that the Senator from West Virginia calls for “finding a prudent and profitable middle ground (my emphasis)” when the coal industry’s continued poisoning of air and water is one of the most immoderate things one can possibly imagine. It is a fine example of Roberts’ Syllogism of Doom.

Senator Robert Byrd playing the fiddle
And, now for my version of Sympathy for Massey Energy

The devil went down to Georgia
He was lookin’ for a soul to steal
He was in a bind
‘Cause he was way behind
And he was willin’ to make a deal

The Devil Went Down to Georgia” by Charlie Daniels

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Other Possibly Related AG Posts Automatically Generated

2 Comments

  1. jcwinnie
    Posted 2009-12-8 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

    John M. Broder informs that “a group of Senate Democrats who are considered swing votes on pending climate change and energy legislation sent a letter to President Obama detailing their conditions for supporting any domestic bill or international treaty to address global warming.”

    The senators, most from industrial states or regions heavily dependent on coal for power generation, laid out 10 provisions any agreement must contain to win their support. They timed their letter to guide Mr. Obama’s thinking as he prepares to go to Copenhagen next week to address the United Nations conference on climate change that is working toward a binding international treaty. With few if any Republicans likely to support legislation imposing mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions, sponsors of the bill will need to round up virtually all Democrats to pass it, including these nine.

    The senators who signed the letter are Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mark Begich of Alaska. All are fence-sitters on the legislation and their votes will be needed when the Senate bill comes up for debate early next year.

    The signers of the letter say they will support climate legislation and international efforts to combat global warming if all nations — industrialized as well as developing — are held to stringent limits on climate-altering emissions. They say that tough verification and enforcement mechanisms are necessary. They want to see trade penalties levied against nations that do not comply with any international agreement. They say that any program to transfer technology to emerging nations must contain copyright protections for intellectual property. And any treaty or bill must protect American jobs and promote low-cost solutions to environmental problems.

    The conditions are shared by virtually all the so-called Brown Dogs who come from manufacturing states and those that produce or use large amounts of coal. They are familiar to those who have followed the debate and reflect concerns about possible sharp increases in energy costs and loss of jobs in the heartland.

    How does one negotiate with hostage takers?

  2. jcwinnie
    Posted 2009-12-20 at 9:57 am | Permalink

    Speaking about concern for the citizenry, if the health insurance legislation, which took precedent in Congress over a climate bill is any indication, the world is very much farked.

    On Facebook Donna J. Pemmitt comments upon a T r u t h o u t post. “Well guess what… if the health care industry on the stock exchange reached a 52 year high on Friday… they must know something we don’t …namely that they’re on the gravy train and we’re taking it up the …!”

One Trackback

  1. By Makes One Wonder – After Gutenberg on 2010-1-16 at 12:54 pm

    [...] foreign nation had done this to us, we would have declared war on them.” Instead, in Washington our elected representatives get their power, literally and figuratively, from such an abominable [...]

Bad Behavior has blocked 2397 access attempts in the last 7 days.