# Obama's War on Coal Country Families



## longknife

Here's the part of the article that hit me in the gut:


*Millions will get laid off—in coal mines, power plants, factories, shops. Entire families and communities will be pounded and impoverished.*


Well, he DID promise to do this when he ran for election and re-election. Yet, many of these people still voted for him!


And, of course, there are plenty of those who will attack the source instead of the message @

Trampling on Coal Country families


----------



## boedicca

The poor and desperate are Much Easier To Control...as long as the gubmint has a bunch of militarized police adjuncts.


----------



## Mr. H.

Plenty of Obama Bucks to go around for the newly-unemployed. 
Lefties and Enviro-Nazis could give a fuck about "families".
This Socialist Marxist Kenyan must be reigned in.


----------



## boedicca

Oh, just give them Obamaphones and Michelle school lunches...


----------



## Moonglow

Do I need to be darker to get the freebies??


----------



## Moonglow

Do you think the whalers are still bitching about oil production cutting out their revenues?


----------



## Mr. H.

Moonglow said:


> Do you think the whalers are still bitching about oil production cutting out their revenues?


Bart's ass was a more appropriate avatar for you.


----------



## Moonglow

Mr. H. said:


> Bart's ass was a more appropriate avatar for you.



Too large of pixel count and I didn't feel like resizing it. Does the Giggiddy gif work for you?


----------



## Camp

The coal industry declared war on America long before anyone ever heard of Obama.

youtube.com/watch?v=p5RcbPZXUZo

youtube.com/watch?v=jKw4CM_aBmc


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

Moonglow said:


> Do you think the whalers are still bitching about oil production cutting out their revenues?



Not even remotely the same thing as that was a result of basic supply, demand, and labor.  In the case of coal, it is almost entirely due to government interference in the marketplace.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

Moonglow said:


> Do you think the whalers are still bitching about oil production cutting out their revenues?



And the makers of buggy whips.


----------



## Moonglow

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Not even remotely the same thing as that was a result of basic supply, demand, and labor.  In the case of coal, it is almost entirely due to government interference in the marketplace.



Coal is cheaper on the fuel cost side, but capital cost are lower with natural gas..


----------



## Old Rocks

Were the coal industry forced to pay for the environmental damage they do, it would not be a cheap power source. Were they forced to pay for the medical costs of the air pollution and harm to people's health, it would not be a cheap source of power. In fact, when you look at the cost of 'clean coal', solar and wind are a bargain.


----------



## Shrimpbox

http://instituteforenergyresearch.o...quality-and-coal-fired-power-plants-final.pdf

Check out pages 8,9, and 10.

This is such a great article and shows the difference between perception and fact. What is even more pertinent(just like the fate of commercial fishermen) is that the govt demands you spend billions of dollars in upgrades and then after you do they say we are going to shut you down cause we feel like it. The report says our air is cleaner not dirtier even with coal producing fifty per cent of electrical energy.take the subsidies away and factor in for dependability and I bet coal is competitive. And as a believer in consistency explain why coal plants producing mercury must shut down but light bulbs producing the same amount of of mercury are mandated by the govt.

As far as the human cost, Obama has never been concerned about jobs for people but rather whether he can buy their votes by getting them on welfare. Mission accomplished.


----------



## bripat9643

Moonglow said:


> Do you think the whalers are still bitching about oil production cutting out their revenues?



Was destroying the whaling industry official government policy in the 1870s?

It's amazing to me how all you liberal assholes claim to be so concerned about the welfare of the poor and the middle class, but the minute their welfare conflicts with your schemes to save the environment, you don't hesitate to shit on them and then laugh about it.


----------



## bripat9643

Old Rocks said:


> Were the coal industry forced to pay for the environmental damage they do, it would not be a cheap power source. Were they forced to pay for the medical costs of the air pollution and harm to people's health, it would not be a cheap source of power. In fact, when you look at the cost of 'clean coal', solar and wind are a bargain.



Can you document any medical costs from coal pollution whatsoever?  Can you produce a single diagnoses that says "problem caused by coal pollution?"

So called "clean coal" is a joke.  Coal is already clean.  CO2 is not pollution.


----------



## bripat9643

Moonglow said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not even remotely the same thing as that was a result of basic supply, demand, and labor.  In the case of coal, it is almost entirely due to government interference in the marketplace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coal is cheaper on the fuel cost side, but capital cost are lower with natural gas..
Click to expand...


You don't save on capital costs by decommission perfectly good coal fired power plants.


----------



## bripat9643

Camp said:


> The coal industry declared war on America long before anyone ever heard of Obama.
> 
> youtube.com/watch?v=p5RcbPZXUZo
> 
> youtube.com/watch?v=jKw4CM_aBmc



Yeah, providing America with cheap, clean, reliable electric power is the way you declare war on it.


----------



## william the wie

Disagree bripat. Fracking coal seams provides even cheaper energy than coal.


----------



## HenryBHough

It's not that Obama hates the miners.

It's more generalized.  He simply hates having anyone not entirely dependent on government (read "Democrat Party") handouts.


----------



## Shanty

Here's what I hope is the future for coal, and saving the coal related jobs from natural gas beating the shit out of it on costs at both point of purchase, and emissions costs. 

EPA approves FutureGen plan for CO2 storage - News - The State Journal-Register - Springfield IL


----------



## Mr. H.

Coal incineration emissions can be mitigated to a least denominator. And for a fraction of what the Obama administration spends on "alternatives". 

Obama and his EPA suck donkey sphincter.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

_Obama's War on Coal Country Families _

Is yet another rightwing lie.


----------



## Moonglow

Shanty said:


> Here's what I hope is the future for coal, and saving the coal related jobs from natural gas beating the shit out of it on costs at both point of purchase, and emissions costs.
> 
> EPA approves FutureGen plan for CO2 storage - News - The State Journal-Register - Springfield IL



Good luck, the US is #1 in ze world,,,hahahahahahahahahahah,,,in gas production!!

 Then why the hell is it so high when you use it in your home?


----------



## Shanty

Moonglow said:


> Shanty said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's what I hope is the future for coal, and saving the coal related jobs from natural gas beating the shit out of it on costs at both point of purchase, and emissions costs.
> 
> EPA approves FutureGen plan for CO2 storage - News - The State Journal-Register - Springfield IL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck, the US is #1 in ze world,,,hahahahahahahahahahah,,,in gas production!!
> 
> Then why the hell is it so high when you use it in your home?
Click to expand...

I was talking more about industrial uses. Natural gas HRSG power plants are replacing the coal fleet for power providers, because natural gas is cheaper to use, and has half of the carbon emissions, and no fly ash to deal with. So, HRSGs don't have to have scrubbers or SO2 SCR units built into the design, or retrofitted.

Some good news for the future is that natural gas exports will happen soon, and the price of gas will go up (it's always been a volatile commodity with wild price swings).


----------



## Moonglow

Yeah, our coop moved over to the new gas fired plant near us....then the gas prices skyrocketed last winter and electric ran 400 bucks a month for 3 months....then only around 300 for 3 months, Coulda bought a lot of weed for that cash...bummer


----------



## Shanty

Moonglow said:


> Yeah, our coop moved over to the new gas fired plant near us....then the gas prices skyrocketed last winter and electric ran 400 bucks a month for 3 months....then only around 300 for 3 months, Coulda bought a lot of weed for that cash...bummer


How does the co-op pricing work?


----------



## Moonglow

They


Shanty said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, our coop moved over to the new gas fired plant near us....then the gas prices skyrocketed last winter and electric ran 400 bucks a month for 3 months....then only around 300 for 3 months, Coulda bought a lot of weed for that cash...bummer
> 
> 
> 
> How does the co-op pricing work?
Click to expand...

 They buy whoresale, then rape the consumer....It is higher than living in a metropolis....or a megalopolis.....


----------



## Shanty

Moonglow said:


> They
> 
> 
> Shanty said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, our coop moved over to the new gas fired plant near us....then the gas prices skyrocketed last winter and electric ran 400 bucks a month for 3 months....then only around 300 for 3 months, Coulda bought a lot of weed for that cash...bummer
> 
> 
> 
> How does the co-op pricing work?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They buy whoresale, then rape the consumer....It is higher than living in a metropolis....or a megalopolis.....
Click to expand...

How do your bills compare with other electric companies that are privately owned, for profit, power suppliers?


----------



## Moonglow

I see my Muddr in laws electric bill and it runs 50% less than the COOP, but you know that has to do with the fact that her supplier is getting hot of their griddle...they cook it themselves, we get it second hand,,and the concentration of customers per square foot divided by the marginal effect rate of flow....


----------



## HenryBHough

Ah, but COOPS are socialistic by their very nature.  You who participate in them surely understood that so why all the whinging about the costs you brought on yourselves?  Oh, that's right!  Liberals lie, even to themselves, about the cost of their cockamamie ideas and try to blame the thoroughly predictable expensive results on others.  Are you absolutely SURE you can't find some way to blame Booooooshhhhh?


----------



## Shanty

Moonglow said:


> I see my Muddr in laws electric bill and it runs 50% less than the COOP, but you know that has to do with the fact that her supplier is getting hot of their griddle...they cook it themselves, we get it second hand,,and the concentration of customers per square foot divided by the marginal effect rate of flow....


Odd, because most local or state owned electricity providers usually run far less than the private companies in costs. You'd think a co-mop would be able to do something closer to what government owned power providers charge, instead of the more expensive private providers.


----------



## Moonglow

You waited all that time to leap, just to let me feed the troll, thinking you were not a demon frog??
The COOP was invited by the farmers in 1948....


----------



## Moonglow

Shanty said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see my Muddr in laws electric bill and it runs 50% less than the COOP, but you know that has to do with the fact that her supplier is getting hot of their griddle...they cook it themselves, we get it second hand,,and the concentration of customers per square foot divided by the marginal effect rate of flow....
> 
> 
> 
> Odd, because most local or state owned electricity providers usually run far less than the private companies in costs. You'd think a co-mop would be able to do something closer to what government owned power providers charge, instead of the more expensive private providers.
Click to expand...


All I stated was my MIL's bill was 50% lower in cost, I never said that she has a smaller house than I, and her house in not all electric like mine,,,,
because I could feel the force of a spam.....on rye.


----------



## Shanty

Moonglow said:


> Shanty said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see my Muddr in laws electric bill and it runs 50% less than the COOP, but you know that has to do with the fact that her supplier is getting hot of their griddle...they cook it themselves, we get it second hand,,and the concentration of customers per square foot divided by the marginal effect rate of flow....
> 
> 
> 
> Odd, because most local or state owned electricity providers usually run far less than the private companies in costs. You'd think a co-mop would be able to do something closer to what government owned power providers charge, instead of the more expensive private providers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All I stated was my MIL's bill was 50% lower in cost, I never said that she has a smaller house than I, and her house in not all electric like mine,,,,
> because I could feel the force of a spam.....on rye.
Click to expand...

I was asking about the bills in other areas. I didn't ask about your MIL's house. I was going by the first statement that the co-op was expensive. I just found it odd, that's all.


----------



## bripat9643

Shanty said:


> Here's what I hope is the future for coal, and saving the coal related jobs from natural gas beating the shit out of it on costs at both point of purchase, and emissions costs.
> 
> EPA approves FutureGen plan for CO2 storage - News - The State Journal-Register - Springfield IL



Natural gas isn't "beating the shit out of coal."   The EPA is beating the shit out of coal.  It's regulating coal into extinction.  The technology you mention above is a joke.  Anyone who thinks a coal plant that has to remove the CO2 from it's emissions is ever going to be cost competitive is the biggest kind of fool there is.


----------



## bripat9643

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> _Obama's War on Coal Country Families _
> 
> Is yet another rightwing lie.



You know how we can be certain what the truth is?  You call it a "right-wing" lie.


----------



## bripat9643

william the wie said:


> Disagree bripat. Fracking coal seams provides even cheaper energy than coal.



Never heard of anyone "fracking coal seams."


----------



## Shanty

bripat9643 said:


> Shanty said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's what I hope is the future for coal, and saving the coal related jobs from natural gas beating the shit out of it on costs at both point of purchase, and emissions costs.
> 
> EPA approves FutureGen plan for CO2 storage - News - The State Journal-Register - Springfield IL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Natural gas isn't "beating the shit out of coal."   The EPA is beating the shit out of coal.  It's regulating coal into extinction.  The technology you mention above is a joke.  Anyone who thinks a coal plant that has to remove the CO2 from it's emissions is ever going to be cost competitive is the biggest kind of fool there is.
Click to expand...

You're obviously ignorant about this, too.  

The coal power plant managers and power company execs I talk to all point to the relative cheapness of natural gas as the biggest reason for coal taking a beating. You can't argue against dollars and cents. And natural gas relies on by very little in the way of scrubbing pollutants, and has half of the carbon emissions of coal. Making carbon capture and sequestration cheaper is going to be necessary to be able to see US energy needs going into the future as gas price volatility is certain. There was a lot of natural gas HRSGs being built 20 years ago, that saw many of them built then barely used as gas prices spiked in the early 2000s. Coal stepped in to replace gas as the energy source that was favored because it's more stable in pricing. And coal mines aren't hurting much in recent years, if at all. They're selling to China and India to feed the coal fired energy booms there.


----------



## Moonglow

Coal is cheaper at the supply side and gas is cheaper on the capital cost side...


----------



## HenryBHough

In a hybrid energy model gas has one major advantage.

You can turn up the output on a gas fired generating plant more quickly than you can with coal fired.  

That WILL be increasingly important when your "primary" energy source can disappear with the movement of a single cloud or a sudden change in wind.

Of course you'll have to pay dearly for the capital cost of the capacity that sits unused much of the time but that's OK because when energy is out of your budget you don't use much of it and that'll SAVE THE FRIGGIN' PLANET!  But not nearly as efficiently as you libs putting your money where your moufs are and get back in the caves.


----------



## Shanty

Yes, gas turbines and gas fired combined cycle plants are quicker to get up and running. But, the volatility of gas prices is likely going to ensure a need for coal fired boilers to remain in play.


----------



## HenryBHough

Shanty said:


> Yes, gas turbines and gas fired combined cycle plants are quicker to get up and running. But, the volatility of gas prices is likely going to ensure a need for coal fired boilers to remain in play.



Challenged, though by Our Kenyan President having vowed to make electricity so expensive that only the very rich (or those living in government housing as does He) will be able to afford using any.


----------



## Shanty

HenryBHough said:


> Shanty said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, gas turbines and gas fired combined cycle plants are quicker to get up and running. But, the volatility of gas prices is likely going to ensure a need for coal fired boilers to remain in play.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenged, though by Our Kenyan President having vowed to make electricity so expensive that only the very rich (or those living in government housing as does He) will be able to afford using any.
Click to expand...

I don't live in Kenya. In the US, we have a US President.


----------



## HenryBHough

Shanty said:


> I don't live in Kenya. In the US, we have a US President.



Keep on believing.....if it helps overcome grim reality.


----------



## william the wie

bripat9643 said:


> Never heard of anyone "fracking coal seams."


 Mostly in Australia. So far the big concerns are financing the LNG plant and safely navigating Indonesian waters. Normally it pops up on slow news days. Dirt cheap NG and no logistics to get it to market, only in the land of Oz.


----------



## Mr. H.

william the wie said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Never heard of anyone "fracking coal seams."
> 
> 
> 
> Mostly in Australia. So far the big concerns are financing the LNG plant and safely navigating Indonesian waters. Normally it pops up on slow news days. Dirt cheap NG and no logistics to get it to market, only in the land of Oz.
Click to expand...

Isn't that coal-bed methane?


----------



## william the wie

Mr. H. said:


> Isn't that coal-bed methane?


Yeah, methane is a one of I believe three major forms of natural gas. If memory serves HL Hunt's donation/sale of mixed natural gas from his well heads to a high school caused an explosion and since then the gases that make up natural gas are refined into separate gases. 

Correction I did a quick wiki check. While methane is the primary form of natural gas water contamination was the primary cause of explosions in the early days. I take it you are from an area where methane is not the term used?


----------



## Mr. H.

william the wie said:


> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that coal-bed methane?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, methane is a one of I believe three major forms of natural gas. If memory serves HL Hunt's donation/sale of mixed natural gas from his well heads to a high school caused an explosion and since then the gases that make up natural gas are refined into separate gases. I take it you are from an area where methane is not used?
Click to expand...

Illinois is underlain with massive coal deposits. But CBM has not taken off in any significance. Years ago, I did do some contract leasing but that never panned out. 

We are still fucking around with HVHF rules. And true to fashion, the state is stepping all over themselves to fuck it up.


----------



## william the wie

Mr. H. said:


> Illinois is underlain with massive coal deposits. But CBM has not taken off in any significance. Years ago, I did do some contract leasing but that never panned out.
> 
> We are still fucking around with HVHF rules. And true to fashion, the state is stepping all over themselves to fuck it up.


HVHF? Well if coal is mined in IL why isn't the methane extracted as a safety measure to protect the miners and nearby residents?


----------



## Mr. H.

william the wie said:


> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> Illinois is underlain with massive coal deposits. But CBM has not taken off in any significance. Years ago, I did do some contract leasing but that never panned out.
> 
> We are still fucking around with HVHF rules. And true to fashion, the state is stepping all over themselves to fuck it up.
> 
> 
> 
> HVHF? Well if coal is mined in IL why isn't the methane extracted as a safety measure to protect the miners and nearby residents?
Click to expand...

To effectively respond to that, i would have to pull your brain out through your nostrils, bitch.


----------



## Shanty

HenryBHough said:


> Shanty said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't live in Kenya. In the US, we have a US President.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep on believing.....if it helps overcome grim reality.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty good at geography. I'm on the East Coast of the US. I've never been to Kenya. But if you are, that's interesting.


----------



## OnePercenter

longknife said:


> Here's the part of the article that hit me in the gut:
> 
> 
> *Millions will get laid off—in coal mines, power plants, factories, shops. Entire families and communities will be pounded and impoverished.*
> 
> 
> Well, he DID promise to do this when he ran for election and re-election. Yet, many of these people still voted for him!
> 
> 
> And, of course, there are plenty of those who will attack the source instead of the message @
> 
> Trampling on Coal Country families



The commodities market made natural gas cheaper than coal, so why not place blame where it belongs.

Besides, the US exported over 100 million short tons of coal in 2013 with expectations of higher number this year, so 'trampling?'


----------



## bripat9643

OnePercenter said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the part of the article that hit me in the gut:
> 
> 
> *Millions will get laid off—in coal mines, power plants, factories, shops. Entire families and communities will be pounded and impoverished.*
> 
> 
> Well, he DID promise to do this when he ran for election and re-election. Yet, many of these people still voted for him!
> 
> 
> And, of course, there are plenty of those who will attack the source instead of the message @
> 
> Trampling on Coal Country families
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The commodities market made natural gas cheaper than coal, so why not place blame where it belongs.
> 
> Besides, the US exported over 100 million short tons of coal in 2013 with expectations of higher number this year, so 'trampling?'
Click to expand...


No matter how cheap natural gas gets, it's never going to be cheaper to replace a perfectly good coal fired power plant with gas fired plant.  The EPA is forcing power companies to shut down existing power plants.  That has nothing to do with the price of natural gas.


----------



## Grandma

bripat9643 said:


> Can you document any medical costs from coal pollution whatsoever?  Can you produce a single diagnoses that says "problem caused by coal pollution?"
> 
> So called "clean coal" is a joke.  Coal is already clean.  CO2 is not pollution.




Coal slurry kills on contact. It's full of arsenic and other heavy metals. If it gets into the ground, the land is unusable for planting. If it gets in the water supply, the water becomes undrinkable.

Google Little Blue slurry pit, West By God Virginia. 

People lost their homes over that one.


----------



## OnePercenter

bripat9643 said:


> No matter how cheap natural gas gets, it's never going to be cheaper to replace a perfectly good coal fired power plant with gas fired plant.  The EPA is forcing power companies to shut down existing power plants.  That has nothing to do with the price of natural gas.



Why do you have to replace the plant. Just flip the switch. ALL power plants can run on multiple fuels.

It has EVERYTHING to do with price.


----------



## Agit8r

It's about f~cking time!

http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf


----------



## bripat9643

OnePercenter said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No matter how cheap natural gas gets, it's never going to be cheaper to replace a perfectly good coal fired power plant with gas fired plant.  The EPA is forcing power companies to shut down existing power plants.  That has nothing to do with the price of natural gas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you have to replace the plant. Just flip the switch. ALL power plants can run on multiple fuels.
> 
> It has EVERYTHING to do with price.
Click to expand...



ROFL!  Thanks for demonstrating your incredible naivete.  Plants have to be built specifically to run on coal or specifically to run on natural gas.  Coal plants are not being converted to natural gas.  They are being shut down.  The cost of building a new natural gas plant to replace a coal fired plant more than negates any savings in the price of the fuel.  However, before the Obama administration's war on coal and all the EPA regulations imposed with the intention of shutting down coal fired power plants, coal was still cheaper than natural gas.  Obama has made coal more expensive than natural gas, not the laws of supply and demand.


----------



## bripat9643

Grandma said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can you document any medical costs from coal pollution whatsoever?  Can you produce a single diagnoses that says "problem caused by coal pollution?"
> 
> So called "clean coal" is a joke.  Coal is already clean.  CO2 is not pollution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coal slurry kills on contact. It's full of arsenic and other heavy metals. If it gets into the ground, the land is unusable for planting. If it gets in the water supply, the water becomes undrinkable.
> 
> Google Little Blue slurry pit, West By God Virginia.
> 
> People lost their homes over that one.
Click to expand...


That's all total bullshit.  coal slurry does not kill on contact.  You can take a bath in it with no ill effects.  The trace minerals in coal are no worse than the trace minerals in the soil around your house.  The only difference is that you don't burn the soil.  It doesn't "get into the ground" because the coal stays on top.  The water filters into the soil or evaporates.  Yeah, you can't drink water mixed with coal slurry, but you also can't drink any water straight out of a river or lake.  Such water is full of bacterial and other contaminates that have to be removed before it's fed into the water supply.

Your claims are nothing but alarmist paranoia.  No substance used in industry is 100% safe.   Natural gas explodes.  Many more people have been killed from natural gas explosions than have ever been killed by burning coal in a power plant.


----------



## bripat9643

Agit8r said:


> It's about f~cking time!
> 
> http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf



You're a gullible dumbass.  The EPA gave the American Lung Association $20 million to produce that study.  It's about as credible as any of Obama's promises about government run healthcare.


----------



## HenryBHough

Taxpayer money being gifted to private organizations?

GIFTED???


----------



## Agit8r

bripat9643 said:


> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's about f~cking time!
> 
> http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're a gullible dumbass.  The EPA gave the American Lung Association $20 million to produce that study.  It's about as credible as any of Obama's promises about government run healthcare.
Click to expand...


Of course the American Lung Association is part of the commie negro conspiracy.  I should have guessed


----------



## bripat9643

Agit8r said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's about f~cking time!
> 
> http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're a gullible dumbass.  The EPA gave the American Lung Association $20 million to produce that study.  It's about as credible as any of Obama's promises about government run healthcare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the American Lung Association is part of the commie negro conspiracy.  I should have guessed
Click to expand...



No, they are simply a paid propaganda mill that does the EPA's bidding.


----------



## Agit8r

bripat9643 said:


> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's about f~cking time!
> 
> http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're a gullible dumbass.  The EPA gave the American Lung Association $20 million to produce that study.  It's about as credible as any of Obama's promises about government run healthcare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the American Lung Association is part of the commie negro conspiracy.  I should have guessed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, they are simply a paid propaganda mill that does the EPA's bidding.
Click to expand...


And you got that information from what source?


----------



## rdean

longknife said:


> Here's the part of the article that hit me in the gut:
> 
> 
> *Millions will get laid off—in coal mines, power plants, factories, shops. Entire families and communities will be pounded and impoverished.*
> 
> 
> Well, he DID promise to do this when he ran for election and re-election. Yet, many of these people still voted for him!
> 
> 
> And, of course, there are plenty of those who will attack the source instead of the message @
> 
> Trampling on Coal Country families




There are approximately 174,000 blue-collar, full-time, permanent jobs related to coal in the U.S.: mining (83,000), transportation (31,000), and power plant employment (60,000). (See below for details on each sector.) The U.S. civilian labor force totaled 141,730,000 workers in 2005; thus, permanent blue-collar coal industry employees represent 0.12% of the U.S. workforce.[1] (Compare this percentage with the 1.89% of U.S. workers who worked in coal mining _alone_ in 1920.)

This total does not include indirect employment - workers who are not directly employed in the coal industry, but whose jobs are supported by that industry. It is entirely possible that thousands - even tens of thousands - of workers are indirectly supported entirely by the coal industry. However, the National Coal Association's 1994 estimate that the coal industry directly and indirectly employs around 1.5 million people[2] seems exaggerated. *The level of indirect employment is in the low hundreds of thousands - not in the millions.*

Coal and jobs in the United States - SourceWatch


----------



## rdean

HenryBHough said:


> It's not that Obama hates the miners.
> 
> It's more generalized.  He simply hates having anyone not entirely dependent on government (read "Democrat Party") handouts.



No one is more dependent on Government than conservatives in Red States.  Links proving that have been posted a hundred times.  Red States are basket cases.  What is it you idiots think you make that anyone wants?


----------



## bripat9643

Agit8r said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's about f~cking time!
> 
> http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're a gullible dumbass.  The EPA gave the American Lung Association $20 million to produce that study.  It's about as credible as any of Obama's promises about government run healthcare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the American Lung Association is part of the commie negro conspiracy.  I should have guessed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, they are simply a paid propaganda mill that does the EPA's bidding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you got that information from what source?
Click to expand...


EPA pays American Lung Association to attack GOP JunkScience.com



> “The American Lung Association has targeted House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton for his efforts to stop U.S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions by placing billboards within sight of his district offices linking climate change with increased childhood asthma,” reports E&E News PM.


----------



## Agit8r

bripat9643 said:


> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's about f~cking time!
> 
> http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're a gullible dumbass.  The EPA gave the American Lung Association $20 million to produce that study.  It's about as credible as any of Obama's promises about government run healthcare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the American Lung Association is part of the commie negro conspiracy.  I should have guessed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, they are simply a paid propaganda mill that does the EPA's bidding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you got that information from what source?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> EPA pays American Lung Association to attack GOP JunkScience.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “The American Lung Association has targeted House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton for his efforts to stop U.S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions by placing billboards within sight of his district offices linking climate change with increased childhood asthma,” reports E&E News PM.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Ahhh, from a real propaganda mill!

Look, people with respiratory problems don't need to be agitated by rhetoric.  We are agitated by all the shit in the air.


----------



## bripat9643

Agit8r said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's about f~cking time!
> 
> http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're a gullible dumbass.  The EPA gave the American Lung Association $20 million to produce that study.  It's about as credible as any of Obama's promises about government run healthcare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the American Lung Association is part of the commie negro conspiracy.  I should have guessed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, they are simply a paid propaganda mill that does the EPA's bidding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you got that information from what source?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> EPA pays American Lung Association to attack GOP JunkScience.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “The American Lung Association has targeted House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton for his efforts to stop U.S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions by placing billboards within sight of his district offices linking climate change with increased childhood asthma,” reports E&E News PM.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ahhh, from a real propaganda mill!
> 
> Look, people with respiratory problems don't need to be agitated by rhetoric.  We are agitated by all the shit in the air.
Click to expand...



Uh . . .no.  Along with the EPA and the American Lung Association, Mother Jones and ThinkProgress.org are real propaganda mills.

Apparently you enjoy being lied to and bamboozled.  You're the kind that politicians love.  If you don't like hearing the truth, you're in the wrong place. Why don't you try hanging out in the capitol building?  There's enough bullshit flowing there to last 10,000 years.


----------



## william the wie

Bripat numeracy is fundamental to understanding your argument so you might as well give up this line of attack.


----------



## rdean

I ask again, what is it you right wingnuts think you make that anyone wants?


----------



## elektra

rdean said:


> I ask again, what is it you right wingnuts think you make that anyone wants?


Food, you idiot.


----------



## elektra

rdean said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the part of the article that hit me in the gut:
> 
> 
> *Millions will get laid off—in coal mines, power plants, factories, shops. Entire families and communities will be pounded and impoverished.*
> 
> 
> Well, he DID promise to do this when he ran for election and re-election. Yet, many of these people still voted for him!
> 
> 
> And, of course, there are plenty of those who will attack the source instead of the message @
> 
> Trampling on Coal Country families
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are approximately 174,000 blue-collar, full-time, permanent jobs related to coal in the U.S.: mining (83,000), transportation (31,000), and power plant employment (60,000). (See below for details on each sector.) The U.S. civilian labor force totaled 141,730,000 workers in 2005; thus, permanent blue-collar coal industry employees represent 0.12% of the U.S. workforce.[1] (Compare this percentage with the 1.89% of U.S. workers who worked in coal mining _alone_ in 1920.)
> 
> This total does not include indirect employment - workers who are not directly employed in the coal industry, but whose jobs are supported by that industry. It is entirely possible that thousands - even tens of thousands - of workers are indirectly supported entirely by the coal industry. However, the National Coal Association's 1994 estimate that the coal industry directly and indirectly employs around 1.5 million people[2] seems exaggerated. *The level of indirect employment is in the low hundreds of thousands - not in the millions.*
> 
> Coal and jobs in the United States - SourceWatch
Click to expand...

2005, that was about ten years ago, before obama, during bush, so to make a point about jobs you use figures from the past.

Rdean proves things were better under Bush than Osama.


----------



## Agit8r

bripat9643 said:


> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's about f~cking time!
> 
> http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're a gullible dumbass.  The EPA gave the American Lung Association $20 million to produce that study.  It's about as credible as any of Obama's promises about government run healthcare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the American Lung Association is part of the commie negro conspiracy.  I should have guessed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, they are simply a paid propaganda mill that does the EPA's bidding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you got that information from what source?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> EPA pays American Lung Association to attack GOP JunkScience.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “The American Lung Association has targeted House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton for his efforts to stop U.S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions by placing billboards within sight of his district offices linking climate change with increased childhood asthma,” reports E&E News PM.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ahhh, from a real propaganda mill!
> 
> Look, people with respiratory problems don't need to be agitated by rhetoric.  We are agitated by all the shit in the air.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Uh . . .no.  Along with the EPA and the American Lung Association, Mother Jones and ThinkProgress.org are real propaganda mills.
> 
> Apparently you enjoy being lied to and bamboozled.  You're the kind that politicians love.  If you don't like hearing the truth, you're in the wrong place. Why don't you try hanging out in the capitol building?  There's enough bullshit flowing there to last 10,000 years.
Click to expand...


Gee, I didn't realize.  I guess when my asthma flares up I should just breathe some coal smoke.  Cures what ails ya, right? "Not a cough in the carload" and all that...


----------



## elektra

> Uh . . .no.  Along with the EPA and the American Lung Association, Mother Jones and ThinkProgress.org are real propaganda mills.
> 
> Apparently you enjoy being lied to and bamboozled.
> 
> Gee, I didn't realize.  I guess when my asthma flares up I should just breathe some coal smoke.  Cures what ails ya, right? "Not a cough in the carload" and all that...




You should breath coal smoke, which is impossible, but go ahead and try.


----------



## longknife

Another thread turned to crap


----------



## HenryBHough

Remember Obama's "If you like your....." lie?

It just bit 250,000 Virginia (coal mining country, many of them) in the ass:

Thanks Obama 250 000 Virginians Set To Lose Their Health Care Due To Obamacare

Think they'll vote for His sycophants in the coming congressional elections?  Any of them?


----------



## bripat9643

Agit8r said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agit8r said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's about f~cking time!
> 
> http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're a gullible dumbass.  The EPA gave the American Lung Association $20 million to produce that study.  It's about as credible as any of Obama's promises about government run healthcare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the American Lung Association is part of the commie negro conspiracy.  I should have guessed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, they are simply a paid propaganda mill that does the EPA's bidding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you got that information from what source?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> EPA pays American Lung Association to attack GOP JunkScience.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “The American Lung Association has targeted House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton for his efforts to stop U.S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions by placing billboards within sight of his district offices linking climate change with increased childhood asthma,” reports E&E News PM.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ahhh, from a real propaganda mill!
> 
> Look, people with respiratory problems don't need to be agitated by rhetoric.  We are agitated by all the shit in the air.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Uh . . .no.  Along with the EPA and the American Lung Association, Mother Jones and ThinkProgress.org are real propaganda mills.
> 
> Apparently you enjoy being lied to and bamboozled.  You're the kind that politicians love.  If you don't like hearing the truth, you're in the wrong place. Why don't you try hanging out in the capitol building?  There's enough bullshit flowing there to last 10,000 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Gee, I didn't realize.  I guess when my asthma flares up I should just breathe some coal smoke.  Cures what ails ya, right? "Not a cough in the carload" and all that...
Click to expand...


I'll bet there isn't a coal fired power plant within 50 miles of where you live.  No doctor ever diagnosed a patient as having "asthma aggravated by smoke from coal fired power plant."  There isn't a shred of evidence that coal fired power plants have any ill health affects whatsoever.   Such claim are pure fabrications by the EPA and the ALA.

Why should I have to pay three times the price for electricity because you're a paranoid hypochondriac?


----------



## HenryBHough

The increased cost of electricity has nothing to with any individual's paranoid hypochondria.  It's due to one (other) man-child's election campaign promise - one of the few fulfilled.


----------



## Windship

Shrimpbox said:


> http://instituteforenergyresearch.o...quality-and-coal-fired-power-plants-final.pdf
> 
> Check out pages 8,9, and 10.
> 
> This is such a great article and shows the difference between perception and fact. What is even more pertinent(just like the fate of commercial fishermen) is that the govt demands you spend billions of dollars in upgrades and then after you do they say we are going to shut you down cause we feel like it. The report says our air is cleaner not dirtier even with coal producing fifty per cent of electrical energy.take the subsidies away and factor in for dependability and I bet coal is competitive. And as a believer in consistency explain why coal plants producing mercury must shut down but light bulbs producing the same amount of of mercury are mandated by the govt.
> 
> As far as the human cost, Obama has never been concerned about jobs for people but rather whether he can buy their votes by getting them on welfare. Mission accomplished.


 

 No polititian is concerned about jobs. Wake up.


----------



## Windship

bripat9643 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Were the coal industry forced to pay for the environmental damage they do, it would not be a cheap power source. Were they forced to pay for the medical costs of the air pollution and harm to people's health, it would not be a cheap source of power. In fact, when you look at the cost of 'clean coal', solar and wind are a bargain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you document any medical costs from coal pollution whatsoever?  Can you produce a single diagnoses that says "problem caused by coal pollution?"
> 
> So called "clean coal" is a joke.  Coal is already clean.  CO2 is not pollution.
Click to expand...

 

Co2 is not pollution? Ever heard of "the greenhouse effect"?


----------



## Windship

bripat9643 said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not even remotely the same thing as that was a result of basic supply, demand, and labor.  In the case of coal, it is almost entirely due to government interference in the marketplace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coal is cheaper on the fuel cost side, but capital cost are lower with natural gas..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't save on capital costs by decommission perfectly good coal fired power plants.
Click to expand...

 
hmmmm...lemme see....
...if coal plants are shut down, wont the price of electricity rise?


----------



## Windship

longknife said:


> Here's the part of the article that hit me in the gut:
> 
> 
> *Millions will get laid off—in coal mines, power plants, factories, shops. Entire families and communities will be pounded and impoverished.*
> 
> 
> Well, he DID promise to do this when he ran for election and re-election. Yet, many of these people still voted for him!
> 
> 
> And, of course, there are plenty of those who will attack the source instead of the message @
> 
> Trampling on Coal Country families


 
and with unemployment running 20%+...good luck finding a job.


----------



## bripat9643

Windship said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Were the coal industry forced to pay for the environmental damage they do, it would not be a cheap power source. Were they forced to pay for the medical costs of the air pollution and harm to people's health, it would not be a cheap source of power. In fact, when you look at the cost of 'clean coal', solar and wind are a bargain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you document any medical costs from coal pollution whatsoever?  Can you produce a single diagnoses that says "problem caused by coal pollution?"
> 
> So called "clean coal" is a joke.  Coal is already clean.  CO2 is not pollution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Co2 is not pollution? Ever heard of "the greenhouse effect"?
Click to expand...


Pollution is toxic to plants or animals.  Human exhale CO2 and plants need it to live.  CO2 does not fit any rational definition of "pollution."


----------



## bripat9643

Windship said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not even remotely the same thing as that was a result of basic supply, demand, and labor.  In the case of coal, it is almost entirely due to government interference in the marketplace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coal is cheaper on the fuel cost side, but capital cost are lower with natural gas..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't save on capital costs by decommission perfectly good coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> hmmmm...lemme see....
> ...if coal plants are shut down, wont the price of electricity rise?
Click to expand...


Hmmmm . .  yeah, because power companies will be spending a lot more on capital to replace coal fired power plants.


----------



## elektra

California literally runs on coal power while hiding behind wind and solar. More like lying about Solar and Wind energy.


----------



## Moonglow

Windship said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the part of the article that hit me in the gut:
> 
> 
> *Millions will get laid off—in coal mines, power plants, factories, shops. Entire families and communities will be pounded and impoverished.*
> 
> 
> Well, he DID promise to do this when he ran for election and re-election. Yet, many of these people still voted for him!
> 
> 
> And, of course, there are plenty of those who will attack the source instead of the message @
> 
> Trampling on Coal Country families
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and with unemployment running 20%+...good luck finding a job.
Click to expand...

Create your own job...I had to...really I wanted to after working for other companies...and could earn more monies..


----------



## Moonglow

bripat9643 said:


> Windship said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not even remotely the same thing as that was a result of basic supply, demand, and labor.  In the case of coal, it is almost entirely due to government interference in the marketplace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coal is cheaper on the fuel cost side, but capital cost are lower with natural gas..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't save on capital costs by decommission perfectly good coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> hmmmm...lemme see....
> ...if coal plants are shut down, wont the price of electricity rise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmmmm . .  yeah, because power companies will be spending a lot more on capital to replace coal fired power plants.
Click to expand...

The COOP I am a member of, buys their electric from the new gas fired plant, they switched over from the coal fired plant this year, electric only rose 6%,(only increase in the 13 years I've been a member) and that was requested by the COOP before they switched and was allowed by the commission by the time they switched to the gas plant.. If they did not get their increase the cost is no higher than what it was last year before the switch...


----------



## Luddly Neddite

Our country and our planet needs to declare war on coal. There is simply no way that we do not have the intelligence and technology to produce cleaner energy.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

Luddly Neddite said:


> Our country and our planet needs to declare war on coal.



No it doesn't.  Only ideological idiots need to do that in order to feel good about themselves.


----------



## william the wie

Luddly Neddite said:


> Our country and our planet needs to declare war on coal. There is simply no way that we do not have the intelligence and technology to produce cleaner energy.


That argument was settled in the negative in the Carter administration.The idiot in charge of energy policy back then blocked not just Solar Power Satellites, He3 acquisition and Ocean Thermal Systems to go all in on hydrogen only fusion he ignored that OTS was proven technology in the 1920s and last I checked fusion break even has yet to be achieved.


----------



## bripat9643

Moonglow said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windship said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not even remotely the same thing as that was a result of basic supply, demand, and labor.  In the case of coal, it is almost entirely due to government interference in the marketplace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coal is cheaper on the fuel cost side, but capital cost are lower with natural gas..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't save on capital costs by decommission perfectly good coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> hmmmm...lemme see....
> ...if coal plants are shut down, wont the price of electricity rise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmmmm . .  yeah, because power companies will be spending a lot more on capital to replace coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The COOP I am a member of, buys their electric from the new gas fired plant, they switched over from the coal fired plant this year, electric only rose 6%,(only increase in the 13 years I've been a member) and that was requested by the COOP before they switched and was allowed by the commission by the time they switched to the gas plant.. If they did not get their increase the cost is no higher than what it was last year before the switch...
Click to expand...


They switched from an existing coal fired plant to an existing gas fired plant.  What they didn't do is tear down a perfectly serviceable coal fired plant and replace it by building a new gas fired power plant from scratch.  I live in Florida, and my power rates are going up because the public utility here is going to tear down two perfectly good coal fired power plants and replace them with new gas fired plants.  They are chucking about $2 billion dollars worth of capital into the trash bin.   Anyone who says that isn't going to affect the rates they charge is either a moron or simply dishonest.


----------



## elektra

Luddly Neddite said:


> Our country and our planet needs to declare war on coal. There is simply no way that we do not have the intelligence and technology to produce cleaner energy.


So quit using coal to manufacture solar and wind. Something the green nuts do not have the intelligence to acknowledge.


----------



## elektra

bripat9643 said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windship said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coal is cheaper on the fuel cost side, but capital cost are lower with natural gas..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't save on capital costs by decommission perfectly good coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> hmmmm...lemme see....
> ...if coal plants are shut down, wont the price of electricity rise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmmmm . .  yeah, because power companies will be spending a lot more on capital to replace coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The COOP I am a member of, buys their electric from the new gas fired plant, they switched over from the coal fired plant this year, electric only rose 6%,(only increase in the 13 years I've been a member) and that was requested by the COOP before they switched and was allowed by the commission by the time they switched to the gas plant.. If they did not get their increase the cost is no higher than what it was last year before the switch...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They switched from an existing coal fired plant to an existing gas fired plant.  What they didn't do is tear down a perfectly serviceable coal fired plant and replace it by building a new gas fired power plant from scratch.  I live in Florida, and my power rates are going up because the public utility here is going to tear down two perfectly good coal fired power plants and replace them with new gas fired plants.  They are chucking about $2 billion dollars worth of capital into the trash bin.   Anyone who says that isn't going to affect the rates they charge is either a moron or simply dishonest.
Click to expand...

They also shut down a nuclear plant in your state, hat effect is that having.


----------



## Moonglow

william the wie said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our country and our planet needs to declare war on coal. There is simply no way that we do not have the intelligence and technology to produce cleaner energy.
> 
> 
> 
> That argument was settled in the negative in the Carter administration.The idiot in charge of energy policy back then blocked not just Solar Power Satellites, He3 acquisition and Ocean Thermal Systems to go all in on hydrogen only fusion. OTS was proven technology in the 1920s and last I checked fusion break even has yet to be achieved.
Click to expand...

Only at negative


bripat9643 said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windship said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coal is cheaper on the fuel cost side, but capital cost are lower with natural gas..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't save on capital costs by decommission perfectly good coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> hmmmm...lemme see....
> ...if coal plants are shut down, wont the price of electricity rise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmmmm . .  yeah, because power companies will be spending a lot more on capital to replace coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The COOP I am a member of, buys their electric from the new gas fired plant, they switched over from the coal fired plant this year, electric only rose 6%,(only increase in the 13 years I've been a member) and that was requested by the COOP before they switched and was allowed by the commission by the time they switched to the gas plant.. If they did not get their increase the cost is no higher than what it was last year before the switch...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They switched from an existing coal fired plant to an existing gas fired plant.  What they didn't do is tear down a perfectly serviceable coal fired plant and replace it by building a new gas fired power plant from scratch.  I live in Florida, and my power rates are going up because the public utility here is going to tear down two perfectly good coal fired power plants and replace them with new gas fired plants.  They are chucking about $2 billion dollars worth of capital into the trash bin.   Anyone who says that isn't going to affect the rates they charge is either a moron or simply dishonest.
Click to expand...

The coal fired plant was not shut down, it is still operating..A COOP only buys wholesale electric they do not have their own plant...The trains hauling coal run through town around 6 times a day, 3 trips with coal and three trips back to the coal source..


----------



## bripat9643

Moonglow said:


> william the wie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our country and our planet needs to declare war on coal. There is simply no way that we do not have the intelligence and technology to produce cleaner energy.
> 
> 
> 
> That argument was settled in the negative in the Carter administration.The idiot in charge of energy policy back then blocked not just Solar Power Satellites, He3 acquisition and Ocean Thermal Systems to go all in on hydrogen only fusion. OTS was proven technology in the 1920s and last I checked fusion break even has yet to be achieved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Only at negative
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windship said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't save on capital costs by decommission perfectly good coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> hmmmm...lemme see....
> ...if coal plants are shut down, wont the price of electricity rise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmmmm . .  yeah, because power companies will be spending a lot more on capital to replace coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The COOP I am a member of, buys their electric from the new gas fired plant, they switched over from the coal fired plant this year, electric only rose 6%,(only increase in the 13 years I've been a member) and that was requested by the COOP before they switched and was allowed by the commission by the time they switched to the gas plant.. If they did not get their increase the cost is no higher than what it was last year before the switch...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They switched from an existing coal fired plant to an existing gas fired plant.  What they didn't do is tear down a perfectly serviceable coal fired plant and replace it by building a new gas fired power plant from scratch.  I live in Florida, and my power rates are going up because the public utility here is going to tear down two perfectly good coal fired power plants and replace them with new gas fired plants.  They are chucking about $2 billion dollars worth of capital into the trash bin.   Anyone who says that isn't going to affect the rates they charge is either a moron or simply dishonest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The coal fired plant was not shut down, it is still operating..A COOP only buys wholesale electric they do not have their own plant...The trains hauling coal run through town around 6 times a day, 3 trips with coal and three trips back to the coal source..
Click to expand...


The fact that it wasn't shut down is the whole point.  Shutting down perfectly serviceable coal fired power plants is going to cost consumers hundreds of billions of dollars.


----------



## Moonglow

bripat9643 said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> william the wie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our country and our planet needs to declare war on coal. There is simply no way that we do not have the intelligence and technology to produce cleaner energy.
> 
> 
> 
> That argument was settled in the negative in the Carter administration.The idiot in charge of energy policy back then blocked not just Solar Power Satellites, He3 acquisition and Ocean Thermal Systems to go all in on hydrogen only fusion. OTS was proven technology in the 1920s and last I checked fusion break even has yet to be achieved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Only at negative
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windship said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmmm...lemme see....
> ...if coal plants are shut down, wont the price of electricity rise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmmmm . .  yeah, because power companies will be spending a lot more on capital to replace coal fired power plants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The COOP I am a member of, buys their electric from the new gas fired plant, they switched over from the coal fired plant this year, electric only rose 6%,(only increase in the 13 years I've been a member) and that was requested by the COOP before they switched and was allowed by the commission by the time they switched to the gas plant.. If they did not get their increase the cost is no higher than what it was last year before the switch...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They switched from an existing coal fired plant to an existing gas fired plant.  What they didn't do is tear down a perfectly serviceable coal fired plant and replace it by building a new gas fired power plant from scratch.  I live in Florida, and my power rates are going up because the public utility here is going to tear down two perfectly good coal fired power plants and replace them with new gas fired plants.  They are chucking about $2 billion dollars worth of capital into the trash bin.   Anyone who says that isn't going to affect the rates they charge is either a moron or simply dishonest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The coal fired plant was not shut down, it is still operating..A COOP only buys wholesale electric they do not have their own plant...The trains hauling coal run through town around 6 times a day, 3 trips with coal and three trips back to the coal source..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The fact that it wasn't shut down is the whole point.  Shutting down perfectly serviceable coal fired power plants is going to cost consumers hundreds of billions of dollars.
Click to expand...

Many of the coal power plants are old and need replacement..The coal fired one is in gentry, Ark and is owned by SWEPCO, I am not sure who owns the gas fired one of hand..The Gentry plant is refurbishing the scrubbers. The biggest problem is they  are  using the ash from the burnt coal to use as filler in the foundations of homes..


----------



## sameech

Moonglow said:


> Many of the coal power plants are old and need replacement..The coal fired one is in gentry, Ark and is owned by SWEPCO, I am not sure who owns the gas fired one of hand..The Gentry plant is refurbishing the scrubbers. The biggest problem is they  are  using the ash from the burnt coal to use as filler in the foundations of homes..



Why is that a problem?  I have been drinking/bathing in coal ash most of the year thanks to a certain energy company.


----------



## bripat9643

sameech said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Many of the coal power plants are old and need replacement..The coal fired one is in gentry, Ark and is owned by SWEPCO, I am not sure who owns the gas fired one of hand..The Gentry plant is refurbishing the scrubbers. The biggest problem is they  are  using the ash from the burnt coal to use as filler in the foundations of homes..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is that a problem?  I have been drinking/bathing in coal ash most of the year thanks to a certain energy company.
Click to expand...


Using coal ash in foundations is no problem at all.


----------



## Windship

bripat9643 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Were the coal industry forced to pay for the environmental damage they do, it would not be a cheap power source. Were they forced to pay for the medical costs of the air pollution and harm to people's health, it would not be a cheap source of power. In fact, when you look at the cost of 'clean coal', solar and wind are a bargain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you document any medical costs from coal pollution whatsoever?  Can you produce a single diagnoses that says "problem caused by coal pollution?"
> 
> So called "clean coal" is a joke.  Coal is already clean.  CO2 is not pollution.
Click to expand...


Jesus Christ! Are you serious? Ummm....black lung??....maybe? For 1.
Are you saying that no miners ever had respiratory problems and that coal smoke and particles are a fictitious left wing lie? Have you ever handled coal or burned it? Wow. Coal clean? Lmao


----------



## Windship

HenryBHough said:


> Ah, but COOPS are socialistic by their very nature.  You who participate in them surely understood that so why all the whinging about the costs you brought on yourselves?  Oh, that's right!  Liberals lie, even to themselves, about the cost of their cockamamie ideas and try to blame the thoroughly predictable expensive results on others.  Are you absolutely SURE you can't find some way to blame Booooooshhhhh?



Well...
...remember the meeting chenney had with the oil co's. behind closed doors with no reporting and no minutes taken??...
...and then, less than a week later, the prices of oil, diesel and gas went through the roof? Huh? What do you think they talked about?


----------



## Mr. H.

Windship said:


> HenryBHough said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, but COOPS are socialistic by their very nature.  You who participate in them surely understood that so why all the whinging about the costs you brought on yourselves?  Oh, that's right!  Liberals lie, even to themselves, about the cost of their cockamamie ideas and try to blame the thoroughly predictable expensive results on others.  Are you absolutely SURE you can't find some way to blame Booooooshhhhh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...
> ...remember the meeting chenney had with the oil co's. behind closed doors with no reporting and no minutes taken??...
> ...and then, less than a week later, the prices of oil, diesel and gas went through the roof? Huh? What do you think they talked about?
Click to expand...


----------



## bripat9643

Windship said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Were the coal industry forced to pay for the environmental damage they do, it would not be a cheap power source. Were they forced to pay for the medical costs of the air pollution and harm to people's health, it would not be a cheap source of power. In fact, when you look at the cost of 'clean coal', solar and wind are a bargain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you document any medical costs from coal pollution whatsoever?  Can you produce a single diagnoses that says "problem caused by coal pollution?"
> 
> So called "clean coal" is a joke.  Coal is already clean.  CO2 is not pollution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Co2 is not pollution? Ever heard of "the greenhouse effect"?
Click to expand...


Yes I have.  It's a hoax.


----------



## bripat9643

Windship said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Were the coal industry forced to pay for the environmental damage they do, it would not be a cheap power source. Were they forced to pay for the medical costs of the air pollution and harm to people's health, it would not be a cheap source of power. In fact, when you look at the cost of 'clean coal', solar and wind are a bargain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you document any medical costs from coal pollution whatsoever?  Can you produce a single diagnoses that says "problem caused by coal pollution?"
> 
> So called "clean coal" is a joke.  Coal is already clean.  CO2 is not pollution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jesus Christ! Are you serious? Ummm....black lung??....maybe? For 1.
> Are you saying that no miners ever had respiratory problems and that coal smoke and particles are a fictitious left wing lie? Have you ever handled coal or burned it? Wow. Coal clean? Lmao
Click to expand...


By the term "coal pollution," I meant from the burning of coal.  Black lung is a disease that is entirely peculiar to coal miners who smoke.  Miners who don't smoke don't get it, so it's really just a symptom of smoking.

No doctor has ever signed a death certificate that says "death by coal pollution."  None have ever even signed a diagnoses for a medical problem that list coal pollution as the cause.


----------



## OnePercenter

bripat9643 said:


> Using coal ash in foundations is no problem at all.



Pay particular attention to coal ash when mixed with water.

http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/coal-ash-hazardous-to-human-health.pdf


----------



## OnePercenter

bripat9643 said:


> By the term "coal pollution," I meant from the burning of coal.  Black lung is a disease that is entirely peculiar to coal miners who smoke.  Miners who don't smoke don't get it, so it's really just a symptom of smoking.
> 
> No doctor has ever signed a death certificate that says "death by coal pollution."  None have ever even signed a diagnoses for a medical problem that list coal pollution as the cause.



Please post ANY evidence that Pneumoconiosis only effects smokers.


----------



## bripat9643

OnePercenter said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Using coal ash in foundations is no problem at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pay particular attention to coal ash when mixed with water.
> 
> http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/coal-ash-hazardous-to-human-health.pdf
Click to expand...


When it's used in foundations it's incorporated with concrete.  That makes it inert.


----------



## OnePercenter

bripat9643 said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Using coal ash in foundations is no problem at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pay particular attention to coal ash when mixed with water.
> 
> http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/coal-ash-hazardous-to-human-health.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When it's used in foundations it's incorporated with concrete.  That makes it inert.
Click to expand...


You want arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium and selenium, as well as aluminum, antimony,
barium, beryllium, boron, chlorine, cobalt, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, thallium, vanadium, and
zinc in the foundation of your house?

I think you're getting fly ash confused with coal ash.


----------



## bripat9643

OnePercenter said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Using coal ash in foundations is no problem at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pay particular attention to coal ash when mixed with water.
> 
> http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/coal-ash-hazardous-to-human-health.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When it's used in foundations it's incorporated with concrete.  That makes it inert.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You want arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium and selenium, as well as aluminum, antimony,
> barium, beryllium, boron, chlorine, cobalt, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, thallium, vanadium, and
> zinc in the foundation of your house?
> 
> I think you're getting fly ash confused with coal ash.
Click to expand...


Nope.  Do you lick the foundation of your house?  If not, then what is there to worry about?


----------



## Abishai100

*The Diamond Thief: Eco-RV*


Coal is a great asset and we know that diamonds are made from pressurized coals.  The international diamond trade is already filled with intrigue.  We need a way to correlate mineral/energy use with society perspectives on human instincts.

The great writer Aldous Huxley wrote that when we look at something shiny, we think of high-minded concepts of the elusive and the desirable.  Such instincts form society's valuation of precious and shimmering minerals such as gold.

Clean coal technologies have come a long way and have provided social critics ways of talking about the neat connection between prosperity and prudence.

_The New American Gothic _: "The diamond thief Adam poises himself to lure a group of unscrupulous Sierra Leone coal-diamond black market processors into a nifty trap. Adam will hoist the processed diamonds out of the area and carry them to Europe and sell them to a network agent. Adam ponders how these diamonds remind him of the modern age civilization blueprints of so-called 'clean-coal technologies.'  Could Adam's diamonds stimulate some real talk about mineral magic?"






Coal Region History Chronicles Miner Folklore And Superstitions ...And Pay Scales For Luke Fiddler Colliery 1877


----------



## KissMy

*"Enhanced Oil Recovery"* created a major demand for Carbon Dioxide from Coal Power Plants. Coal fired power plants are SELLING CO2 to Oil Producers. Coal plants are gaining more revenue streams by capturing & selling CO2.

There is no war on Coal. Natural Gas is cheaper than coal & that competition is cutting coal fired energy demand.


----------



## bripat9643

KissMy said:


> *"Enhanced Oil Recovery"* created a major demand for Carbon Dioxide from Coal Power Plants. Coal fired power plants are SELLING CO2 to Oil Producers. Coal plants are gaining more revenue streams by capturing & selling CO2.
> 
> There is no war on Coal. Natural Gas is cheaper than coal & that competition is cutting coal fired energy demand.



You don't shut down a perfectly good coal plant in good working order and throw a  multi-billion dollar investment into the waste bin because natural gas is a little bit cheaper.   That only happened because the EPA's new draconian regulations required  them to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to keep them in compliance.  Natural gas is cheaper only because of these ridiculous regulations that won't improve the health of a single person.

Every time an environmental nut job opens his mouth nothing but lies comes out.


----------



## Old Rocks

Heard the same crock of shit concerning lead in the gasoline, asbestos, and the crud that was coming out of the smokestacks of the coal fired plants before the scrubbers. Time to close down all the coal fired plants as soon as there capacity can be replaced by renewables. Whether nuke, solar, wind, or hydro.


----------



## KissMy

bripat9643 said:


> KissMy said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"Enhanced Oil Recovery"* created a major demand for Carbon Dioxide from Coal Power Plants. Coal fired power plants are SELLING CO2 to Oil Producers. Coal plants are gaining more revenue streams by capturing & selling CO2.
> 
> There is no war on Coal. Natural Gas is cheaper than coal & that competition is cutting coal fired energy demand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't shut down a perfectly good coal plant in good working order and throw a  multi-billion dollar investment into the waste bin because natural gas is a little bit cheaper.   That only happened because the EPA's new draconian regulations required  them to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to keep them in compliance.  Natural gas is cheaper only because of these ridiculous regulations that won't improve the health of a single person.
> 
> Every time an environmental nut job opens his mouth nothing but lies comes out.
Click to expand...


It may cost $1 billion over the 30 year lifetime for a coal plant to capture it's CO2, but that same CO2 is sent to EOR & produces more than $2 billion extra oil profits for EOR oil companies. The EOR companies are effectively being subsidized by the Coal companies thus harming Coal. The EOR oil companies need to be made to pay more to the Coal companies for the CO2!


----------



## bripat9643

KissMy said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KissMy said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"Enhanced Oil Recovery"* created a major demand for Carbon Dioxide from Coal Power Plants. Coal fired power plants are SELLING CO2 to Oil Producers. Coal plants are gaining more revenue streams by capturing & selling CO2.
> 
> There is no war on Coal. Natural Gas is cheaper than coal & that competition is cutting coal fired energy demand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't shut down a perfectly good coal plant in good working order and throw a  multi-billion dollar investment into the waste bin because natural gas is a little bit cheaper.   That only happened because the EPA's new draconian regulations required  them to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to keep them in compliance.  Natural gas is cheaper only because of these ridiculous regulations that won't improve the health of a single person.
> 
> Every time an environmental nut job opens his mouth nothing but lies comes out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It may cost $1 billion over the 30 year lifetime for a coal plant to capture it's CO2, but that same CO2 is sent to EOR & produces more than $2 billion extra oil profits for EOR oil companies. The EOR companies are effectively being subsidized by the Coal companies thus harming Coal. The EOR oil companies need to be made to pay more to the Coal companies for the CO2!
Click to expand...


What the hell is an EOR company?  

If there's a market for CO2, then the coal companies would sell it, not give it away for free.  No one is subsidizing anyone.

I think you just made up your numbers out of thin air.  Currently there are very few coal fired power plants that capture their CO2.

I've heard estimates that Obama's new climate change regulations will impose a cost of $250 million to $400 million on each coal fired power plant in the country.  Yeah, that should drive down the price of electricity.


----------



## bripat9643

Old Rocks said:


> Heard the same crock of shit concerning lead in the gasoline, asbestos, and the crud that was coming out of the smokestacks of the coal fired plants before the scrubbers. Time to close down all the coal fired plants as soon as there capacity can be replaced by renewables. Whether nuke, solar, wind, or hydro.



What shit, that it would increase the cost of things?  It wasn't shit.  It did drive up the cost.  Furthermore, when Tretra Ethyl Lead was outlawed, Detroit had to lower the compression ratios in their engines, which meant lower performance and lower gas mileage.  Getting rid of asbestos cost our economy hundreds of billions of dollars.  Furthermore, it turned out that it was safer to leave asbestos in buildings than remove it because the process sent asbestos flying everywhere.

The bottom line is that Obama's regulations will double or triple the price of electricity in this country.  Just look to Germany and look at the price of electricity there.


----------



## ScienceRocks

What are you doing to stop him?


----------



## bripat9643

Matthew said:


> What are you doing to stop him?



I donate plenty of money to the right candidates, for one thing.


----------



## Old Rocks

bripat9643 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Heard the same crock of shit concerning lead in the gasoline, asbestos, and the crud that was coming out of the smokestacks of the coal fired plants before the scrubbers. Time to close down all the coal fired plants as soon as there capacity can be replaced by renewables. Whether nuke, solar, wind, or hydro.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What shit, that it would increase the cost of things?  It wasn't shit.  It did drive up the cost.  Furthermore, when Tretra Ethyl Lead was outlawed, Detroit had to lower the compression ratios in their engines, which meant lower performance and lower gas mileage.  Getting rid of asbestos cost our economy hundreds of billions of dollars.  Furthermore, it turned out that it was safer to leave asbestos in buildings than remove it because the process sent asbestos flying everywhere.
> 
> The bottom line is that Obama's regulations will double or triple the price of electricity in this country.  Just look to Germany and look at the price of electricity there.
Click to expand...

Really? Yes, Detroit did that. But in Europe they used the computer controlled fuel injection for the engines that was developed by Bendix of the USA and raised the gas mileage and power. Also increased the longevity of the engines. Now every body uses computer controlled fuel injection, the engines are much small, much more powerful, and get far better mileage on unleaded gasoline. And there is far less lead in the air we breathe. And when we shut down the last coal fired generator, the nation will be better off, with less costly electricity, and much better air to breathe.


----------



## Old Rocks

bripat9643 said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are you doing to stop him?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I donate plenty of money to the right candidates, for one thing.
Click to expand...

Good, I love to see fools throwing their money away.


----------



## Political Junky

longknife said:


> Here's the part of the article that hit me in the gut:
> 
> 
> *Millions will get laid off—in coal mines, power plants, factories, shops. Entire families and communities will be pounded and impoverished.*
> 
> 
> Well, he DID promise to do this when he ran for election and re-election. Yet, many of these people still voted for him!
> 
> 
> And, of course, there are plenty of those who will attack the source instead of the message @
> 
> Trampling on Coal Country families


Those poor coal miners and their forefathers who have suffered lung disease and more from working in those mines for years.


----------



## Old Rocks

There are far better ways to make a living than coal mining. The accident rate and degradation of health of the miners is a shame to all of us. Too high of a price.


----------



## David_42

Look out OP, Obama is coming to steal the coal miners kids. LOL.


----------



## HenryBHough

David_42 said:


> Look out OP, Obama is coming to steal the coal miners kids. LOL.



That is SO silly.

More creditable that He might come take their (tasty little) *dogs*........


----------



## jasonnfree

Lot's of that coal goes on a slow boat to china and india also.  Let those countries  blow up their own mountaintops and pollute their own regions to get  coal.


----------



## jasonnfree

David_42 said:


> Look out OP, Obama is coming to steal the coal miners kids. LOL.



republican goooood, democrat baaaad!!


----------

