Obama Administration Opens Up Thousands Of Acres

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,998
Criminal Mexi Midget
Of Public Lands To Coal Mining

On May 29, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management released a regional management planfor the Buffalo Field Office, the Wyoming office charged with managing the Powder River Basin, an area that supplies nearly 40 percent of U.S. coal.

Under the proposed plan, the BLM estimates that it will issue 28 new coal leases, which could open up the mining of 10 billion tons of coal over the next 20 years.
Thought he was for greener energy?

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/06/01/3664633/blm-coal-lease-decision/
 
  • Like
Reactions: DUCKofD3ATH

VulchR

macrumors 68020
Jun 8, 2009
2,329
10,254
Scotland
We'd be much better off abandoning coal and retraining coal workers to work in the renewables industry. I live not far from a coastal forest located just behind the dunes on a beach on the North Sea. The forest is just a few feet above sea level. Trees that have been there for over 100 years are starting to die because the water table is rising. Frankly it's scary. I suspect it has more to do with rainfall than rising sea levels, but dunes are being lost to the action of the sea. I do not understand why we continue to burn fossil fuels. We need petrochemicals for plastics, but we shouldn't be creating an environmental mess our kids and grandkids will have to endure.

I was in Cleveland when the Cayahoga River caught fire.

I thought we'd gotten the message about pollution back then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jnpy!$4g3cwk

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,998
Criminal Mexi Midget
If the headline was "Obama Administration Closes Up Thousands Of Acres To Coal Miners"
your response would be "why does he hate coal miners?"

jkcerda, I really do enjoy your posts, it's getting a story from Fox News where regardless of it's origin, it's spun to fit your agenda.
well, if you believe thingprogress is the same as faux news then I have no problem with that :D
 

vrDrew

macrumors 65816
Jan 31, 2010
1,317
11,835
Midlife, Midwest
Thought he was for greener energy?
From the article:

The new management plan, Anderson said, won’t necessarily flood the U.S. market with more coal — instead, it will help mining operations maintain current levels of production, allowing them to tap into new reserves if they exhaust current ones.That’s because the new management plan doesn’t actually change the status quo of land management in the area — it simply keeps coal lease decisions from 2001 in place.
I'm sure everyone would like a solution that let everyone keep their jobs; kept companies profitable; and didn't cause any pollution.

But the real world is a little more complicated like that. And for some problems, there simply aren't always easy answers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Renzatic

aaronvan

Suspended
Dec 21, 2011
1,349
9,287
República Cascadia
Obama is opening coal fields at the same time Hillary is promising to put coal miners on the welfare rolls. Talk about dysfunctional insanity. Time to blow-up the DNC once and for all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda

vrDrew

macrumors 65816
Jan 31, 2010
1,317
11,835
Midlife, Midwest
Obama is opening coal fields at the same time Hillary is promising to put coal miners on the welfare rolls. Talk about dysfunctional insanity. Time to blow-up the DNC once and for all.
Obama opening up coal fields = Bad

Hillary Clinton closing coal fields = Bad

Sounds to me that no matter what Democrats do, you kvetch about it. Talk about dysfunctional...
 

thermodynamic

Suspended
May 3, 2009
1,336
1,175
USA
Or realistic. Too many variables making a transition impossible. I'm all for any number of things, but Obama has a point about realistic and reasonable compromise, regardless of any of our individual opinions are. And during the time frame indicated, as we continue to migrate to other fuel sources that also become cheaper and increasingly effective (I'd love to do solar on my house, as I've seen farms using solar to complement their needs and I don't need nearly as much as they do) but I digress, usage will continue to go down. Obviously there are numerous long-term considerations on a number of issues other than what I adumbrated. Party of me dreams of "instant overnight change" but that's not realistic and even environmentalists in position of ability know that as well. These things can't magically happen overnight. Even a cynic like myself has to take a step back at times, and I need to do that more often.
[doublepost=1463608711][/doublepost]
Obama opening up coal fields = Bad

Hillary Clinton closing coal fields = Bad

Sounds to me that no matter what Democrats do, you kvetch about it. Talk about dysfunctional...
Same party, wide range of beliefs that don't always get met lockstep. And unlike the GOP, Democrats are less inclined to "toe the line". Which can be a strength and a weakness.
 

thewap

macrumors 6502a
Jun 19, 2012
558
1,346
It is not complicated..we have clean coal technology - you know like a catalytic converter re-burning the smoke and gases.. thats the little secret that the libs do not want to share.

If pollution was the issue, we would not be selling all our coal to the Chinese who do not have clean coal tech.

Selling out our natural resources while putting America out of energy jobs = PROFIT! big govt crony to big corps butt kissing China.