Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Pro-coal event turns political

Posted in:

Illinois

* A pro-coal rally in southern Illinois turned political over the weekend when first one speaker then another denounced President Obama…

Phil Gonet, president of the Illinois Coal Association, said although coal production was up 13 percent last year in Illinois, growth might be short lived. He said the administration in Washington wants to put the coal industry out of business.

Although the event was billed as an apolitical rally, some speakers, including Gonet, made it clear that politics is playing a large role in the current state of the industry.

“I want to be clear today: Some said this isn’t a rally about politics, and it isn’t — it’s about coal,” he said. “But I want to be clear right at the beginning, if you’re for coal, you can’t be for the present administration, you can’t be for President Obama.”

So, Illinois coal production was up 13 percent last year, but… Obama is killing it? I’m not sure I follow here.

* Things really got heated when the next speaker took the podium, Bob Murray, president of Murray Energy…

Murray continued several minutes outlining how Obama is hurting the industry and how Republican challenger Mitt Romney would support the coal industry.

Murray was eventually interrupted by a heckler in the crowd, who yelled the rally wasn’t supposed to be political.

Murray replied, “This is very political, that’s’ what the coal industry is all about,” he said. “I’ve been invited to speak, when I’m done you can speak — until I’m done, you shut up.”

Moments later Murray was again interrupted, to which he replied, “Shut up, you’re no coal miner,” and began a chant of “Coal, Coal, Coal.”

* You may have heard about Mr. Murray…

Several miners at Murray Energy’s Century coal mine in Beallsville, Ohio, contacted a nearby morning talk radio host, David Blomquist, over the last two weeks to say that they were forced to attend an Aug. 14 rally for Romney at the mine.

Murray closed the mine the day of the rally, saying it was necessary for security and safety, then docked miners the day’s pay.

Asked by WWVA radio’s Blomquist about the allegations on Monday’s show, Murray chief operating officer Robert Moore said: “Attendance was mandatory but no one was forced to attend the event.”

Murray is right about one thing, though. Coal is more about politics than anything else. Everybody promises to revive coal, and then nothing happens until the next election, when everybody promises to revive coal. But when coal finally does rebound, the person in charge is denounced for killing the industry.

Weird.

* And then there was this…

State Treasurer Dan Rutherford said the Illinois coal industry is a billion dollar industry that employs 3,500 people. Rutherford said the industry needs to be sustained in order to protect American interests and security.

3,500 employees. That’s it.

Coal extraction is so mechanized now that even a huge increase in production wouldn’t employ all that many people.

Trust me, I understand the strategic aspect of the resource. But a jobs producer it really ain’t. Take a look at this graph of Kentucky coal mining output and employment…

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 1:43 pm

Comments

– Murray chief operating officer Robert Moore said: “Attendance was mandatory but no one was forced to attend the event.” –

Would you call that double-talk — doubled?

Comment by sal-says Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 1:47 pm
The problem isn’t that the President is against coal mining so much as he’s against actually using the coal once it’s mined. The resulting decrease in demand will eventually kill the industry. That is what Gonet meant when he predicted that the recent increases will be short-lived.

Comment by grand old partisan Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 1:53 pm
“Shut up, you’re no coal miner,”

“‘Cause if you were a coal miner, I would fire you for not knowing your place.”

– MrJM

Comment by MrJM Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 1:54 pm
===he’s against actually using the coal once it’s mined===

Actually, he’s pumping billions into clean coal research and development.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 1:59 pm
I follow the rail industry quite a bit and rail traffic is down in 2012 from 2011 due to 1 commodity—coal. So s a whole coal usage in Amrica has begun to drop–slowly but it has begun to drop.
It is only partially due to government policy however. The biggest reason that coal production has declined is because, due to fracking technology, natural gas has become so much cheaper. It is good old “free market” economics (you know the ones that conservative politicians are always screaming about except when it costs jobs in their district)and not so much government policy that has hurt the coal industry.

train111

Comment by train111 Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 1:59 pm
May only be 3,500 jobs here in IL, but those tend to be pretty well paying jobs - and located in areas of Illinois where those types of jobs are hard to find.

Also, there’s a spin off effect where those jobs create more rail traffic, which means more railroad workers. And those are also pretty well paying jobs.

Rather keep them then lose them. And if we can grow more of them, all the better.

Comment by Judgment Day Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:05 pm
===Rather keep them then lose them. And if we can grow more of them, all the better. ===

I don’t disagree. However, it’s important to know the context here.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:06 pm
That’s great Rich, but no one is going to pay mining companies to stock-pile coal until the technology those universities are “researching and developing” actually come on line (or be prove profitable enough to sustain). In the meantime, thousands of workers are loosing their jobs as coal-fire plants across the country are shuttered. The miners’ jobs aren’t far behind those plant operators’.

Comment by grand old partisan Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:09 pm
You may remember Murray Energy from the 2007 mine collapse at the Crandall Canyon Mine in Utah where six miners and three rescue workers were killed.. The owner of the mine was a subsidiary of Murray.

Comment by red eft Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:11 pm
In the 1980s, in response to the threat of acid rain that was destroying lakes in Canada, the federal government passed legislation (RCRA) favoring low-sulphur coal mined primarily out west, in Wyoming and Utah. That was a Republican administration under Ronald Reagan. You can trace the decline in Illinois coal production directly to that law. Illinois coal is high sulphur coal and western coal, while low in sulphur, is high in mercury, which also poisons lakes.

Did we do anything about improving technology to burn Illinois coal more cleanly? Not enough apparently. You can’t hang the problems of the coal industry on this president. As Rich noted, he is spending a lot of money investing in ways to use coal safely and cleanly.

There is enough coal buried in Illinois to power the country for something like 300 years. On the other hand, burning that coal using today’s power plant technology would do untold damage to our environment. We can spend time fighting about that or we can invest and get our government, industry and researchers involved in creating new technology that changes the equation.

Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:12 pm
grand old partisan, as has been pointed out elsewhere in comments, this year’s declines have been mainly due to natural gas prices. Are you now picking winners? I thought the GOP was against that sort of thing.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:15 pm
Some company CEOs are driven more by political ideology than by any understanding of real economics, or even their own industry in the global market. I see this all the time in talking to CEOs. Some embrace a group political culture that they think makes them seem more business-saavy. The Chamber just adds to the group-think, which is often simply wrong about the facts.

To expect business leaders to somehow be smarter about politics or government than those in other walks of life, is a mistake.

Comment by walkinfool Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:16 pm
“Attendance was mandatory but no one was forced to attend the event.” — those coal people are silly.

Market forces in the electric markets, including the low cost of natural gas will hurt the coal industry more than “the current administration.” Also, no offense to the coal industry, but it’s not good for the environment and the air we breathe. If you don’t care about the environment, fine, but I have to live it in, so I do. The cost to make coal clean enough to not pollute the air as much and to upgrade power plants to keep up with current technologies does not make economic sense right now. Will it make sense in a couple more years when the economy picks up and the electric markets stabilize (partly due to old coal plans shutting down)? Probably. But let’s not go overboard with blaming the President for the energy market.

Comment by Ahoy! Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:17 pm
Rich, the decision to close my father-in-law’s plant was made 2 years ago, when the EPA started following through on Obama (primary) campaign pledge to regulate coal power to the point of being unprofitable. If natural gas has become more economical, it’s at the very least in part because of Obama’s policies. He’s the one picking winner and losers, not me.

Comment by grand old partisan Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:22 pm
Shale gas has been a game changer. As Rich notes, you can’t blame the market for preferring cheap natural gas over more expensive coal, especially when natural gas is cleaner.

Comment by soccermom Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:27 pm
Train 111 hit on the most salient point here. The primary reason for planned coal plant retirements is because gas fired power is so cheap today, due to the supply increases from fracking. Coal-fired power just doesn’t compete with gas at these prices. The Obama admin regs contribute to the closings, but saying they cause the closings is just wrong.

Also, it’s my understanding that Illinois mines are doing quite well, the coal’s just being shipped overseas to feed growing economies elsewhere.

Comment by Senator Clay Davis Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:31 pm
The good news is the southern Illinois coal industry will always be able to sell their dirty coal to Santa. The naughty list gets longer every year.

Comment by Jaded Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:31 pm
Want to hear some real irony? Bombardier Recreational Products announced on Friday that it is closing its plant in Franklin County and laying off 350 people. Who owns 50% of Bombardier…Bain Capital.

Comment by Old Shepherd Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:32 pm
Obama wants Cap and Trade which will hit coal very hard. So the fact that he hasn’t done it yet shouldn’t lead people to believe he doesn’t have it in his sights.

do the 3500 jobs include the jobs manufacturing the mining equipment? Cat in Decatur does a lot of that.

Comment by Disconnect Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:40 pm
Come on Phil, you missed a chance to name the Speaker and his “Chicago Democrat Machine” as part of the problem too. You may have to turn in your Illinois GOP Member Card.

Comment by Give Me A Break Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:46 pm
Coal is a very dirty energy Source. It’s use will keep declining will Obama speed the decline? Probably, not sure except for coal miners that a bad thing.

Comment by Fed up Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:48 pm
Grand old partisan, you just aren’t telling the truth.

“The projected decline in Central Appalachian steam coal is the result of a number of factors, including increased competition from other coal-producing regions (Powder River and Illinois Basin), cheap and abundant natural gas, the depletion of the most accessible coal reserves, and, to a far lesser extent, environmental regulations (greenhouse gases and mercury emissions). While some have suggested that future EPA regulations will be a major factor in the future decline of coal production, projections from EIA indicate that they will have little impact on future coal production in Central Appalachia.”

http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2012/09/04/an-update-on-w-va-s-coal-economy/

“At one of Georgia Power Co.’s newest plants in metro Atlanta, two gas turbines and one steam turbine generate about 840 megawatts, enough energy to supply about 25,000 homes, says plant manager Tony Tramonte.

Georgia Power, like a growing number of power companies, is ditching coal and switching to natural gas. Tramonte explains that one reason is the overall dramatic air quality improvement.

“There’s a 100 percent reduction in mercury emissions … [and] a 50 percent reduction in the rate of carbon dioxide production,” he says.

He also says there’s a 99 percent reduction in sulfur dioxide and about a 90 percent reduction in nitrous oxide, with a plant that’s now five times larger than the one it replaced.

The bigger reason for the switch, however, is more mundane: money.

Domestic natural gas is killing coal because it’s cheap and abundant. Four years ago, electricity generated by gas was twice as expensive as coal. Today, gas is less than half the price of coal.

“What that means is, literally, natural gas is going to kill more coal-fired power plants than the EPA regulations,” says Michael Zenker, a coal analyst for Barclays.

http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2012/07/16/npr-gets-it-right-on-whats-killing-king-coal/

Comment by Aaron Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 2:49 pm
Saturday’s rally was produced by the UMWA to help Forby and other Dems who find themselves in the same party as Obama. The Obama administration has created (or is in the process of creating) four new EPA rules that are death sentences for coal-burning plants. The only bright news in the coal industry is in exports.

It coal gets beat on an even playing field by gas that’s good because it’s the free market. What we don’t need are additional rules designed to kill one industry over another and increase the cost of electricity.

Quinn’s rules right now on increasing the use of renewable energy are not sustainable and are increasing the state’s electricity costs. It’s just one more area where Illinois’ business climate takes a hit.

I’m not a huge partisan for coal. I don’t like it, don’t really have a sympathetic bone in my body toward it. It’s got a bloody history on both sides. It rips up the landscape, but I’m not a hypocrite. I like my air conditioning. I like my heat.

Comment by Downstate Illinois Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 3:07 pm
My grandfather was a miner back in the day when they didn’t even have to pay the miners in money–they got paid in scrip, which could only be used to buy things at the store also owned by the mine owners.

Sounds to me like Murray misses those good old days.

Comment by Cheryl44 Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 3:12 pm
Judgment Day,

But doesn’t that extra rail traffic also cause an effect whereby workers waiting for trains are delayed from using their time as productively as they could? Also, rail cars used for coal cannot be used for other, possibly more valuable cargo.

One of the prime benefits of natural gas, is once the pipe line is built, it’s a highly efficient transportation system.

Comment by cermak_rd Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 3:12 pm
The UMWA wasn’t involved in the rally. If they were, Bob Murray wouldn’t have been there.

Comment by Old Shepherd Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 3:15 pm
Great post, Rich.

As I have been pointing out, while the GOP has blamed Democrats for job losses in manufacturing, and Democrats have focused on GOP policies that “ship jobs overseas,” much of the loss in manufacturing can likely be attributed to technological imrpovements in manufacturing that have grown profits without creating many jobs.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 3:27 pm
Disconnect,

Even if Obama has Cap and Trade “in his sights,” if Obama couldn’t make it happen with his party having 60 senators and control of the house, how exactly are you expecting him to make it happen with Republican control of one or both houses, or in a best-case-scenario for him, slight majorities for Democrats in both houses but no filibuster-proof majority in the Senate?

Comment by hisgirlfriday Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 3:42 pm
“But doesn’t that extra rail traffic also cause an effect whereby workers waiting for trains are delayed from using their time as productively as they could? Also, rail cars used for coal cannot be used for other, possibly more valuable cargo.”

Well, on the basis of avoiding delays due to rail traffic tying up rail crossings, you could probably attempt to get rid of all rail traffic everywhere. Metra would certainly come to mind (and I like and use Metra).

As far as “…other, more valuable cargo” - well, right now due to this lackluster, so-called ‘economic recovery’ that we are in, there’s literally tens of thousands of idle freight cars of all types sitting on rail sidings.

So “Maybe in theory, but not in reality”.

As to pipelines being a highly efficient transportation system, no doubt. But there’s the usual caveat, the “…once the pipeline is built” clause. I think that’s one issue that is still being fought over at the federal level.

Also, building pipelines are downright expensive. Capital costs are extremely high.

Comment by Judgment Day Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 3:42 pm
Murray is right that any coal rally is political. It’s silly to pretend otherwise.

Coal production has shot up nationally over the past 30 years while coal mining jobs have been cut roughly in half. It’s because of mechanization. You can end every environmental law on the books and those jobs still aren’t coming back.

Illinois spends tens of millions (usually over $100 million) annually subsidizing the coal industry. All for a measly 3,500 dangerous jobs. What coal boosters never explain is why every region that bases their economy on coal mining is always poor. Southern Illinois, Eastern Kentucky, West Virginia and the Powder River Basin all stay poor, and so does every other coal region until they diversify their economy. That’s not a coincidence. There are good reasons for it. When DCEO pushes coal as the only hope for regional economies, they’re basically telling 1/3 of the state to stay poor.

Comment by Will Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 4:11 pm
The buggy whip manufacturers association has a SuperPac which has pledged to stop time to preserve its industry by defeating Obama and his anti-antiquated businesses policies.

Comment by D.P. Gumby Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 4:21 pm
grand old partisan == “Obama (primary) campaign pledge to regulate coal power to the point of being unprofitable.” === Please provide the source of this alleged statement in context. (Rush Limbaugh & Glenn Beck don’t count)

Comment by Crime Fighter Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 4:42 pm
Phil Gonet was the genius who encouraged Springfield CWLP to “go long” on coal-fired power generation. The utility is nearly insolvent because of this approach.

Comment by Crime Fighter Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 4:45 pm
Downstate Illinois, I guess you didn’t hear that cities and co-ops that invested in the new Prairie State coal plant just got hit with 15%-30% rate increases. Wind is cheaper than new coal.

If government isn’t supposed to pick winners and losers then there’s about $100 million in coal subsidies that can be trimmed off the annual state budget and given back to taxpayers.

Comment by Will Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 4:46 pm
So if coal supports 3500 jobs and wind supports 20,000 jobs in Illinois — according to Jack Darin of the Sierra Club here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jack-darin/illinois-wind-energy_b_1688331.html

based off a white paper from ISU here:

http://renewableenergy.illinoisstate.edu/wind/publications/2012EconomicImpactReportForWeb.pdf

doesn’t that mean we should be moving away from coal and towards wind as our state’s energy policy?

(Not to mention that no one with asthma dies from wind power).

Comment by Dan Johnson Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 5:01 pm
===Government shouldn’t pick winners and losers.===

Why else would we have a government?

Dividing scarce resources is the very definition of politics, that’s why it exists. That’s the only way lots of unrelated people can live together without constant warfare.

If government didn’t constantly pick winners and losers, human civilization would have never emerged from the caves.

Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 5:10 pm
What Illinois coal doesn’t produce in jobs it makes up for in dollars, which are taxed. The growth in this regard is in exports. So, we send coal to Asia. Asia in turn sends money to Illinois.

Comment by Keyser Soze Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 5:15 pm
===Government shouldn’t pick winners and losers.===

Air pollution from coal is an economic externality for the burners of coal. Those downwind pay for the impact of acid rain, mercury, etc. By imposing regulations on pollution, the government places the cost on those who reap most of the economic benefits (the producers of the pollution and their customers). Not regulating is also picking winners and losers.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 6:23 pm
Aside for all the job considerations….Natural gas is simplier to acquire, can be stored for seasonal use in depleted gas fields in the east, easy to transport, and has environmental advantages over coal.

My only concern is the ease of which one could disrupt a pipeline, thus easily shutting down huge communities.

Its a bit more difficult to disrupt the flow of coal.

Comment by Sunshine Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 6:38 pm
“doesn’t that mean we should be moving away from coal and towards wind as our state’s energy policy?”

Depends what the cost per Kw. hour is. If it’s providing jobs for 20k people just here in IL, the money to pay for all of those folks has to be coming from somewhere. Divide all the people cost + operating expenses by the total amount of power produced, and let’s see if the numbers make economic sense when compared to other current power producers.

And lets cut out all that tossing in of unmeasurable nebulous costs like the crazy numbers that get assigned for impact of acid rain, mercury, etc.

If you can’t make your economic case on the solid numbers, then IMO, it’s just another Solyndra wannabe.

Comment by Judgment Day Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 7:06 pm
As far as Mr. Murray is concerned, it gives me great pleasure to see cheap shale gas throttling this truly, genuinely bad dude.

The potential for shale gas (and liquids) production in Southern Illinois is not proven and is only partially understood. The efforts of enviro-religionists to shut down this nascent industry will hopefully be held off to allow for a full-scale effort to determine what potential may exist. If we have a resource similar to that in the Dakotas, it might be a game-changer for Illinois.

Comment by JoeVerdeal Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 8:37 pm
==And lets cut out all that tossing in of unmeasurable nebulous costs like the crazy numbers that get assigned for impact of acid rain, mercury, etc. ==

Those impacts are measurable if we choose to do so. You can add up the impact on health, the consequences to the fish industry, the damage acid rain does to buildings & plants, etc.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 8:38 pm
There’s got to be some measurement on health that coal- or oil-leaning energy advocates would accept. There are a certain number of deaths that can be attributed to coal pollution. We can pick a number for each death and multiply by that number. It may be crude, but to get a benefit-cost ratio, we can assign some dollar value to each life lost from coal pollution.

Jobs / cost per kWh is important, but the cost can and should include externalities.

Comment by Dan Johnson Monday, Sep 17, 12 @ 11:50 pm
===So if coal supports 3500 jobs and wind supports 20,000 jobs in Illinois===

Apples to oranges I think. Those are direct coal jobs, while the wind numbers I believe include indirect jobs.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Sep 18, 12 @ 12:54 am
The man from Maywood, John Prine:

–Then the coal company came with the world’s largest shovel

And they tortured the timber and stripped all the land

Well, they dug for their coal till the land was forsaken

Then they wrote it all down as the progress of man

And daddy won’t you take me back to Muhlenberg County

Down by the Green River where Paradise lay

Well I’m sorry my son but you’re too late in asking

Mister Peabody’s coal train has hauled it away–

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Sep 18, 12 @ 8:50 am
===Actually, he’s pumping billions into clean coal research and development====
Please cite your source, FutureGen 2.0 isn’t a reality, yet.

Comment by Anon: Tuesday, Sep 18, 12 @ 9:47 am
A five second Google search led me to this:

“Today’s awards are part of a more than $5 billion investment strategy by the Obama Administration in clean coal technologies and R&D. This strategy, which has attracted over $10 billion in additional private capital investment, is designed to accelerate commercial deployment of clean coal technologies – particularly carbon capture and storage (CCS) – and to position the United States as a leader in the global clean energy race.”

http://energy.gov/articles/obama-administration-announces-clean-coal-research-awards-universities-across-country

Google is your friend.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 18, 12 @ 11:04 am
So has anyone looked at the facts of natural gas and the way it is extracted from the ground? Ive never seen coal setground water on fire. There are places where they are no longer alowed to drink the water because its deadly. Know the facts

Comment by coal man Friday, Sep 21, 12 @ 11:59 am