Last week the U.S. Department of Energy pulled the plug on the proposed Western Greenbrier Co-Generation plant after not being able to find any private funders for it.
This is good news for a number of reasons:
- Coal is dirty and this Rainelle, W.V., plant would’ve polluted the air and water (burning coal is a major contributor to global warming).
- This plan would've burned waste coal, which is even dirtier than your typical coal-fired power plant.
- Funders are seeing that investing in coal is a bad idea.
- West Virginians won't be left on the hook to repay the state's investment debt from the plant.
Yet this is also bad news because the feds "spent more than $8 million on project planning, and the West Virginia Economic Development Authority lost $3 million in a loan guarantee…"
Instead of continuing to support coal, we should be investing in a clean energy future for the U.S. -- which will help fight global warming and create jobs (see the next story for proof!).
Rapid Clean Energy Investment Will Create 2 Million Jobs
A new report released this week shows that investing in a rapid green economic recovery program will create two million new U.S. jobs, strengthen the economy, increase energy independence, and fight global warming.
According to this new report entitled "Green Recovery A Program to Create Good Jobs and Start Building a Low-Carbon Economy," a short-term $100 billion green economic recovery package would:
- Create nearly four times more jobs than spending the same amount of money within the oil industry.
- Create roughly triple the number of good jobs as spending the same amount of money within the oil industry.
- Reduce the unemployment rate to 4.4 percent from 5.7 percent.
- Bolster employment - especially in construction and manufacturing.
Read more about the report here.
The report was prepared by the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Did You Comment on the ESA Yet?
Time's running out to comment on the proposed weakening of the Endangered Species Act rules.
The new rules would take decision-making on endangered species listings out of the hands of federal scientists and wildlife professionals and instead put it in the hands of agencies working on projects that may be adversely affected by a listing.
You've got until Sept. 15 to comment -- do it here: http://action.sierraclub.org/esa