Coal phase out

A coal phase-out is a type of fossil fuels policy that dictates the gradual shutdown of operating coal-fired power plants while prohibiting construction of new plants.

Main Causes

Environment

Global warming

The primary reasons for a government to try this option are the problematic toxic emissions involved with mining and burning coal, which have been implicated as causes of global warming and climate change. Emissions from electricity generation account for a signifcant portion of world greenhouse gas emissions; in the United States, electricity generation accounts for nearly 40 percent of emissions, the largest of any source [http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003732690_carbon03.html] [* [http://www.houghtonmifflinbooks.com/catalog/titledetail.cfm?titleNumber=694238 "Big Coal: The Dirty Secret Behind America's Energy Future" by Jeff Goodell. 324 pages] . ISBN-13/EAN: 9780618872244; ISBN-10: 0618872248. Publication Date: 04/03/2007. Edit. Houghton Mifflin. Goodell is a contributing editor at Rolling Stone magazine and a frequent contributor to the New York Times Magazine. From the same author are "The Cyberthief and the Samurai" about Kevin Mitnick and " Sunnyvale: The Rise and Fall of a Silicon Valley Family" and "Our Story: 77 Hours That Tested Our Friendship and Our Faith".]

Clean coal technology plays a critized role in the debate, and there is a divide among environmentalists and climatologists who support a phase-out versus entrepreneurs who promote improved regulations and modernized technology.

A 38-page document authored by James Hansen and eight other scientists, entitled “” calls for phasing out coal power completely by the year 2030 [http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf] .

In 2008 P.A. Kharecha and James Hansen released a study projecting the effect of a coal phase-out on atmospheric CO₂ levels. [Kharecha, P.A., and J.E. Hansen, [http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2008/Kharecha_Hansen.html "Implications of "peak oil" for atmospheric CO2 and climate,"] Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 22, GB3012, doi:10.1029/2007GB003142] One scenario was a phaseout of coal emissions by 2050. The authors describe the scenario as follows: :The second scenario, labeled Coal Phase-out, is meant to approximate a situation in which developed countries freeze their CO2 emissions from coal by 2012 and a decade later developing countries similarly halt increases in coal emissions. Between 2025 and 2050 it is assumed that both developed and developing countries will linearly phase out emissions of CO2 from coal usage. Thus in Coal Phase-out we have global CO2 emissions from coal increasing 2% per year until 2012, 1% per year growth of coal emissions between 2013 and 2022, flat coal emissions for 2023–2025, and finally a linear decrease to zero CO2 emissions from coal in 2050. These rates refer to emissions to the atmosphere and do not constrain consumption of coal, provided the CO2 is captured and sequestered. Oil and gas emissions are assumed to be the same as in the BAU [Business as Usual] scenario.Kharecha and Hansen also consider three other scenarios, all with the same coal phase-out schedule but each making different assumptions about the size of oil and gas reserves and the speed at which they are depleted. Under the Business as Usual scenario, atmospheric CO₂ peaks at 563 parts per million (ppm) in the year 2100. Under the various coal phase-out scenarios, atmospheric CO₂ peaks at 422-446 ppm between 2045 and 2060. The implication of the study is that a phase-out of coal is a much more potent remedy for global warming than any actions that might be taken in limiting or stretching out the use of oil and gas.

Mountaintop removal mining

Mining industry uses mountaintop removal to obtain the coal.

Mining accidents

Coal mining disasters are a reason to try to use more easy obtainable (over ground) energy sources.

Governmental action

Canada

Ontario

Ontario has passed coal phase-out legislation [AllBusiness. [http://www.allbusiness.com/energy-utilities/utilities-industry-electric-power/5013652-1.html Ontario's Coal Phase-out Will Have Drastic Consequences, Say The Thinking Companies] . February 16 2005] .

United States

California

California's SB 1368 created the first governmental moratorium on new coal plants in the United States. The law was signed in September 2006, took effect for investor-owned utilities in January 2007, and took effect for publicly-owned utilities in August 2007. SB 1368 applied to long-term investments (five years or more) by California utilities, whether in-state or out-of-state. It set the standard for greenhouse gas emissions at 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour, the equal to the emissions of a combined-cycle natural gas plant. This standard created a de facto moratorium on new coal, since it could not be met without carbon capture and sequestration. [ [http://www.solutionsforglobalwarming.org/docs/SB1368_FS_FINAL.pdf "California Takes on Power Plant Emissions: SB 1368 Sets Groundbreaking Greenhouse Gas Performance Standard,"] Natural Resources Defense Council Fact Sheet, August 2007.]

Maine

On April 15, 2008, Maine Governor John E. Baldacci signed LD 2126, "An Act To Minimize Carbon Dioxide Emissions from New Coal-Powered Industrial and Electrical Generating Facilities in the State." The law, which was sponsored by Rep. W. Bruce MacDonald (D-Boothbay), requires the Board of Environmental Protection to develop greenhouse gas emission standards for coal gasification facilities. It also puts a moratorium in place on building any new coal gasification facilities until the standards are developed. [Rhonda Erskine, [http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=84867 "Maine Governor Baldacci Signs Bill to Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions,"] WCSH6.com, April 15, 2008]

Texas

In 2006 a coalition of Texas groups organized a campaign in favor of a statewide moratorium on new coal-fired power plants. The campaign culminated in a "Stop the Coal Rush" mobilization, including rallying and lobbying, at the state capital in Austin on February 11 and 12th, 2007. [ [http://texas.sierraclub.org/press/newsreleases/20070125.asp "Stop the Coal Rush" Rally & Lobby Day Set for February 11 & 12"] Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter.] Over 40 citizen groups supported the mobilization. [ [http://www.stopthecoalrush.com/participating-organizations/ Stop the Coal Rush! Participating Organizations] ] f

In January, 2007, A resolution calling for a 180-day moratorium on new pulverized coal plants was filed in the Texas Legislature on Wednesday by State Rep. Charles "Doc" Anderson (R-Waco) as House Concurrent Resolution 43. [ [http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80R/billtext/pdf/HC00043I.pdf Text of HCR 43] ] The resolution was left pending in committee. [ [http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=80R&Bill=HCR43 Legislative history of HCR 43] ] On December 4, 2007, Rep. Anderson announced his support for two proposed integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) coal plants proposed by Luminent (formerly TXU). [ [http://www.docandersonfortexas.com/news.htm Rep. Anderson press release] , December 4, 2007.]

Washington state

Washington has followed the same approach as California, prohibiting coal plants whose emissions would exceed those of natural gas plants. Substitute Senate Bill 6001 (SSB 6001), signed on May 3, 2007, by Governor Gregoire, enacted the standard. [Christina Russell, [http://whitmanpioneer.com/outdoors/2007/11/15/wallula-coal-plant-proposal-controversial-among-students-faculty/ “Wallula Coal Plant Proposal Controversial Among Students, Faculty,”] Whitman College Pioneer, 11/15/07] As a result of SSB 6001, the Pacific Mountain Energy Center in Kalama was rejected by the state. However, a new plant proposal, the Wallula Energy Resource Center, shows the limits of the "natural gas equivalency" approach as a means of stopping carbon dioxide emissions from coal plants. This proposed plant would meet the standard set by SSB 6001, even though it would capture and sequester a portion (65 percent, according to a plant spokesman) of its carbon. [Christina Russell, [http://whitmanpioneer.com/outdoors/2007/11/15/wallula-coal-plant-proposal-controversial-among-students-faculty/ “Wallula Coal Plant Proposal Controversial Among Students, Faculty,”] Whitman College Pioneer, 11/15/07]

Proposed legislation

H.R. 5575, the "Moratorium on Uncontrolled Power Plants Act"

In March, 2008, Henry A. Waxman and Edward J. Markey, co-chair of the U.S. House or Representatives Committee on Government Oversight and Reform, introduced H.R. 5575, the “Moratorium on Uncontrolled Power Plants Act of 2008.” The legislation addresses the largest new source of global warming pollution — new coal-fired power plants that are being built without any controls on their global warming emissions. [ [http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1797 "Chairman Waxman Introduces H.R. 5575, the 'Moratorium on Uncontrolled Power Plants Act',"] announcement, 3/11/08]

The legislation states: "Effective upon the date of enactment of this Act, no permitting authority shall issue a permit for a proposed new coal-fired electric generating unit under the Clean Air Act, unless the permit requires the unit to use state-of-the-art control technology to capture and permanently sequester carbon dioxide emissions from such unit." [ [http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20080311112442.pdf "H. R. 5575,"] text or proposed legislation, 3/11/08]

"State-of-the-art control technology" is defined as "The term ‘‘technology that captures not less than 85 percent of the total carbon dioxide produced by the unit on an annual average basis and permanently sequesters that carbon dioxide in a geologicalformation approved by the Administrator in a manner that prevents its later release into the atmosphere." [ [http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20080311112442.pdf "H. R. 5575,"] text or proposed legislation, 3/11/08]

Utility action

* Progress Energy Carolinas announced on June 1, 2007, that it was beginning a two-year moratorium on proposals for new coal-fired power plants while it undertook more aggressive efficiency and conservation programs. The company added, "Additional reductions in future electricity demand growth through energy efficiency could push the need for new power plants farther into the future." [ [http://www.progress-energy.com/aboutus/news/article.asp?id=16202 "Progress Energy Carolinas sets goal of doubling efficiency savings to 2,000 MW,"] company press release, June 1, 2007.]

* Public Service of Colorado concluded in its November 2007 Resource Plan: "In sum, in light of the now likely regulation of CO₂ emissions in the future due to broader interest in climate change issues, the increased costs of constructing new coal facilities,and the increased risk of timely permitting to meet planned in-service dates, Public Service does not believe it would not be prudent to consider at this time any proposals for new coal plants that do not include CO₂ capture and sequestration. [http://www.iccr.org/news/press_releases/pdf%20files/DontGetBurned08.pdf "Don't Get Burned: The Risks of Investing in New Coal-Fired Generating Facilities,"] Synapse Energy Economics, 2008, p. 11 (PDF file)]

* Xcel Energy noted in its 2007 Resource Plan that "given the likelihood of future carbon regulation, we have only modeled a future coal-based resource option that includes carbon capture and storage."

* Minnesota Power Company announced in December 2007 that it was not consider a new coal resource without a carbon solution.

* Avista Utilities announced that it does not anticipate pursuing coal-fired power plants in the foreseeable future.

* NorthWestern Energy announced on December 17, 2007, that it planned to double its wind power capacity over the next seven years and steer away from new baseload coal plants. The plans are detailed in the company's 2007 Montana Electric Supply Resource Plan. [ [http://www.rnp.org/News/news_NWEnergy2007IRP17Dec07.html "NorthWestern Energy Plans For More Wind; Says New Coal is Too Risky,"] Renewable Northwest Project, 12/17/07.]

Public support for a coal moratorium

Opinion polls

In October, 2007, Civil Society Institute released the results of a poll of 1,003 U.S. citizens conducted by Opinion Research Corporation.

The authors of the poll reported:"75 percent of Americans –-including 65 percent of Republicans, 83 percent of Democrats and 76 percent of Independents --would 'support a five-year moratorium on new coal-fired power plants in the United States if there was stepped-up investment in clean, safe renewable energy --such as wind and solar --and improved home energy-efficiency standards.' Women (80 percent) were more likely than men (70 percent) to support this idea.Support also was higher among college graduates (78 percent) than among those who did not graduate from high school (68 percent). [Opinion Research Corporation, [http://www.cleanenergyaction.net/101807_CLEAN_survey_report.pdf A Post Fossil-Fuel America] , Executive Summary, National Opinion Survey Produced for Citizens Lead for Energy Action Now (CLEAN),A Project of the Civil Society Institute, October 18, 2007]

The exact question posed by the survey was as follows:More than half of power plant-generated electricity comes from coal. Experts say that power plants are responsible for about 40 percent of U.S. carbon dioxide pollution linked to global warming. There are plans tobuild more than 150 new coal-fired power plants over the next several years. Would you support a five-year moratorium on new coal-fired power plants in the United States if there was stepped-up investment in clean, safe and renewable energy –such as wind and solar –and improved home energy-efficiency standards? Would you say definitely yes, probably yes, probably no, definitely no, or don't know.

The results were as follows: [Opinion Research Corporation, [http://www.cleanenergyaction.net/101807_CLEAN_survey_report.pdf A Post Fossil-Fuel America] , National Opinion Survey Produced for Citizens Lead for Energy Action Now (CLEAN),A Project of the Civil Society Institute, page 18, October 18, 2007]

* 30% "definitely yes"
* 45% "probably yes"
* 13% "probably no"
* 8% "definitely no"
* 4% "don't know"

CLEAN call to action

In October, 2007, fifteen groups led by Citizens Lead for Energy Action Now (CLEAN) called for a five-year moratorium on new coal-fired power plants, with no exception for plants sequestering carbon. The groups included Save Our Cumberland Mountains (Tennessee); Ohio Valley Environmental Council (West Virginia); Cook Inlet Keeper (Alaska); Christians for the Mountains (West Virginia); Coal River Mountain Watch (West Virginia); Kentuckians for the Commonwealth (Kentucky); Civil Society Institute (Massachusetts); Clean Power Now (Massachusetts); Indigenous Environmental Network (Minnesota); Castle Mountain Coalition (Alaska); Citizens Action Coalition (Indiana); Appalachian Center for the Economy & the Environment (West Virginia); Appalachian Voices (NC); and Rhode Island Wind Alliance (Rhode Island). [ [http://www.cleanenergyaction.net/101807release.cfm CLEAN press release] , October 18, 2007.]

Other citizen groups supporting a coal moratorium

* [http://www.1sky.org/about/1sky-solutions/no-new-coal 1 Sky]
* Energy Action Coalition
* [http://ran.org/what_we_do/global_finance/spotlight/coal_is_over/ Rainforest Action Network]
* [http://kansas.sierraclub.org/Wind/Coal%20Moratorium.htm Kansas Sierra Club]
* [http://cmnow.org/ Coal Moratorium Now!]
* [http://stepitup2007.org/article.php?id=469 Step It Up! 2007]
* [http://www.coopamerica.org/programs/climate/dirtyenergy/coal/index.cfm Coop America]
* [http://www.risingtide.org.au/cleancoal Rising Tide Australia]
* [http://www.cleanenergyaction.net/callaction.cfm Citizens Lead for Energy Action Now (CLEAN)]

hareholder resolutions in favor of a coal moratorium

* Trillium Asset Management, a social investment management company, submitted the resolution [http://trilliuminvest.com/resolutions/moritorium-on-coal-financing/ "Moratorium on Coal Financing"] to Bank of America in the 2007-2008 shareholder resolution season. The resolution concluded:::"RESOLVED: Shareholders request that BOA’s board of directors amend its GHG emissions policies to observe a moratorium on all financing, investment and further involvement in activities that support MTR coal mining or the construction of new coal-burning power plants that emit carbon dioxide. [ [http://trilliuminvest.com/resolutions/moritorium-on-coal-financing/ "Moratorium on Coal Financing,"] accessed April 2008.]

Prominent individuals supporting a coal moratorium

* Al Gore [ [http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/gore-lecture_en.html Nobel Lecture] , Oslo, December 10, 2007] :

* Banker and financier [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Sanzillo Tom Sanzillo] , currently First Deputy Comptroller for the state of New York, called for a moratorium on new coal plants in the state of Iowa. Citing slow growth in electricity demand and better alternative sources of energy, Sanzillo said, "It's not only good public policy, it's great economics." [ [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zG0pUjBr8KU Tom Sanzillo statement on YouTube] ]

* Mary Wood, Professor of Law at the University of Oregon, called for a moratorium on new coal plants in an videocast lecture to the University of Montana on February 19, 2008. Wood compared the urgency of the climate crisis to World War II: “Nothing less than a massive global effort on the scale of WWII can save our climate.” [Peter Metcalf, [http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/law_professor_says_government_obligated_to_curb_climate_change/C38/L38/ "Law Professor Says Government Obligated to Curb Climate Change,"] New West, 2/20/08.]

Prominent individuals supporting a coal phase-out

* Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, called for replacing all fossil fuels with renewable sources of energy in twenty years. [ [http://www.mercurynews.com/olympics/ci_10419245 "Google CEO ERic Schmidt offers energy plan,"] MercuryNews.com, 9/9/08]

EPA lawyers supporting a coal moratorium

In May, 2008, Laurie Williams and Allan Zabel, two lawyers at the Environmental Protection Agency, wrote a public letter opposing cap-and-trade solutions to greenhouse gas emissions and supporting a federal moratorium on new coal plants that don't sequester their carbon dioxide emissions. The letter, "Urgent Plea for Enactment of Carbon Fees and Ban on New Coal-Fired Power Plants without Carbon Sequestration," was written in their capacity as citizens rather than in their capacity as EPA employees. [ [http://yubanet.com/opinions/Laurie-Williams-and-Allan-Zabel-Urgent-Plea-for-Enactment-of-Carbon-Fees-and-Ban-on-New-Coal-Fired-Power-Plants-without-Carbon-Sequestration.php Urgent Plea for Enactment of Carbon Fees and Ban on New Coal-Fired Power Plants without Carbon Sequestration] Laurie Williams and Allan Zabel, May 6, 2008 ]

Mayors supporting a coal moratorium

* Charlottesville, N.C., mayor Dave Norris has spoken out in favor of a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants. [ [http://cvilledave.blogspot.com/2007/12/clean-energy-for-cville-beyond.html CvilleDave,] (Mayor Dave Norris's blog), accessed January 2008.] On December 19, 2007, Charlottesville passed the Charlottesville Clean Energy Resolution putting the city on record in support a moratorium.

* On October 13, 2007, Pocatello, Idaho, mayor Roger Chase told other mayors from across the state attending an Association of Idaho Cities legislative committee that he favored a moratorium no new coal plants in the state. [ [http://www.localnews8.com/Global/story.asp?S=7211810 "E. Idaho Mayor Doesn't Want Coal-Fired Plant in State,"] Associated Press, 10/14/07.]

* On June 1, 2007, Park City, Utah, mayor Dana Wilson wrote a letter to Warren Buffett expressing the city's opposition to three coal plants proposed by Rocky Mountain Power. [ [http://www.lesscoal.com/ParkCity%20Endorsement.htm Letter from Dana Wilson to Warren Buffett,] June 1, 2007.]

* In November 2007, Salt Lake City mayor Rocky Anderson expressed his support for a coal moratorium at a rally organized by the Step It Up! campaign. [ []

Other politicians supporting a moratorium

* Ed Fallon, running against incumbent Leonard Boswell for Democratic Party nomination for Iowa's 3rd Congressional District, stated his support for a coal moratorium and criticized Boswell's statement that "coal will be the mainstay for electricity for decades to come." [ [http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=117914 Fallon campaign: Fallon criticizes Boswell on taxpayer-funded 'environmental' mailing,] IowaPolitics.com, 2/11/08.]

Local governmental bodies supporting a coal moratorium

* In January, 2008, Black Hawk County (Iowa) Health Board recommended that the state adopt a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants until it enacts tougher air pollution standards. [ [http://www.wcfcourier.com/articles/2008/01/16/news/top_story/doc478e26fd33f2f364595766.txt "Board calls for coal plant moratorium,"] WCFCourier.com, 1/16/08.]

Move Toward Renewables

Some electricity producers are changing from coal to renewables.

Toward Solar

The Colorado Public Utilities Commission approved Xcel's voluntary decision to shut down two coal-fired power plants in the state and building one of the world's largest utility-scale solar power plants and adding 850 megawatts of wind energy to its system [http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/aug/20/xcel-ditching-2-coal-plants-going-to-solar/] [http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/othercities/denver/stories/2008/08/18/daily23.html] .

Toward Biomass

Biomass power is a growing trend in the United States [http://www.eere.energy.gov/news/enn.cfm#id_11950] . In 2006, Public Service of New Hampshire [http://nuwnotes1.nu.com/apps/mediarelease/psnhpr.nsf/ae4a5e02027c8da2852566740065f15e/921ebbbc341fdd338525723a0071cc46?OpenDocument] finished converting one of its coal-fired power plants into a 50-MW biomass power plant, the Northern Wood Power Project, which is fueled with wood chips. In 2008, DTE Biomass Energy [http://www.dtebiomassenergy.com] (DTE Energy Company) agreed to buy the 50-MW E.J. Stoneman Power Plant in Cassville, Wisconsin, with plans to convert it to burn wood waste in 2009.

Georgia Power, a subsidiary of Southern Company, asked the state's public service commission for approval to convert the coal-fired Plant Mitchell to run on wood fuel. If approved, the retrofit will begin in 2011 and the biomass plant will start operating in mid-2012. The 96-MW biomass plant will run on surplus wood from suppliers within a 100-mile radius of the plant, which is located near Albany, Georgia.

Coal-fired power plant in Pepeekeo, Hawaii, that formerly provided electricity to a sugar mill is now being converted into a 24-megawatt (MW) biomass power plant. MMA Renewable Ventures [http://www.mmarenewableventures.com/news/docs/hu_honua.pdf] is financing the conversion and will operate the new plant, which will be called the Hū Honua Bioenergy Facility [http://www.huhonua.com/proj_over.htm] . Located about 8 miles north of Hilo on the Big Island of Hawaii, the facility will draw on residual wood from the local timber industry and other biomass wastes to produce enough power for about 18,000 homes, meeting up to 10% of the Big Island's electricity needs.

Companies are also building new power plants designed to run on biomass.

See also

* Clear Skies
* Georgia Power
* New Source Review
* Renewable energy

References

* [http://www.houghtonmifflinbooks.com/catalog/titledetail.cfm?titleNumber=694238 "Big Coal: The Dirty Secret Behind America's Energy Future" by Jeff Goodell. 324 pages] . ISBN-13/EAN: 9780618872244; ISBN-10: 0618872248. Publication Date: 04/03/2007. Edit: Houghton Mifflin.

External links

* [http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/22/features/bookfri.php Big Coal: The Dirty Secret Behind America's Energy Future, Book Review] (International Herald Tribune).
* [http://www.opha.on.ca/advocacy/letters/coal.html Coal Phase Out overview]
* [http://www.worldwatch.org/node/1657 Coal Phase Out Environmental impacts]
* [http://nonewcoal.org.uk/ No New Coal website] .
* http://www.coal-is-dirty.com
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=No-Coal_Scenarios No-Coal Scenarios]
* [http://lobbyingdisclosure.house.gov/ Coal lobbying disclosure website]
* [http://www.wvoter-owned.org/news/2006/01_09.html Coal companies are big political donors]
* [http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13159559/national_affairs_big_coals_dirty_move/1 Big Coal's Dirty Move]
* [http://www.thestar.com/News/Ideas/article/258871 A bright energy future without coal or nuclear] (Toronto Star).
* [http://www.sierraclub.org/grassroots/stories/00017.asp Coal Plant Near Everglades Denied] .
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Nonviolent_direct_actions_against_coal Nonviolent direct actions against coal]
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_Activist_Videos:_Mountaintop_removal Mountaintop removal videos]
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Proposed_coal_plants_in_the_United_States Proposed coal plants in the United States]
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_plants_cancelled_in_2007 Coal plants cancelled in 2007] ] - 59 projects
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_plants_cancelled_in_2008 Coal plants cancelled in 2008] ]
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_Issues_Calendar Coal Issues Calendar] ]
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_Studies Compilation of Coal Studies] ]
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_Activist_Videos Coal Activist Videos] ]
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=State-by-State_Guide_to_Information_on_Coal_in_the_United_States State-by-State Guide to Information on Coal in the United States] ]
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Information_on_Coal International Information on Coal] ]