INTL 407 2012Summer Research Paper: “Indispensable Coal”: Environmentally-unjust Propaganda

Xiaorui Huang

INTL 407 Environmental Justice
Research Paper
Instructor: Prof. Braun

Grade: A+

“Indispensable Coal”: Environmentally-unjust Propaganda

Introduction 

Around half of electricity in the United States is generated from coal, which counts for 23% of total national energy supply (Storm 9). Indeed, coal has been important to America. However, its severe environmental costs make it undesirable on the list of promising future energy sources. Coal’s unpopularity drives coal industry to adopt many public relation strategies to prolong its past prosperity. The propaganda of “indispensable coal” is one of such strategies. This propaganda hinders the mitigation of coal-associated environmental injustice and further worsens such injustice by casting anti-coal organizations as groups failing America, contributing to political support for pro-coal policies, and swaying people to become market price-centered consumers who favor coal over other energy sources.

            In this paper, I will do a theoretical analysis on the impacts of the “indispensable coal” propaganda on environmental injustice.  Firstly, I briefly describe the environmental injustice caused by coal production at intra-national, international, and intergenerational levels. Secondly, I explain what the “indispensable coal” propaganda is. Thirdly, I analyze the impacts of such propaganda on impeding the mitigation of coal-associated environmental injustice. Finally, I discuss how such propaganda further worsens environmental injustice.

Environmental Injustice Caused by Coal

The impacts of the “indispensable coal” propaganda on environmental injustice directly relate to the environmental injustice issues caused by coal itself at intra-national, international, and intergenerational levels. At the intra-national level, various studies have shown that the life cycle of coal, while powering the whole America, causes environmental damages and other burdens disproportionally borne by certain groups of people like Appalachian communities (Epstein 77-85; Hendryx 541-50; McSpirit & Reid 512-16). Specifically, coal mining and coal-fired power generation cause visual, water, and air pollution in mining communities and often result in serious public health hazards. At the international level, the environmental injustice caused by coal mainly manifests as the climate injustice that is exacerbated by the huge amount of carbon emission of coal usage. For example, by indirectly increasing global temperature and aggravating sea level rise, the usage of coal in some countries accelerates the submersion of an atoll where a agricultural Polynesian community resides for centuries (There once was an island = Te henua e nnoho). At the intergenerational level, the environmental injustice of coal is also derived from its carbon emission. Since it takes decades for current emission to fully realize into the increase of carbon concentration in upper atmosphere, the usage of coal somewhat boost present economy at the expense of the severer climate change for future generations (Gardiner 403-04; Epstein 87-90).

The Industrial Propaganda of “Indispensable Coal”

Among various propaganda made by coal industry, “indispensable coal” plays an important role. Coal industry has made two arguments that promote coal as indispensable for America. First, coal industry argues that the American economy and businesses depend on the cheap electricity produced by coal in order to be competitive internationally (Storm 1, 4, 10; PRI’s The World; American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity; America’s Power). Without coal, economy will fail. Second, coal industry argues that coal is the only energy source that can power Americans’ wonderful lives at an affordable cost (American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity). Without coal, life expenses of Americans will rocket.

“Indispensable Coal” Hinders the Mitigation of Environmental Injustice

Both types of “indispensable coal” propaganda undermine the will of people, politicians, and governmental agencies to address coal-associated environmental injustice at all three levels discussed above.

On one hand, by claiming that American economy and businesses depend on coal, coal industry describes itself as the defender for American interests and casts those who intend to regulate coal industry and address associated environmental injustice as failing America. In a speech in the 2008 Coal Market Strategies Conference, Richard Storm, CEO of a coal company argues that “we are on the right side of the issue [by stating that coal good for America]”, “[we need to] convince other energy groups to put America’s interest first” (Storm 7, 15). Also coal industry vilifies anti-coal environmental groups and governmental regulators as “weaken America’s economic strength, our national security and the future prosperity for our grandchildren” (Storm 20). Particularly, coal industry targets Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by arguing that EPA is failing America by regulating coal industry (American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity). Basically, coal industry uses “indispensable coal” propaganda to constructs a public perception of “America needs coal! Regulating coal industry harms America.”

On other hand, by propagating that only coal can power Americans’ lives at an affordable cost, coal industry again portrays itself as the defender of public interests and anti-coal groups as the enemies of the public who threat the lives for Americans. In the coal commercial We Can All Make a Difference, coal industry indicates that any shifts to other energy sources will increase utility costs for American families and make their lives tougher (American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity). Also, Lisa Miller, a spokeswoman for a coal industry group, comments on a renowned Harvard study on the externalities of coal that “ [this study] ignores the substantial benefits of coal in maintaining low energy prices for American families…,[which] are linked to a higher standard of living and better health” (Malone). Here coal industry tries to build a public perception of “American people need coal! Regulating coal industry harms Americans.”

            If the public perception is built that coal is indispensable to both American economy and people, anyone who wants to regulate coal industry and address associated environmental injustice will lose public support. Although no case-based study has been done on the correlation between “indispensable coal” propaganda and the deregulation of coal industry in the last two decades, it is likely that such propaganda plays a role in forcing the regulators to retreat. In this sense, “indispensable coal” propaganda hinders the mitigation of coal-associated environmental injustice.

“Indispensable Coal” Further Worsens Environmental Injustice

Not only undermining the mitigation of coal-associated environmental injustice, the “indispensable coal” propaganda may further worsen such injustice by actually encouraging a momentum of increasing coal usage[1].

            First, policies become more pro-coal industry under the influence of “indispensable coal” propaganda, which may potentially increase coal usage. A message implied in the “indispensable coal” propaganda is that it is righteous to use coal. Based on the fact that America has the largest coal reserve in the world, this message then encourages people to use coal to the largest extent (American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity). When applying to policies, such a message contributes to the political support for policies that benefit coal industry and increase coal usage. An example is the Advance Energy Portfolio Standard (AEPS) in Pennsylvania. Originally named as Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), this regulation was supposed to encourage the development of renewable energy such as wind power, solar energy, and biomass. However, in Pennsylvania, waste coal is included in the promotion list (Pennsylvania AEPS Alternative Energy Credit Program). According to a study by sociologists Leland Glenna and Robert Roy Thomas, in the Pennsylvania AEPS case, the past dependence on coal together with the perception of continuous future dependence contributes to the strong political power of coal industry to turn a pro-environment policy into an opportunity for further development of coal usage (862-64, 867-68). Of course, the “indispensable coal” propaganda is not solely responsible in this case, yet, theoretically it can empower coal industry with more political support to get more pro-coal policies passed. 

Second, the “indispensable coal” propaganda causes the increase of coal usage by both treating people solely as consumers and promoting the cheap market price of coal but deliberately neglecting various externalities of coal. In anecdotes described in several “indispensable coal” commercials, characters involved are only concerned about saving money from using cheap coal-generated electricity without thinking about the huge externalities of coal (Bigelow; American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity). In doing so, audiences of the commercials are treated solely as consumers. And Coal, with a cheap market price, is promoted as the best energy source for consumers. Subconsciously, people tend to become what they are treated as (The Century of the Self). In this case, people as audiences of “indispensable coal” commercials tend to care about only the cheap market price of energy sources. As a result, coal usage is very likely to increase. Since coal usage causes severe environmental injustice as discussed in the beginning, the “indispensable coal” propaganda may worsens these environmental injustices by potentially increasing coal usage.

             

Conclusion

            Based on the theoretical analysis, the “indispensable coal” propaganda of coal industry hinders the mitigation of environmental injustice caused by coal because it casts those who intend to regulate coal industry as failing American economy and people. Moreover, such propaganda may further worsens the environmental injustice because it potentially leads to the increase of coal usage by getting more pro-coal policies passed and treating people as market price-centered consumers.

            Of course, this theoretical analysis is insufficient and does not provide concrete evidences for the negative impacts of the “indispensable coal” propaganda on environmental injustice. Specific case studies are called for to further explore how such industrial propaganda influences environmental injustice. 

Works Cited

Bigelow, Bill. "Scholastic Inc. Pushing Coal Propaganda to Kids." Common Dreams. N.p., 12 May 2011. Web. 19 Aug. 2012. <https://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/05/12-5>.

"Coal - Data - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)." U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Aug. 2012. <http://www.eia.gov/coal/data.cfm>.

Epstein, Paul, Samir Doshi, Jonathan Buonocore, Leslie Glustrom, Melissa Ahern, Nancy Reinhart, Beverly May, Richard Clapp, Richard Heinberg, Benjamin Stout, Michael Hendryx, and Kevin Eckerle. "Full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal." Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1219.1 (2011): 73-98. Print.

Gardner, Stephen. "A Perfect Moral Storm: Climate Change, Intergenerational Ethics and the Problem of Moral Corruption." Environmental Values 15.3 (2006): 397-413. Print.

Glenna, Leland, and Robert Thomas. "From Renewable to Alternative: Waste Coal, the Pennsylvania Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard, and Public Legitimacy." Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal 23.9 (2010): 856-71. Print.

Hendryx , Michael, and Melissa Ahern. "Mortality in Appalachian Coal Mining Regions: The Value of Statistical Life Lost." Public Health Reports 124.4 (2009): 541-50. Print.

Malone, Scott. " Coal's hidden costs top $345 billion in U.S.-study| Reuters." Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News | Reuters.com. N.p., 16 Feb. 2011. Web. 19 Aug. 2012. <http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/16/usa-coal-study-idUSN1628366220110216>.

McSpirit, Stephanie, and Caroline Reid. "Residents' Perceptions of Tap Water and Decisions to Purchase Bottled Water: A Survey Analysis from the Appalachian, Big Sandy Coal Mining Region of West Virginia." Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal 24.5 (2011): 511-20. Print

"Overview." Pennsylvania AEPS Alternative Energy Credit Program. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Aug. 2012. <paaeps.com/credit/overview.do >.

PRI’s The World. "US depends on coal, too | PRI's The World." PRI's The World. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Aug. 2012. <http://www.theworld.org/2010/12/us-depends-on-coal-too/>.

Storm, Richard. "Enhancing Public Perception of Coal." 2008 Coal Market Strategies Conference. Storm Technologies, Inc.. Kingsmill Resort & Spa, Williamsburg, Va. 6 Oct. 2008. Speech.

The Century of the Self. Dir. Adam Curtis. Perf. Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays. BBC Four, 2002. VHS.

There once was an island = Te henua e nnoho. Dir. Briar March. Perf. Teloo, Endar, Satty. On the Level Productions, 2010. DVD.

"anon." America's Power. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Aug. 2012. <www.americaspower.org/keeping-electricity-prices-low-american-business>.

"anon.." American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Aug. 2012. <www.cleancoalusa.org/>.

***Special notes: When I drafted my paper in Eugene, I have cited examples of industrial propaganda from American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity and America’s Power (the last two in the references list). However, when making references in China, somehow I cannot access these two websites (they might be blocked by Chinese government). Therefore I cannot get enough information to make complete references for these two websites. Apologies for any violation of rules of academic integrity.

---

[1] According to U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the annual coal consumption in America had increased since 1990s till mid-2000s. It reached the highest point in 2007 and slightly decreased in the following years. Here “encouraging a momentum of increasing coal usage” means that: in the years of decreasing coal consumption, “indispensable coal” propaganda somewhat neutralizes the decrease; in the years of increasing coal consumption, “indispensable coal” propaganda reinforces the increase. Also, since it is very hard to quantify the influence of “indispensable coal” propaganda on actual coal consumption, I will only focus on the theoretical analysis of such influence.