Home / Latest News /
Bloomberg gives $50 million to fight coal-fired power plants
By The Washington Post
This article was published July 21, 2011 at 1:09 p.m.
PHOTO BY BRYAN THORNHILL
Work continues in July on the main power building at the John W. Turk Jr. power plant in Hempstead County.
- Comments (35)
- aAFont Size
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg will donate $50 million to the Sierra Club to support its nationwide campaign to eliminate coal-fired power plants, including one under construction in southwest Arkansas.
Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune described the gift from Bloomberg Philanthropies, which will be spread out over four years, as “a game-changer, from our perspective.” The group will devote the money to its “Beyond Coal” campaign, which has helped block the construction of 153 new coal-fired power plants across the country since 2002.
In some cases, the Sierra Club has joined with unusual allies in working to prevent new power plants, like in southwestern Arkansas, where the advocacy group and the Hempstead County Hunting Club are suing to block the construction of Southwestern Electric Power Co.’s $1.7 billion John W. Turk plant.
Brune said in a phone interview that the group will use the money “to identify the oldest, dirtiest coal-fired power plants, retire them and replace them with clean energy.”
As mayor of New York, Bloomberg has pushed for environmentally friendly policies such as investing in renewable energy and making the city’s taxi fleet more efficient. But this is his largest financial contribution to an environmental effort, and the donation will significantly swell the Sierra Club’s $80 million annual budget.
Coal industry officials, however, questioned whether the campaign to phase out coal plants was realistic given the fact that they now supply close to half of the nation’s electricity.
“If their program were successful, where does the Sierra Club suggest we get our energy?” asked Lisa Camooso Miller, spokesman for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, a trade group. “Coal is American. It’s affordable. It adds to our quality of life.”
With Bloomberg’s donation, the Sierra Club plans to expand its “Beyond Coal” staff from about 100 people to nearly 200 full-time employees, which it will deploy in 46 states. Most of the staff will engage in grass-roots organizing, but some will work on lawsuits or social networking.
Comments on: Bloomberg gives $50 million to fight coal-fired power plants
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.
You must login to make comments.
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 21, 2011 at 4:56 p.m.
%0 million .... what a waste of money.
( permalink | suggest removal )
RonalFos says... July 21, 2011 at 5:18 p.m.
50 million is a big chunk of money but it pales compared to the money spent by coal companies trying to hide the problems of mining and burning coal.
( permalink | suggest removal )
LevitiCuss says... July 21, 2011 at 5:49 p.m.
Sweet! If you're an air-breather, this is a good thing.
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 21, 2011 at 6:15 p.m.
That 50 million could have been spent on the future of as in Research and Development, but not ending a viable electrical producing platform. Just dumb!
( permalink | suggest removal )
JakeTidmore says... July 21, 2011 at 6:39 p.m.
Viable??? I'd like my air to be viable first.
( permalink | suggest removal )
evanspe05191104 says... July 21, 2011 at 7:13 p.m.
So when all the cars and trucks are powered by ELECTRICITY because the petro powered vehicles "pollute", where do you get the extra electricity to charge the vehicles? Don't tell me the charging is done at night, so it does not matter. If all vehicles are electric and are eventually able to propel a vehicle more than 200 miles (think tractor trailer rig trucks and commerce) then there will be an astronomically increased demand. Wind and solar do not fill the gap.
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 21, 2011 at 7:40 p.m.
Barrister ... not to mention the HIGHER cost of electricity which would be intolerable for a vast majority of citizens.
( permalink | suggest removal )
evanspe05191104 says... July 21, 2011 at 9:35 p.m.
You are right, Madd; the cost of electricity for normal household use would be prohibitively driven up if all motor vehicles were electric powered. That is especially so when the electric powered vehicles are big tractor trailer rigs which need to be powered for 400 miles per day, not just puttering around town like a "Smart Car". Anybody have an idea of where cheap electric will come from? Obama said before he got elected that if one thought of operating a coal fired plant under his administration, the cost would be very high - that includes consumers as well. Any cheap alternatives?
( permalink | suggest removal )
JakeTidmore says... July 21, 2011 at 9:38 p.m.
You guys are saying that electricity is so important that we must poison the air we breathe and the air our children, grandchildren and future descendants will breathe. You guys must think Agent Orange would make a great cocktail mixer with that kind of mentality.
( permalink | suggest removal )
evanspe05191104 says... July 21, 2011 at 9:43 p.m.
Bloomberg is a great guy and is practical, but he is able to throw the $50 Million out as if it were a pittance in a bid to be the next energy czar or something else in the BO Admin. Don't be fooled with this "contribution" - it is Mike's bid for a position forward or tax deduction.
( permalink | suggest removal )
evanspe05191104 says... July 21, 2011 at 9:46 p.m.
JakeTid: What is the alternative which keeps the economy going? We all know that you can shut down the economy and be sooo clean. What is the answer?
( permalink | suggest removal )
RonalFos says... July 21, 2011 at 10:35 p.m.
Wind and solar do have the ability to meet our needs down the road. North and South Dakota are known at the Saudi Arabia of Wind. New technologies in both wind and solar point to a future where they could meet all of our needs. No one is talking about closing down old coal powered plants next week. This money will be spent to move us in the right direction.
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 21, 2011 at 11:27 p.m.
What a snow job Ron.
( permalink | suggest removal )
aimee says... July 22, 2011 at 3:02 a.m.
Maddjack:
You said, "That 50 million could have been spent on the future of as in Research and Development, but not ending a viable electrical producing platform."
Now, listen to one of their spokemen:
"“If their program were successful, where does the Sierra Club suggest we get our energy?” asked Lisa Camooso Miller, spokesman for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, a trade group. “Coal is American. It’s affordable. It adds to our quality of life.”"
Does THIS sound like an industry that is going to spend money "on the future of as in Research and Development"..???
No, they are dragging their feet and it is only by closing down plants that they will be FORCED to work towards cleaner energy...
Yep, they will be dragged, kicking and screaming into the 21st century...!!!
( permalink | suggest removal )
JakeTidmore says... July 22, 2011 at 6:43 a.m.
Mary Anne Hitt, Sierra Club:
We will continue standing up to King Coal and its pollution of our air, our water, and our politics. Moving beyond coal means ending coal pollution's $100 billion in annual health costs. It means ending mountaintop removal coal mining, which poisons drinking water, lays waste to our purple mountains majesty, increases the risk of deadly floods, and turns small towns into ghost towns.
It means ending the hazards of coal ash, which is stored in unlined ponds nationwide and contaminates drinking water. The toxins found in coal ash have been linked to organ disease, cancer, respiratory illness, neurological damage and developmental problems. Children are more susceptible to the health impacts of coal ash, a disturbing fact since EPA has found that 1.54 million children live near coal sites.
Who wants their child to live with these deadly effects of coal when we can power our nation with clean energy?
Mayor Bloomberg sees the reality of our nation's energy independence. He recognizes that the switch to clean energy is already starting to happen, and it is spurring innovation and job creation. Local communities are taking the lead and replacing coal with wind and solar power.
Iowa is already getting more than 15% of its energy from wind power. San Antonio just announced it is retiring its coal plant and is now planning to build one of the largest solar projects in the country. In Denver, the Mayor and residents grew tired of the dirty air, put pressure on the local utility and got the coal plant retired. Colorado utility Xcel is now on target to meet that state's clean energy goal -- one of the most aggressive state standards in the country -- a full eight years ahead of schedule. Oregon and Washington have both announced they are retiring the one-and-only coal plant in each state.
( permalink | suggest removal )
RonalFos says... July 22, 2011 at 7:28 a.m.
The only snow job around is is the lies spread by the coal companies about the harm they do and the lack of harm from moving on to better power sources.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... July 22, 2011 at 2:14 p.m.
Barrister,
Do you think that he wants to be Energy Czar for the $300,000 or so it pays? I think not. Bloomberg is a good guy. He would make a decent president. If you can handle New York City, you can handle the president of the US.
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 22, 2011 at 2:44 p.m.
Pop have you ever lived in NYC?
( permalink | suggest removal )
jjordan says... July 22, 2011 at 3:12 p.m.
What is so bad about improving our energy problem and moving away from traditional sources? Every time we hear of any progress being made in alternative energy or cleaning up pollution causing sources, we've got to hear from the usual suspects about what a waste it all is or how we are going to lose jobs in the oil industry or how climate change is the world's biggest joke and an attack on business, etc. What is so bad about trying to protect the environment once in a while instead of always prostituting it out to the highest bidder... Is it just always hard-coded in every conservative mind that we need to trash the environment or our economy will fail? Just keep shuffling those deck chairs on the titanic and earning that wage - I'm sure things will work out in the end by not changing course...
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... July 22, 2011 at 3:40 p.m.
Maddjack,
NYC is a nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there. Bloomberg has done a good job with a nightmarish city. Giuliani wasn't bad either.
JJordan,
The Neanderthals always fight change. Of course, we will run out of coal and oil etc. and they are nasty anyway. We need to invest massive amounts in transferring to wind, solar, wave, etc. It does not help that the 2nd District elected an oil lobbyist to Congress.
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 22, 2011 at 3:54 p.m.
Try Flat Bush in Brooklyn, and this president needs to go!
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... July 22, 2011 at 4:47 p.m.
This is a decent President, and we are going to keep him. The far right might want Bachman, and the far left might prefer others, but many of us in the middle like this one just fine. I don't agree with everything he does or doesn't do, but he is working to keep us safe and make things better for everybody. God Bless our country and our president!
( permalink | suggest removal )
trouble06 says... July 22, 2011 at 5:12 p.m.
Populist says, Of course we will run out of coal and oil. Yes, but it won't be anywhere soon. We have in the Green River Formation of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming a moderate estimate of 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil from oil shale that is three times greater than the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. We have enough gas
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 22, 2011 at 6 p.m.
Oil from oil shale, will take more energy to extract than it would produce as of this writing.
( permalink | suggest removal )
evanspe05191104 says... July 22, 2011 at 8:47 p.m.
jjordan: what is so bad about alternative sources of energy is that they do not provide the level of energy of coal fired plants for electricity and of oil that we need and expect.
Sure, there are lots of alternative sources of energy, but our government allows lobbyists to cajole our government into NOT allowing these alternative forms of energy to become a major alternative source of energy.
So, when you get Obama to "focus like a laser" on alternative energy and stopping business as usual in Washington (i.e., big money contributors to his campaign), maybe we'd have a chance to get that alternative energy like the algae in the Exxon commercials translated into a real solution.
Y'all koolaiding in the meantime!
( permalink | suggest removal )
aimee says... July 23, 2011 at 3:01 a.m.
trouble:
You said, "Of course we will run out of coal and oil. Yes, but it won't be anywhere soon."
Typical Republican solution..!!! Just pass the problem on since it won't affect YOU and let these companies keep making their profits... Don't ask a thing of them...!!!
Idiot..!!!
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 23, 2011 at 9:21 a.m.
Why would any company work so hard not to make a profit? Idiot!
( permalink | suggest removal )
jjordan says... July 23, 2011 at 9:31 a.m.
Keep on drinking it Barrister. Heaven forbid we have a mixture of alternative and traditional energy sources until eventually the alternative energy surpasses the traditional sources. Those of us in the middle aren't buying your blame on Obama. You think a Republican president will push alternative energy or at least setting a goal for a mixture of the two - at least one that's not 50 yrs out and is weak at best? The oil companies won't have it, but I'm sure you won't assess any blame on the people pouring your koolaid.
( permalink | suggest removal )
aimee says... July 23, 2011 at 11:20 a.m.
Maddjack:
They should INVEST their profit towards the FUTURE of their company which will be using RENEWABLE sources of energy..!!! IDIOT..!!!
( permalink | suggest removal )
80Redux says... July 23, 2011 at 11:45 a.m.
I say do it all. Anything to get out from under the Middle East's thumb. That would include Coal, Oil, Nuclear, Geothermal, Wind, CNG, Ocean currents, and anything else we can think of. Why isn't Detroit making CNG cars???
( permalink | suggest removal )
Coralie says... July 23, 2011 at 3:14 p.m.
Barrister says "Wind and solar do not fill the gap."
But some pretty smart and technologically advanced people in Japan and Germany think that they can.
( permalink | suggest removal )
HogJockey says... July 23, 2011 at 5:35 p.m.
Such wishful thinking! The Sierra Club is just anti-Capitalism/American. Make energy prohibitively expensive and watch the economy continue to slide. I guess Bloombluster is willing to contribute $50 million to nuclear power? France gets 80% of their electricity from nuclear so why don't we. The technology is already available. If the tax money were removed from the chinese windmills, they wouldn't be there. Just ask GE, the government's champion of sweet deals and no taxes! If wind and solar can make it on the open market, it will be embraced. Otherwise, quit starving people for some religious ideology!
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 23, 2011 at 7:13 p.m.
And here is the Clean-Coal-Research, www(DOT)propertyex. com/artman/publish/cheyenne-chamber-of-commerce/Clean-Coal-Research-Projects-Choose-Cheyenne-and-Wyoming-Properties. html
~
This is where some of that 50 Million should have gone.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Jjackk says... July 23, 2011 at 9:22 p.m.
Give your 50 million to it then. It is his money, you know you always argue to leave rich people's money alone. Unless you don't like what they do with it. Just like you always want the government to leave you alone but you have a list of people you think they should go after. Thats called hypocritical.
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... July 24, 2011 at 10 a.m.
No Jjackk I was pointing out of how unwise the money was spent. For anyone not to see that is stupid.
( permalink | suggest removal )
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.