This letter is a response to Gabi Seltzer’s column, “Moving ‘Beyond Coal’ must be cost efficient for future students” (CT, Nov. 30), which is about a very controversial issue, especially at a traditionally conservative southwest Virginia university. We are, in fact, in the heart of coal country. Your concerns are ones that many students have regarding how switching away from coal will affect their pockets. However, rather than saying moving off our dependency on coal is unrealistic and not cost effective in 10 years, why not see it as a challenge?
Virginia Tech is a leading institute in research and technology. We are smart problem solvers. We work hard. Like I said, we invent the future. In the Environmental Coalition we like to say that Hokies invent the right future. I am optimistic and excited about the new Virginia Tech Beyond Coal campaign. Its goals are ambitious, but its grassroots energy and visibility in a mere six months is phenomenal. It is inspiring to see campus activism on such a pressing energy issue.
Even more respectable, the students in Beyond Coal are not just crazy liberal hippies who are protesting the campus power plant. Beyond Coal is a campaign, and thus a strategic political plan is being formulated to propose to the administration. The proposal will have realistic goals and a timeframe, but will also emphasize that moving off of coal is crucial in the greater global climate change picture.
Yesterday, Beyond Coal student leaders met with Mike Coleman, the facilities manager, to discuss how Tech has the responsibility and capacity to move away from coal. Just think, Tech could lead the way for renewable energy technology with all our engineers. With passage of the Virginia Tech Climate Action Commitment last spring, there is no doubt in my mind that the administration is ready to be a leader in sustainability. Sure there are budget cuts and the economy is unstable, but with great student-led campaigns like the SGA Sustainability Committee’s Green Fee, how could we lose? Wouldn’t you be willing to designate $5 of your Tech tuition toward energy efficiency and conservation? I don’t think this would hurt our pockets. Funds generated from a Green Fee could fuel the transition to change campus energy infrastructure. And that’s only one idea of how to raise money to address our addiction to dirty coal.
Lyndsay McKeever
Humanities science and the enviroment major
Intern, Sierra Club
Leave a comment 11 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
First of all no that's my $5 you can't have it. Secondly switching to a renewable energy power plant would cost the university millions so I don't see how 5 dollars changes anything. Third Tech is by no means obligated to change from coal it's a tiny plant that produces an insignificant amount of pollution. Our slogan is "Invent the Future" coal is our future. we have a 1000 year supply, coal and uranium that's the energy of tomorrow.
Reply to this Top
This guy probably got an internship with a coal company this summer... Go Hokies! Beyond Coal!
Reply to this Top
You say that because you can't attack my position. You know I'm right yet you still believe the opposite.
Reply to this Top
This is awesome to see this dialogue over coal becoming a regular feature in the CT. Let's keep it up and find some common ground so we can get off this awful energy source.
Reply to this Top
We are brilliant problem solvers at Tech, I am glad you noticed. But there first has to be a problem in order for us to solve it. Coal energy is not a problem, you just fantasize that it is. Grow up and get over it, go hug a tree.
Reply to this Top
Well it's only a problem in the sense that it is the number one contributor to atmospheric CO2, mining it has devastated Appalachia by blocking streams, poisoning wells, and killing residents with cancer and respiratory disease, and burning it releases tons of mercury, arsenic, and lead into the atmosphere.
Reply to this Top
A lot of that has changed you're thinking of the old coal techniques. Modern approaches are much safer, they provide needed employment to WV which lets be honest is a 3rd world nation without federal funding, and we get in return a cheap and reliable energy source.
Top
You are completely wrong and utterly absurb with the above statement. Coal may very well be the number one man-made producer of CO2, but do you know what else produces CO2? Human breathing and human life. CO2 is an issue that can not and will not be solved by eliminating coal. Beyond that, there are things being researched to capture coal after it is emitted to reduce the problem; note reduce the problem, not eliminate (it can't be done). Next, mining has not devasted Appalachia, it has enriched the economy of the region vastly. Coal companies and other mining companies invest a lot of time and money into the Appalachian region and by saying it is destroying it due to one or two mines out of a thousand plus is just misleading. Burning coal does not release tons or mercury, arsenic or lead into the atmosphere; it may release some, but no more than chlorine producing chemical plants or other industry. Please try to be a bit more educated, or at least not so obtuse, about the idea of coal being used; it will be here until our generation is on our deathbed, so get used to it or start developing a plan to fix it.
Top
The $5 fee proposal is not necessairly a bad idea, as long as you keep yourself realistic. There are ~30K students here, so the fee would raise $150k in funds. With that we could replace incadnesent bulbs with CFLs, replace single pane windows with double, improve insulation, etc. in order to reduce energy consumption. There may be substantial support for this.
However, getting the entire university off of coal is another story. The on campus plant does not provide all the electricity for the campus (most comes from AEP), and it also does steam heating of the buildings. A complete overhaul would take years of construction and cost on the order of tens of millions of dollars. You will not get the university to support this.
One other alternative you haven't considered is clean coal technology (yes it is real). It is cheaper than wind/solar and has greatly reduced emissions compared to traditional coal burning.
Reply to this Top
Instead of building on your point I am just going to count down the seconds until someone yells that all coal is dirty.
(Which for you yellers we already know, "Clean Coal" is just easy to say then, "Cleaner Coal")
Reply to this Top
wow, beyond coal really is a political movement. establishing mandatory fees from tuition as a nice way to siphon money from people so they have a little party cash to throw around for pizza and t-shirts for the club...has politics written all over it. of course theyll use a little of it to make pamphlets to "raise awareness" on campus. i might join up in get in on this scam while it still lasts
Reply to this Top