5 ms·

I am speculating, but I think the real motive for cancelling renewables is to appeal to coal counties in the USA. Coal is in a scary place right now in the US,

I am speculating, but I think the real motive for cancelling renewables is to appeal to coal counties in the USA. Coal is in a scary place right now in the US, see this as an example: https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/comments/1mmqwd3/i_live_in_coal_country_and_i_dont_know_who_else/ https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/comments/1mmqwd3/i_live_in... Basically coal is less profitable and more expensive in places that have always been coal counties. The only thing to do in these areas is mine coal, so the concern is that entire regions will be rendered worthless if coal collapses. Which means local residents cannot sell their homes without taking significant losses, and they probably lose their jobs in coal, which manifests into a poverty trap for the entire town. And there are hundreds of these towns all through Appalachia. So renewable energy will always be a political issue over the next 50 years, because entire towns and regions depend on its political outcome.

Sharlin 1y ago
At the same time there are hundreds of towns in low-lying areas that are being rendered worthless by the climate change.
- deadeye 1y ago
  Where can I find a list of these towns?
  - meowkit 1y ago
    [dead]
cosmic_cheese 1y ago
The thing is, if you’re burning fossil fuels to generate power there’s not much reason to prefer coal over natural gas. The latter is cheaper and cleaner and once pipelines are in place, you don’t need to truck it around. Coal is dead and it’s not coming back. Areas in which it served as the pillar of the economy need to figure something else out. I say this as someone hailing from one such area. Speaking frankly, the way politicians keep selling the fantasy of it making a comeback is cruel.
- ModernMech 1y ago
  > Areas in which it served as the pillar of the economy need to figure something else out. I say this as someone hailing from one such area. Old steel towns had to do this, coal country might look to them for a model on how to leave a dying industry behind. But seeing how they vote, they might not like the answer for what it takes to survive: Pittsburgh PA - famous former steel town, faced very uncertain economic future after the mills closed, now a booming metropolis with top industry leaders in education, healthcare, sports, finance. What did it take? A dedication to multiculturalism and diversity. Pittsburgh would have died without embracing the global economy and attracting doctors, professors, students, entertainers, and athletes from all over the world to visit, live, and grow a family. Cleveland OH - once one of America's great manufacturing hubs, powered by steel mills, car parts, and shipping along Lake Erie. When industry collapsed, Cleveland faced deep decline, job losses, shrinking population, even bankruptcy in the 1970s. But today it's finding new strength as a center of healthcare, research, and culture. Then you look at places like Youngstown OH. Unlike Pittsburgh or Cleveland, Youngstown struggled to reinvent itself. Population plummeted, tax bases collapsed, and poverty took hold. The city became a symbol of the Rust Belt's hardest struggles. What held it back? Overreliance on steel, limited diversification, and waves of outmigration left too few resources to rebuild. What are they doing today to fix things? Healthcare and education. Should have started a lot sooner. One more example is Bethlehem PA, another former steel town that now has top industries in healthcare, education, and also some manufacturing. So that's the model. If you're a dying town with an industry that's shrivveling up due to changing economic conditions, the model to survive is to quickly pivot to healthcare, education, and entertainment, and to invite a bunch of outsiders into your community with open arms. And that is the main problem these dying coal regions have, because looking at how they vote, embracing healthcare, education, entertainment, and diversity is the last thing they want to do. You look at what the people who they voted for are doing with their power, they're attacking healthcare, attacking education, and attacking diversity sometimes violently, but always unrelentingly. So the Pittsburgh model is off the table, and they'll have to find another way from the abyss of failed post-industrial policy.
  - cosmic_cheese 1y ago
    > And that is the main problem these dying coal regions have, because looking at how they vote, embracing healthcare, education, and diversity is the last thing they want to do. You look at what the people who they voted for are doing with their power its attacking healthcare, attacking education, and attacking diversity sometimes violently, but always unrelentingly. So the Pittsburgh model is off the table, and they'll have to find another way from the abyss. Spot on, from what I’ve seen. Just keep doubling down on what hasn’t worked in hopes that one day it’ll magically manifest a Disney ending and the good old days will return.
burnout1540 1y ago
There are only about 45,000 coal miners in the entire US. That's a tiny number.
- jeffbee 1y ago
  More people drive buses in NYC than are coal miners in the whole America.
  - HPsquared 1y ago
    Probably though, like the buses, there's an order of magnitude more work done on the "back end". The machines, logistics, etc etc and everything else that depends on the industry. In the bus drivers example, it could be all the people in NYC who need to take a bus to get to work and would be affected by the sudden disappearance of buses. So it is with many industries.
- olddustytrail 1y ago
  If people really cared about coal miners then they could be offered a $1 million redundancy package. It would amount to a tiny fraction of government spending and I'm pretty sure it would be welcomed.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- rtkwe 1y ago
  They're also in geographically low population areas so counting them and the people employeed in their towns they have a significant sway on some states and the Senate skews things towards low population states through it's inequitable representation AND the outsized power Senate rules give individual Senators. Plus it's made a few people EXTREMELY rich so they've made their opinions and interests everyone elses problem too.
  - Yeul 1y ago
    Every once in a while someone in the Netherlands argues for the district system and they are immediately shut down with "America". One man one vote. And yes the regions that contribute more to the economy are a priority. They fund everything including the military without which we'd still be a part of Spain.
alistairSH 1y ago
Anybody who didn’t see this coming hasn’t been paying attention. There’s been plenty of time to move, retrain, whatever. The government has probably failed these people in one way or another, but these tend to be areas the say they value self-sufficiency and minimal government interference , so…
- zahlman 1y ago
  > move To where, with what savings? > retrain To do what, in this area, with what existing infrastructure?
  - ironman1478 1y ago
    I don't believe in retraining, but tons of immigrants move for better opportunities with very little savings. It's difficult and unfortunate, but it's necessary
    - bluefirebrand 1y ago
      People probably should not be forced to behave like desperate immigrants within the borders of their own country though
      - ironman1478 1y ago
        Why not? It'll probably build character. Also, it's happened all the time? People have been doing it for all of America's history. Tons of famous media is about people moving to the city for a better life.
      - 8note 1y ago
        people also shouldnt be forced to bend over backwards to ensure these couple villages never have to change their coal mining ways.
        zahlman 1y ago
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> the real motive for cancelling renewables is to appeal to coal counties in the USA Wyoming here. Coal country. Everyone thinks this is dumb. Including the folks in Campbell county, our top-producing coal region that has been trying to build a wind farm [1]. Trump’s social media fans in Florida and Texas like this because it feels like owning the libs. (To the extent there may be pecuniary interest, it would be in power producers. Like housing, stopping new power raises prices and profits incumbents.) Also, that Reddit thread is about coking coal. Not the thermal coal power plants burn. It’s about American steel production shutting down in the face of our trade war. Not this new economic miracle these idiots have spun up. [1] https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/campbell-county-delays-vote-on-wind-farm-rules/article_44fda2f0-7a0b-11df-8dcd-001cc4c03286.html https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/...
- CamperBob2 1y ago
  Everyone thinks this is dumb. Dumb enough to make them reconsider voting Republican in the future? I doubt it.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
ModernMech 1y ago
This message seems to come from a timeline where the people cutting the renewable projects care about electoral outcomes. But in this timeline, they tried to violently overturn the 2020 election, and they are currently trying to rig the 2026 election by gerrymandering states they control as much as possible. This isn't about earning the political support of people in coal country who vote GOP. If they ever face negative electoral outcomes in the future, their plan is to overturn the election using either force or legal chicanery.
groby_b 1y ago
This would make sense if it were a single issue. (And then, limited sense - even quite red places like Texas invest in solar because they need it. Coal is a regional issue, not a national one) If you see it in light of all the other actions taken across the spectrum, you land at best at "desperate dice roll to re-tool the US into a manufacturing power from the 80s", and at worst at "deliberate dismantling of a first-rate world power into a second tier paradise for oligarchs".
- rtkwe 1y ago
  It's made a national issue by 1) Senators from coal mining heavy states and the ridiculous setup of the Senate and the outsized power it gives individual Senators unless one party has 60 seats and 2) the amount of wealth it's given a few people (like the Koch brothers) who've used that wealth to buy influence in the GOP.
wat10000 1y ago
Coal counties are insignificant. Nobody is winning national elections by appealing to them. The actual motive is to appeal to people who have made coal part of their identity. These are people who have never been anywhere near a coal mine, but have internalized coal as Important and American, and as a way to stick it to those stupid environmentalists.
- notahacker 1y ago
  Yeah. Think this was epitomised by the DoE tweeting pictures of coal to own the libs. Or as one wag put it the right in 2005: "we shouldn't overregulate energy markets"; the right in 2025: "I'm actually attracted to coal" In Trump's case you can throw in a personal obsession with hating wind power because you can see it from one of his golf courses. Generally pathetic that people are trying to retcon this reflexive lib-owning vice-signalling from incredibly stupid people as actual industrial policy.
  - wat10000 1y ago
    I think it’s hard for people who aren’t steeped in that world to understand it, because it sounds so ridiculous. The idea of loving pro-coal policies because it upsets environmentalists is hard to accept. It’s natural to think it must really be about economic realities, people's livelihoods, etc. I have the questionable advantage of having listened to Rush Limbaugh almost every day in the 90s, reading lots of National Review, and taking in various other conservative media. I know the basis for these things, straight from the people pushing them. None of what’s happening is a surprise to me.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
dalyons 1y ago
At the speed at which coal has been declining, and will continue to decline now due to economics, it’s not going to take 50 years. Maybe 10 at most.
hollerith 1y ago
>So renewable energy will always be a political issue over the next 50 years, because entire towns and regions depend on its political outcome. I heard that before the first Trump administration, there was bipartisan support in Congress for phasing out the use coal in the US, so it seems quite possible that that bipartisan support will reassemble itself after Trump is gone (because the next President is unlikely to be as populist and as uncaring about climate change as Trump).

Sharlin 1y ago

At the same time there are hundreds of towns in low-lying areas that are being rendered worthless by the climate change.

deadeye 1y ago
Where can I find a list of these towns?
- meowkit 1y ago
  [dead]

cosmic_cheese 1y ago

The thing is, if you’re burning fossil fuels to generate power there’s not much reason to prefer coal over natural gas. The latter is cheaper and cleaner and once pipelines are in place, you don’t need to truck it around. Coal is dead and it’s not coming back. Areas in which it served as the pillar of the economy need to figure something else out. I say this as someone hailing from one such area. Speaking frankly, the way politicians keep selling the fantasy of it making a comeback is cruel.

ModernMech 1y ago
> Areas in which it served as the pillar of the economy need to figure something else out. I say this as someone hailing from one such area. Old steel towns had to do this, coal country might look to them for a model on how to leave a dying industry behind. But seeing how they vote, they might not like the answer for what it takes to survive: Pittsburgh PA - famous former steel town, faced very uncertain economic future after the mills closed, now a booming metropolis with top industry leaders in education, healthcare, sports, finance. What did it take? A dedication to multiculturalism and diversity. Pittsburgh would have died without embracing the global economy and attracting doctors, professors, students, entertainers, and athletes from all over the world to visit, live, and grow a family. Cleveland OH - once one of America's great manufacturing hubs, powered by steel mills, car parts, and shipping along Lake Erie. When industry collapsed, Cleveland faced deep decline, job losses, shrinking population, even bankruptcy in the 1970s. But today it's finding new strength as a center of healthcare, research, and culture. Then you look at places like Youngstown OH. Unlike Pittsburgh or Cleveland, Youngstown struggled to reinvent itself. Population plummeted, tax bases collapsed, and poverty took hold. The city became a symbol of the Rust Belt's hardest struggles. What held it back? Overreliance on steel, limited diversification, and waves of outmigration left too few resources to rebuild. What are they doing today to fix things? Healthcare and education. Should have started a lot sooner. One more example is Bethlehem PA, another former steel town that now has top industries in healthcare, education, and also some manufacturing. So that's the model. If you're a dying town with an industry that's shrivveling up due to changing economic conditions, the model to survive is to quickly pivot to healthcare, education, and entertainment, and to invite a bunch of outsiders into your community with open arms. And that is the main problem these dying coal regions have, because looking at how they vote, embracing healthcare, education, entertainment, and diversity is the last thing they want to do. You look at what the people who they voted for are doing with their power, they're attacking healthcare, attacking education, and attacking diversity sometimes violently, but always unrelentingly. So the Pittsburgh model is off the table, and they'll have to find another way from the abyss of failed post-industrial policy.
- cosmic_cheese 1y ago
  > And that is the main problem these dying coal regions have, because looking at how they vote, embracing healthcare, education, and diversity is the last thing they want to do. You look at what the people who they voted for are doing with their power its attacking healthcare, attacking education, and attacking diversity sometimes violently, but always unrelentingly. So the Pittsburgh model is off the table, and they'll have to find another way from the abyss. Spot on, from what I’ve seen. Just keep doubling down on what hasn’t worked in hopes that one day it’ll magically manifest a Disney ending and the good old days will return.

burnout1540 1y ago

There are only about 45,000 coal miners in the entire US. That's a tiny number.

jeffbee 1y ago
More people drive buses in NYC than are coal miners in the whole America.
- HPsquared 1y ago
  Probably though, like the buses, there's an order of magnitude more work done on the "back end". The machines, logistics, etc etc and everything else that depends on the industry. In the bus drivers example, it could be all the people in NYC who need to take a bus to get to work and would be affected by the sudden disappearance of buses. So it is with many industries.
olddustytrail 1y ago
If people really cared about coal miners then they could be offered a $1 million redundancy package. It would amount to a tiny fraction of government spending and I'm pretty sure it would be welcomed.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
rtkwe 1y ago
They're also in geographically low population areas so counting them and the people employeed in their towns they have a significant sway on some states and the Senate skews things towards low population states through it's inequitable representation AND the outsized power Senate rules give individual Senators. Plus it's made a few people EXTREMELY rich so they've made their opinions and interests everyone elses problem too.
- Yeul 1y ago
  Every once in a while someone in the Netherlands argues for the district system and they are immediately shut down with "America". One man one vote. And yes the regions that contribute more to the economy are a priority. They fund everything including the military without which we'd still be a part of Spain.

alistairSH 1y ago

Anybody who didn’t see this coming hasn’t been paying attention. There’s been plenty of time to move, retrain, whatever. The government has probably failed these people in one way or another, but these tend to be areas the say they value self-sufficiency and minimal government interference , so…

zahlman 1y ago
> move To where, with what savings? > retrain To do what, in this area, with what existing infrastructure?
- ironman1478 1y ago
  I don't believe in retraining, but tons of immigrants move for better opportunities with very little savings. It's difficult and unfortunate, but it's necessary
  - bluefirebrand 1y ago
    People probably should not be forced to behave like desperate immigrants within the borders of their own country though
    - ironman1478 1y ago
      Why not? It'll probably build character. Also, it's happened all the time? People have been doing it for all of America's history. Tons of famous media is about people moving to the city for a better life.
    - 8note 1y ago
      people also shouldnt be forced to bend over backwards to ensure these couple villages never have to change their coal mining ways.
      - zahlman 1y ago

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> the real motive for cancelling renewables is to appeal to coal counties in the USA Wyoming here. Coal country. Everyone thinks this is dumb. Including the folks in Campbell county, our top-producing coal region that has been trying to build a wind farm [1]. Trump’s social media fans in Florida and Texas like this because it feels like owning the libs. (To the extent there may be pecuniary interest, it would be in power producers. Like housing, stopping new power raises prices and profits incumbents.) Also, that Reddit thread is about coking coal. Not the thermal coal power plants burn. It’s about American steel production shutting down in the face of our trade war. Not this new economic miracle these idiots have spun up. [1] https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/campbell-county-delays-vote-on-wind-farm-rules/article_44fda2f0-7a0b-11df-8dcd-001cc4c03286.html https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/...

CamperBob2 1y ago
Everyone thinks this is dumb. Dumb enough to make them reconsider voting Republican in the future? I doubt it.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

ModernMech 1y ago

This message seems to come from a timeline where the people cutting the renewable projects care about electoral outcomes. But in this timeline, they tried to violently overturn the 2020 election, and they are currently trying to rig the 2026 election by gerrymandering states they control as much as possible. This isn't about earning the political support of people in coal country who vote GOP. If they ever face negative electoral outcomes in the future, their plan is to overturn the election using either force or legal chicanery.

groby_b 1y ago

This would make sense if it were a single issue. (And then, limited sense - even quite red places like Texas invest in solar because they need it. Coal is a regional issue, not a national one) If you see it in light of all the other actions taken across the spectrum, you land at best at "desperate dice roll to re-tool the US into a manufacturing power from the 80s", and at worst at "deliberate dismantling of a first-rate world power into a second tier paradise for oligarchs".

rtkwe 1y ago
It's made a national issue by 1) Senators from coal mining heavy states and the ridiculous setup of the Senate and the outsized power it gives individual Senators unless one party has 60 seats and 2) the amount of wealth it's given a few people (like the Koch brothers) who've used that wealth to buy influence in the GOP.

wat10000 1y ago

Coal counties are insignificant. Nobody is winning national elections by appealing to them. The actual motive is to appeal to people who have made coal part of their identity. These are people who have never been anywhere near a coal mine, but have internalized coal as Important and American, and as a way to stick it to those stupid environmentalists.

notahacker 1y ago
Yeah. Think this was epitomised by the DoE tweeting pictures of coal to own the libs. Or as one wag put it the right in 2005: "we shouldn't overregulate energy markets"; the right in 2025: "I'm actually attracted to coal" In Trump's case you can throw in a personal obsession with hating wind power because you can see it from one of his golf courses. Generally pathetic that people are trying to retcon this reflexive lib-owning vice-signalling from incredibly stupid people as actual industrial policy.
- wat10000 1y ago
  I think it’s hard for people who aren’t steeped in that world to understand it, because it sounds so ridiculous. The idea of loving pro-coal policies because it upsets environmentalists is hard to accept. It’s natural to think it must really be about economic realities, people's livelihoods, etc. I have the questionable advantage of having listened to Rush Limbaugh almost every day in the 90s, reading lots of National Review, and taking in various other conservative media. I know the basis for these things, straight from the people pushing them. None of what’s happening is a surprise to me.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

dalyons 1y ago

At the speed at which coal has been declining, and will continue to decline now due to economics, it’s not going to take 50 years. Maybe 10 at most.

hollerith 1y ago

>So renewable energy will always be a political issue over the next 50 years, because entire towns and regions depend on its political outcome. I heard that before the first Trump administration, there was bipartisan support in Congress for phasing out the use coal in the US, so it seems quite possible that that bipartisan support will reassemble itself after Trump is gone (because the next President is unlikely to be as populist and as uncaring about climate change as Trump).