Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship and environmentalist Robert Kennedy, Jr., argued, sparred and occasionally even made each other laugh during their 90-minute debate Thursday night.
But when it was over University of Charleston President Ed Welch, who served at the moderator, was left to wonder if there was much common ground.
"I don't think there's an 'alter call' to recognize conversions," Welch deadpanned.
The audience of nearly 1,000 people in the auditorium at the University of Charleston--divided evenly between supporters of Kennedy and Blankenship-- had to laugh.
That, they could agree upon.
No, there were no conversions. But how could there be?
When Blankenship looks at a mountain top removal site he sees jobs, economic prosperity, cheap energy, free enterprise. The hard edge of the American Dream.
"The mission statement for coal is prosperity for this country and security," Blankenship said.
Kennedy looks at the same mine and sees the equivalent of a bomb site courtesy of the coal industry.
"We are cutting down the Appalachian mountains," Kennedy said. "These companies are liquidating the state."
And so it went throughout the evening.
Kennedy, at times emotional and lecturing, riffed facts, figures, allegations, theories and studies to support his argument that Blankenship and his ilk are ruining lives and the planet for profit without acknowledging the pain.
"Mr. Blankenship makes himself rich by making everybody else poor," said Kennedy.
Blankenship, whose voice and demeanor never change, calmly accused Kennedy and other environmentalists of engaging in a misguided mission to destroy the economy with calamitous rhetoric and fantasies about solar energy and windmills.
For the executive of the largest coal company in West Virginia, the real sin is not damage to the environment, but rather the damage done to the lives of people who depend on the coal industry for their welfare and a country that must have cheap, accessible energy.
And all Blankenship hears from the "enviros" is "a bunch of rhetoric."
But aren't "dialogs" good things? Isn't there hope when differing sides can sit down together as they did Thursday night in the cool intellectual setting of a college campus and have a rational conversation?
Blankenship saw some benefit.
"The more we educate the public, the more we think the industry wins," Blankenship told reporters after the debate.
Not exactly common ground, which was one of Welch's goals for the evening.
No, wait. There was a moment near the end when both agreed that carbon sequestration doesn't work.
But back to the disagreements.
Climate change?
Kennedy says 98 percent of climate scientists agree that man is causing global warming and the carbon that comes from burning coal and other fossil fuels is contributing to that.
Blankenship's take: "It's all totally nonsensical. You can't do anything about the climate change."
Jobs?
Kennedy says greedy coal barons have become ruthlessly efficient through mechanization and eliminated 90,000 coal jobs in the last 40 years.
Blankenship said coal companies are part of the community. He countered that his company has bought bankrupt mines and reopened them, putting people to work.
The able Dr. Welch gave Kennedy and Blankenship lots of room, and the two took advantage of it as though they had been anxious to have their say in this kind of setting.
Welch said at the outset that it's "sadly rare" today to have a serious conversation on critical issues. He and the University of Charleston set out to have that Thursday night.
On that, they were successful.
Congratulations. We could use more of these. At least each side gets to air, at length, their positions and the other side is forced to sit and listen.
It would have been foolish to expect either Kennedy or Blankenship to concede any major points. And perhaps even unrealistic to find much common ground on the controversial issue of mountain top removal.
What we witnessed Thursday night is that when it's an environmentalist versus the coal industry on MTR there really is none.
On that there seems to be agreement.
User Comments
Posted by buckaroo on 01/22/10 at 3:37 PM
I did't watch the debate because I knew it would be more of the same.I am a surface miner and I believe there has to be a middle ground somewhere. Instead of both sides always trying to prove the other wrong all the time they should be trying to find that middle ground.All industries change and mechanize as time goes on. You either change with the times or you go the way of the dinosaurs and die.
Posted by Cranky Craig on 01/22/10 at 3:00 PM
What is sad is that mountain top removal will continue because people can still turn on their lights, air conditioners, and heaters. Only when people can not have electricity will they look at the devastation and wonder "What have we done?"
Posted by guinstigator on 01/22/10 at 2:44 PM
The debate probably didn't change minds. I was in attendance and watched both sides. But the fact is that Kennedy could quote studies, talk about ghosts towns that were thriving communities, how Blankenship cut his workers salaries and at the same time give himself a raise should have made some people think a bit.
Greedy corporations may claim to care about the worker, but when they destroy unions, they prove that they care about themselves and stock holders far more. People can make profit, but not at the detriment of others.
You can't be a mountaineer state without mountains. And you can't have clean drinking water without being responsible stewards of the land and water.
One last thing. I watched Blankenship raise the water bottle and tell us it was so clean he could drink out of it. But he never did. I wonder why?
Posted by nojunkmonk on 01/22/10 at 1:13 PM
I see no difference in "cutting down mountains" to build a walmart and a dog track and reaping the coal fruits of this earth. Most of the enviros have a predominant conception of coal being "dirty" but that can and is being remedied with new technology. What irks me the most is people like Kenedy coming in here from outside and telling us to adopt thier values and how to live our lives. I didnt like it with Rockefeller either. Montani Semper Liberi.
Posted by mountaineer bob on 01/22/10 at 12:07 PM
Part of the argument from some of those posting and the environmentalists is that the coal companies are so wrong in many ways. Do they and have they not provided good paying jobs with benefits, paid taxes, etc.? The environmental argument is valid and that can be debated, but I don’t feel it is necessary to bash these companies for job reductions or simply pulling out of the state as they are in business to make money and along with making money sometimes involves making changes. What a novel idea that someone that owns a company should make some money from their investment, as they could have easily lost it.
Posted by skipdog11 on 01/22/10 at 9:03 AM
There is no doubt that this debate was a good thing. Anytime folks get together and intellectually debate crucial issues in our society, it is a good thing. Both gentleman acquitted themselves well.
As far as the substance, I am somewhere in the middle. Obviously, our nation's energy portfolio needs coal for the forseeable future. And obviously, coal mining is crucial to the state's economy. Few debate that.
But also obvious to most, the world needs to begin moving towards high tech, renewable energy such as wind, solar, tide, geothermal, etc. Less obvious, but perhaps even more important to the future of this great nation, is the fact that there will be an "arms race" for becoming energy independent and fully reliant on renewable, clean energy, and, just as important, the primary owner of the best technology. Nations like China know this. That is why, while they (China) currently are relying heavily on coal, they are sinking tons of captial into development of renewable energy such as wind, solar, etc. As Mr. Kennedy said, China sees it as an arms race, and they are right.
I thought the most well-taken point from Mr. Kennedy was the exploitative nature of coal on WV. Coal jobs have reduced by 90% since the 1950s, but the same or more coal is still being produced. Moreover, while there are about 50,000 good paying jobs created in WV by coal, and severance taxes paid, the vast majority of big profit from coal leaves the state, never to be seen again. (This is partly our own fault, as we have never implemented an export tax on our valuable coal, as Alaska has done with its oil). And when the coal is tapped, the community dies.
All these facts are undeniable. West Virginians do need to understand that when the coal companies have mined all of our coal, they will not "hang around" out of the kindness of their heart and help us find new economic footing. They will be gone in a nano-second, looking for the next fertile ground from which to extract. (It has already begun to happen, in the case of Peabody Energy bolting for more fertile ground out west and beyond, leaving behind a much smaller new company, Patriot Coal). And you cannot blame them, they are for-profit corps, that is what they do. No, if we find ourselves in that precarious situation, we will have no one to blame but ourselves.
Posted by EriS on 01/22/10 at 8:45 AM
You've distanced yourself from an analysis of the debate, which I don't think you'd like. Blankenship clearly won the rhetoric aspect, but then again Kennedy has a speech dysfunction. On the points, Blankenship got steal rolled. A debate is about responding specifically on point to arguments raised by the opponent, and then providing your own positive argument, supported by valid facts and/or reasoning which can be challenged. Blankenship did neither. When faced with the most valid and convincing arguments that we are and should be moving away from burning coal in the coming years, Blankenship would respond with completely irrelevant aphorisms and generalities, such as "this nation was built on coal". True. At times it was built on slavery and horse-drawn carriages. No-one suggests that means we should have continued with either one. It's an irrelevant point.
When Blankenship tried to rant about environmentalists, Kennedy fired back, as you note he did all night, with fact-based arguments, pointing out that in recent history no coal miner jobs in WV were lost due to environmentalists, but rather to the shift to blowing up mountaintops. Blanenkship's response: silence. When Kennedy pointed out that markets were actually failing to appropriately cost carbon sources like coal because of the tremendous externalities they represented and their transfer of wealth from taxpayers to shareholders, Blankenship's response was yet again not on point. As you point out, Kennedy noted a pretty well-known fact that the overwhelming majority of professional climate scientists agreed that we're causing climate change, the point Blankenship said was most important to determining what we should do moving forward, Blankeship's response was silent on the point. When faced with incredibly well-respected studies from our nation's (and the world's) finest universities' leading thinkers, Blankenship responded that, well, a person can find a study to say anything. True, and that 2% of climate change skeptics certainly have some of those, as Kennedy pointed out. But these are not any old studies, they are the best our best minds have to offer, and Blankenship as usual had absolutely no rebuttal to offer other than what amounts to "well, I don't believe that.".
All night long it was a logical argument on one side, a joke and misdirection on the other. Improper pronouns don't make points or win debates. Vague generalities unsupported by actual facts or sources don't win debates. Blankenship got his clock cleaned. In this state, he probably won the "have a beer" competition. I have no doubt of that. But among people trained and educated to analyze arguments, he got steam rolled. There's no doubt on that point.
Posted by smokey on 01/22/10 at 8:10 AM
Hoppy,
The debate was fascinating. This was civilized, if not respectful, dialogue between two passionate, informed giants. You are correct that nobody woke up this morning with their attitude changed because of the debate, but at least we have the debate. We need more of this type discussion. To everybody's credit, the program did not degenerate into the spectacle we have recently witnessed at town hall meetings and teabag sessions. Have a great day.
Posted by ronbron on 01/22/10 at 7:18 AM
I am a registered professional engineer who worked in the mining industry in the early 80's. The overlooked fact about Mountaintop Removal is the fact that the size of these permits increased dramatically during the 90's and beyond. This is due to the use of huge "draglines" which can take over 6 months to assemble and disassemble. These mammoth machines need room to operate, hence the need for permits in excess of 1000 acres. This size is in stark contrast to the 60 and 70 acre mountaintop permits which had the environmental benefit of cleaning up the "sins" of the past from the old "shoot and shove" days. I am not convinced that these huge MTR permits can have any environmental benefits, but yield only problems that leave lasting effects such as groundwater contamination (e.g. - selenium). Great debate last night! Both sides were effective!
Posted by CaptainQ on 01/21/10 at 11:24 PM
No common ground on the issues, Hoppy?
I HATE to say I told you so... but I did!
On this very MB in your last commentary!
I TOLD you that this so called "Grand Meeting" would be nothing more than political theater and a 'dog and pony show.' Looks like you've just admitted it!
And like I said before, Environmentalist Democrats like RFK Jr. want NOTHING to do with coal, PERIOD! In fact, the Obama Administration's "War On Coal" is aimed soley at dismantling the coal industry COMPLETELY. Just look at the "Cap and Tax.. er.. I mean Cap & Trade" bill he muscled through Congress.
This meeting was just a waste of time and energy, even more of a waste of time for YOU and the WV Media for covering it.
Post Your Comments
All comments are moderated before showing up on the site. Comments are only reviewed for inappropriate language and libelous or damaging comments. Read full user policy here.
You must be a registered user to post commments. Please login or register to post a comment.
Click Here to simply send a private email to Hoppy about this article (comments will not be posted on the website).
