Here The EPA is just doing their job. The article here includes a couple points of view included which are pretty good. (As per the comments, a Democrat should have been quoted to counter-balance the GOP quote). That one climate denier politician Rep. Lummis supplies the most ignorant quote. But interesting that the farmer and even some of the coal 'advocates' seemed genuinely concerned and apologetic about the pollution -- health and climate destruction -- coal provides. Nice if they have developed absorbing towers, why are these not used more commonly even if expensive? We all know that the coal industry is one of the most profitable in the world, why can't some of the profits be used to install and use these pollution control devices? It's not necessarily the source people have the biggest problem with (although of course coal mining has its own dangers and mortality rate) ... it's the pollution. And obviously if the pollution cannot be adequately or affordably controlled the black junk has got to stay in the ground until it can.
The most meaningful exchange:
"
Professor Harold Bergman specializes in environmental toxicology.
HAROLD BERGMAN, University of Wyoming: Wyoming can file 100 lawsuits a month if they want, and it’s not going to change a thing. This is going to get fixed. It absolutely must.
LEIGH PATERSON: He says Wyoming lawmakers need to recognize the realities of a changing climate.
HAROLD BERGMAN: The consequences for the coal industry, for instance, are going to be severe, and they have to begin adjusting for it now. If they don’t, we’re going to be blindsided."