Leaders Gather In Pikeville For Energy Symposium
Leaders Gather In Pikeville For Energy Symposium Save Email Print
Reporter: Danielle Morgan & Heather Haley
Email Address: danielle.morgan@wymtnews.com - heather.haley@wymtnews.com

A | A | A

A new vision for energy in the year 2030. That's what leaders from at least 14 states gathered to discuss in Pike County Monday at an energy symposium, how to gain independence from foreign oil by using natural resources in Eastern Kentucky.

U.S. Senator Jim Bunning says he's fighting for 15 billion dollars in federal funding past 2010 to help reach the goal of an energy secure America by 2030.

"We're at the mercy of Middle Eastern oil companies, OPEC, and the total non-control of the price of crude oil that is dictated by a monopoly to the U.S," Bunning said.

On the state level, some legislators say few revisions need to be made to the new energy bill, but overall, everyone is working together.

"This issue has not been handled in a partisan way. It’s been handled in a very bipartisan way," said Senator Ray Jones.

Whether it's coal, biomass or another alternative, Pike County Judge Executive Wayne Rutherford says the nation needs new energy sources.

"Our mission is really zero emissions from all of our energy sources," Rutherford said.

Not everyone attending the energy symposium supports using coal for oil.

"I think that conservation is the way to go and we can start doing that now. We don't have to spend billions of dollars," said David Cooper with Kentuckians for the Commonwealth.

Senator Bunning agrees more conservation is need, but he says it's not enough.

"I think conserving as much energy as possible is part of the solution, but we can't conserve our way if we don't have enough energy to power our economy," Bunning said.

Environmentalists including Kentuckians For The Commonwealth say they're against using coal for liquid fuel. They actually gathered outside of the energy symposium to show their opposition with coal to liquid fuel production, because they say coal to liquid fuel will result in the greater destruction of the mountains.

Members of the Kentuckians For The Commonwealth say the state and the nation needs an energy policy that puts people and communities first.

"If you can't deep mine it, it ain't worth getting it out of the mountain in the first place," said Carl Shoupe.

They say they want the state's leaders to pursue a vision for cleaner and safer ways to meet the nation's energy needs.

"To think about coal production going up 40% is just a scary thought considering we've buried almost 500 miles of headwater streams with valley fills in the state today," said Teri Blanton.

Members say it's time to seize the opportunity to invest in energy efficiency but the energy should be a renewable resource such as wind, solar, or bio fuel.

"They say coal is a clean, cheap source of energy. There is nothing clean and there's nothing cheap about it if you live in a place where they're producing coal," Blanton said.

They believe officials would be rushing coal to liquid fuel production if Governor Fletcher calls a special session.

"Not the destruction of the land, the culture of the people. Let’s move to some positive things for our future," Blanton said.

Members of the Kentuckians For The Commonwealth believe the choices made this year about our energy policy have the potential to secure a better future for generations to come, but they believe that can only happen with renewable resources.

One thing both groups seem to agree on is the need for energy independence. Making that happen is where they strongly disagree.

More Stories
Light Snow Accumulations Possible Today, Tonight

Budget Shortfall Looms Large For Legislature

Silver Stars Presented To Father & Son War Heroes

Teacher Found Dead on Campus

Postal Workers Accused Of Stealing Mail

UT Will Introduce Kiffin On Monday

Fort Campbell Braces For Soldier Homecoming

Local Retail Store Managers Say Black Friday Went Better Than Expected

Post Your Comments
First Name:
Location:
Enter Comments: characters left
Email (optional):
Email will not be displayed on site. For station contact purpose only.
Read Comments
Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
Posted by: Barry Location: Pike County on Jun 25, 2007 at 02:28 AM
Coal to liquid fuel is such a bad idea for so many reasons. Here are a few. First, the cost to build these plants is to be carried, as usual, by the working class taxpayers. Second, The industry not only wants us (our tax money) to build the plants but they also want us to guarantee them a profit through long term contracts to purchase the liquid fuel. Third, if it is really such a wonderful idea, do you think that the major oil companies and others with money would not be all over making a profit? Just a reminder, Marathon (an American owned company) just recently lost a multimillion dollar price gouging law suite. Fourth, Do people who make 75,000 and up a year really care about a 3.00 a gallon price for gas. They are going to go and do what they will. Just as though the rest of us didn't even exist. One last thought about motives, greedy polititions and lobbist as well as drugs and illegals aleins are killing not only Kentucky but our country as a whole. Its about time WE the people took it back! Please Don't forget to vote and write your representatives...get critically active and stay there!

Posted by: Dawn Location: NE KY on Jun 20, 2007 at 12:33 PM
Sen. Bunning is short-sighted and needs to do more research. Coal to liquid is not the answer. Not only will it cause MORE pollution, it will mean continued destruction of our mountains. Would anyone think of sacrificing the Alps or the Smokies in the name of "cheap" energy? I think not.

Posted by: matt Location: huntington on Jun 20, 2007 at 08:40 AM
Crystal you need to wake-up and realize that mountain top removal is not good for your state.I live in southern WV and I am a environmentalist and I am not wealthy buy no means. Mountain top removal uses less people to do the job, causes flooding, destroys your beautiful landscape, and contributes to global warming. We have enough malls.

Posted by: Amanda Location: Corbin on Jun 19, 2007 at 09:07 PM
This idea is NOT GOOD FOR OUR STATE! And, Crystal, I'm not sure that razing mountains and destroying our environment so Hazard can get a new strip mall makes a whole lot of sense in the great scheme of things. We need to spend our nation's resources on trying to find a conservative, clean source of energy. Coal to liquid or coal to fuel is just going to pollute and ravage our state even further.

Posted by: James Location: Pike County on Jun 19, 2007 at 12:35 PM
I'm not sure that I understand the argument of those that are against mining coal in order to help with our country's dependence on oil. They say that they don't want the nation becoming dependent on coal for a fuel source, like we are now for oil. The big difference in the two is the fact that we do have coal and it is here. They say we need to explore alternative energy sources like wind or solar. If they have ever been on a re-claimed strip or mountain top removal job, they would know that there are vast areas now available for this type of energy, all made possible by our wonderful workforce. Sure, mining changes the topography of the land, but sometimes change can be good. Try trekking through untouched mountains as opposed to re-claimed land and you'll see the difference. The mountains may look different afterwards, but not necessarily for the worse.

Posted by: Crystal Location: Corbin on Jun 19, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Coal for fuel is an excellent idea. The only people who do not want coal production is environmentalist who are not poor and living in Eastern Kentucky. Those who live here appreciate coal and the jobs that it creates. Plus, mountains need to be moved so that places like Hazard can expand and grow. It's hard to build factories and malls on top of steep mountains. It keeps the citizens of this area stalled and no room for progression. So whatever will help with coal production and save energy, why not?

Posted by: carl Location: benham(harlan co) on Jun 18, 2007 at 09:19 PM
Thanks WYMT for your coverage of the coal to liquid meeting in Pikeville,this is a very important subject being discussed and will continue to be debated not only on the state level but the national level also. Please,just continue giving both points of view a fair shake. thanks again carl

Posted by: Dawn Location: Kentucky on Jun 18, 2007 at 09:14 PM
I agree with the KFTC group. I don't think destroying our mountains is the answer. They'd never destroy the Smokey Mtns or the Alps! Senator Bunning needs to do more research. Coal to liquid is not the answer!

Posted by: Maggie Bermingham Location: Portland, OR on Jun 18, 2007 at 08:17 PM
It's interesting to hear Mr. Rutherford say that their goal is to have zero emissions from all energy sources - because coal to liquid process produces TWICE as much CO2 emissions than even the dirtiest of the current coal-fired power plants.

AP Video
WYMT Special Sections
Issues & Answers
Host Neil Middleton gets the answers you want.
Jim's Weather Class
Want to understand the hows and whys of weather?
Holiday Gift Guide
Looking for great gift ideas?
?
Lawyers
FREE legal advice.
Refrigerator Art
Share your works of art.
Student Achiever
Honoring outstanding students in our community.
Health
What you need to know about your health.
Business Connections
Connecting businesses and customers.
Focus on the Family
Help your family thrive.
Classifieds
THE place to buy and sell items. Most ads free.
Stocks
QUOTES
    Symbol Lookup

WKYT Mobile