Move beyond coal

Mead Gruver’s article, “Wyoming backs coal with lawsuit threats,” on May 3rd grasped my interest and compelled me to express my opinion.

Renewable energy is a concept that the nation and the globe have begun to grasp. It’s a mindset that will not only benefit us, but also our everlasting home. Coal, however, does not fall into this category. It’s a fossil fuel, and a harmful one for that matter. Several harmful emissions — like sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide and mercury — are produced in coal combustion.

A pendulum sways between economic stimulation and their effect on our environment. Wyoming in this case is focusing more toward the economic stimulation generated in the area from coal. Yes, it is important to adjust choices based on the revenue it will produce, however it should never be at the expense of our forests, wildlife and well-being of the planet.

The main focus of Gruver’s article is the bureaucracy and lawsuits generated between states in efforts to sway this pendulum in a way that benefits their interests. Washington made the decision to halt transportation of coal through the state. What gives Wyoming the authority to challenge this?

It is my opinion that the coal industry is detrimental to our environment and limitations should be placed on its use before economic benefit is even considered. There are other renewable energy sources that Wyoming could shift their focus toward in order to create a balanced structure between economic growth and environmental awareness.

Chase Dinges

Spokane