Suzanne Goldenberg holds nothing back in a one-two punch of proper journalism in which she exposes the despicable actions of Peabody Coal—the world's largest privately-held coal company—taken in service of its profits. (Goldenberg's articles are part of The Guardian's "Keep it in the ground" campaign.)
First, Goldenberg explores Peabody's "campaign to rebrand coal as a poverty cure." She then exposes how "Peabody Energy exploited [the] Ebola crisis for corporate gain."
The story behind the Ebola episode is pretty simple. During a presentation, a Peabody executive claimed (citing an infectious disease expert) that if Africa had more energy (generated by coal), then a hypothetical vaccine could have been distributed more quickly. In response, Goldenberg quotes other experts who strongly reject Peabody's claims, saying, "[the claims are] a pretty far-fetched leap," and "absolutely ludicrous." Goldenberg also quotes the expert whose comments were used to justify Peobody's claims, and he himself points out that, due to cell phone towers, there's already plenty of electricity in Africa to keep vaccines refrigerated and ensure they're distributed efficiently.
The Ebola claim is part of Peabody's larger effort to distract from the climate and health impacts of coal and instead portray it as a savior of the poor. That effort is covered in detail in Goldenberg's longer feature, which focuses on a deceptive Peabody PR video as well as the company's and certain employees' long history of climate denial. So go read it, but for the sake of space we'll cut to the chase. While Peabody and others talk a lot about how coal should be used to reduce energy poverty, they don't seem to actually be doing anything about it. While Peabody has spent plenty on its PR campaign, Goldenberg points out that there's "no record of funding programmes to reduce energy poverty."
So it should come as no surprise that Peabody asked those expressing interest in its campaign to write the EPA in opposition to the Clean Power Plant rules, rather than to actually do something that would help the poor. Apparently—to use the company's logic—protecting Peabody's profits in America is the best way to electrify Africa.
Which, even if you ignore the monumental health and environmental costs of coal, still doesn't make any sense. If demand for Peabody's coal is reduced because the USA isn't burning coal, wouldn't that make it even cheaper for Africans to buy it?
-----
Top Climate and Clean Energy Stories:
The 'Shocking' Cost of Letting Companies Pollute for Free. This year, the report estimates, fossil fuels are being subsidized to the tune of $5.3 trillion, or 6.5 percent of global gross domestic product.
California, international leaders sign climate change agreement. California and leaders of 11 states and provinces signed an agreement on Tuesday to limit their output of heat-trapping greenhouse gases 80 to 95 percent by 2050, a goal they hope will help prevent runaway climate change.
Wind Power Is Poised to Spread to All States. All 50 states could become wind energy producers, according to an Energy Department report released Tuesday, once the next generation of larger, taller turbines in development hits the market.
