Editorial: Coal reduction needs dialogue, not protests

Published Feb. 26, 2010

Protesting coal use on campus needs to become more realistic.

Coal Free Mizzou relentlessly protests coal use and demands MU stop using it immediately. In addition, the MU College Republicans haven't missed a single opportunity to counter-protest or start a protest for that matter.

Both of these are counterproductive in the pursuit of eliminating coal use and saving the UM system money.

Although UM system President Gary Forsee failed to support cap-and-trade legislation because it would increase UM energy costs up to 50 percent, he did sign the American College and University President's Climate Commitment.

By signing the Climate Commitment, Forsee agreed to initiate a comprehensive plan to achieve climate neutrality. In other words, Forsee sees there is an issue and has agreed to work on it.

It's unrealistic to expect coal usage to just stop. In addition, it's unrealistic to expect coal to last forever.

In fact, the Sierra Club, which uses Coal Free Mizzou as one of 35 pawns sent across the nation to demand less coal, must understand this because its message only really spouts out random facts. Sure, coal use is bad. Yeah, it's detrimental to the environment. Everyone who has hasn't been living under a rock for the past five years knows this. What we don't know is how to fix our dependency on it.

Using alternative energy sources as this time isn't cost effective or efficient.

Coal Free Mizzou and the Sierra Club could do more to effectively reduce coal usage by helping MU by being realistic, both with goal setting and finding alternatives. As Sustain Mizzou proved neither students nor administration is against working for sustainability. Students voted last year to pay a sustainability fee and there is now a sustainability office at MU, proving the administration is willing to work with students on this issue.

MU is also working to install a biomass boiler, which will reduce coal use by 25 percent. MU supplements a portion of its coal with old tires. MU has also made progress with alternative fuels by using corncobs, waste wood and switch grass. In addition the UM system has won 14 international, national and state awards for its energy management techniques. Clearly, MU and the UM system aren't opposed to clean, sustainable energy. It's just impossible to stop using coal immediately.

Although Coal Free Mizzou is raising awareness or educating some students with its protests, much more productive activities could be done. The expert panel held earlier this month for instance, helped create a dialogue instead of a rant. There are 16.5 million square feet on the MU campus to power, and coal is the most effective way to do so at this point.

The MU College Republicans could also help by not making this a political issue. Wanting to be sustainable doesn't need to be partisan, nor does Forsee's desire to save money for the UM system. Instead of trying to stop Coal Free Mizzou, the College Republicans members could put their efforts toward finding a cost effective alternative because like it or not, coal is not a sustainable source of energy.

It will run out, and only a smart discourse will help find necessary solutions.