Silverstein, Ken. “Now That Coal Companies Are Troubled, Who Should Pay for Environmental Cleanups?” Environmental Leader. N.p., 24 Aug. 2016. Web. 25 Aug. 2016.

Coal companies are now in trouble due to all the regulations and laws set by the government with harsh restrictions. The article brings up an interesting point, since the coal companies are going broke, who is left to pay for the environmental clean up after. The prediction is that taxpayer money will end up being used to cover the clean up costs.

The actions of coal companies relate to environmental science because of their pollution. I do not agree that taxpayer money should be used to pay for the cleanup. In most cases, the people paying taxes likely did not agree to use coal as a large resource for energy so why should they have to pay for it.

Press, Associated. “Indiana Regulators Approve Deal over Coal-gasification Plant.” Indianapolis Star. N.p., 25 Aug. 2016. Web. 26 Aug. 2016.

Indiana is approving a 2 percent increase in in electricity rates so that Duke, a company that produces electricity, may pay for a 3.5 billion dollar gas coal-gasification plant. A coal-gasification plant is supposed to burn cleaner and more efficiently than the other power plant. Duke serves 800,000 customers, meaning it has a large impact on Indiana residents and it shows the country’s switch toward cleaner energy.

Indiana’s switch to a cleaner plant is relevant to environmental science because it shows the power companies are concerned with pollution. I agree with the actions of the company by switching to a cleaner plant. Although they could have switched to a plant that was not coal powered, it shows movement in the right direction.

Chediak, Mark. “Texas Power Plant Is Switching From Coal to Less Dirty Coal.” Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg, 24 Aug. 2016. Web. 26 Aug. 2016.

A power plant in Texas that used coal from texas to power the plant is switching their energy source. The company is deciding to end its contract with the Texas coal supplier to use a cleaner burning and cheaper coal from Wyoming. This switch is relevant because it reveals that people have knowledge that coal pollution is a problem and needs to stop, or at least be hindered.

The impact switching to a cleaner burning coal relates to environmental science. It shows how even the coal companies realize that they need to stop polluting as much. I agree with the change the company has made.

Phillips, Ari. “Obama Just Gave Coal Country $39 Million to Help People Get on With Their Lives.” Fusion. N.p., 25 Aug. 2016. Web. 26 Aug. 2016.

Obama decided to give back to the miner community because he is killing off their jobs by trying to stop coal. He also gave money to help train them for other jobs and create other job opportunities for the miners after their jobs were destroyed. Obama wants to stop the usage of coal in the U.S. and he is willing to pay off people to stop the pollution.

The relevance this article has to environmental science is significant. The fact that Obama is paying attention to the impact coal has on our environment. I agree with Obama’s donation to the community and his dedication to stop coal in our country.

Springer, Dan. “Warnings of Rate Hikes as Oregon Becomes 1st State to Kill Coal.” Fox News. Foxnews.com, 24 Aug. 2016. Web. 25 Aug. 2016.

Coal is a very important resource we use in the United States. It made up almost 40% of our power last year. One of the downsides of coal is the fact that it pollutes much more compared to other sources of energy. Oregon has decided to implement a law stopping all use of coal by 2020. A disadvantage this reveals is that it is pushing for more wind power, where on days with no wind, which can last more than a day or two, it will be very hard to produce the energy necessary to keep the lights on.

The article displays how states are now making the move towards stopping pollution from coal. States are now considering the impact coal makes on air quality. This relates to environmental science because coal is a very large part of air pollution and Oregon’s decision shows the change other states will hopefully make. I agree with the change Oregon has made.