Jerry Holbert by Jerry Holbert

Jerry Holbert

Comments (20) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Stipple

    Stipple said, over 3 years ago

    Tens of thousands?
    And their families?
    It is all Bush’s fault.

  2. Mats Dahlgren

    Mats Dahlgren GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Coal is a dead end energy sourse and a real poluter – creating jobs in a pro-future industry is smart.

  3. uh-oh

    uh-oh said, over 3 years ago

    Lobbyist is why.

  4. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 3 years ago

    In the 80’s, a story from Germany made me realize that coal, like oil and natural gas, are finite resources. A coal mine was closing because after decades of production, there was not enough coal left to make the extraction worth the cost.
    There is an attitude in too many that says we should use up all of one thing before we invest or create another. Minerals are not leftovers in the fridge, they are part of the bone and muscle of the planet. The mining and fracking and extractions of resources between the surface of earth and our molten core has consequences far beyond the profiteering of humans who don’t care what happens to the people who outlive them, as long as they get what they want now. This is bad attitude.
    I confess to not understanding those who don’t want to invest in hydrogen gas, wind, solar, and some of the newer hydroelectric ideas, like underwater ‘fans’ that are spun by fast moving river currents. Wood was a good source until coal came along. Coal was replaced by oil/gas with great efficiency. Nuclear energy is actually a good energy source except that we allow the plants to be built to substandard conditions, ofttimes in areas where they are at risk to one threat or another, and we still haven’t decided what to do with the radioactive waste being generated. Hydrogen can be extracted from H20 at very low cost and stored in tanks to power generators to make electricity. As wind and solar energy plants increase in number and efficiency, the startup costs will drop to be lower than what we are now paying for conventional sources. Ever lower when one considers that when a wind tower collapses, it doesn’t leak tens of thousands of barrels of chemicals to be cleaned up.
    There are also new designs for wind turbines, a spiral design that could be attached to the sides of skyscrapers or alongside busy highways where the wind and the drafts from cars would cause these long spiraling fans to spin and generate energy.
    If people had worried about ‘costs’, coal mines would not have opened until the last tree had been cut down. Edison would not have been permitted to create electric power to replace the natural gas being used in his time. Mankind must move forward and create new things from which newer things can be discovered and created. The cost of not innovating is much higher than the cost of progress.
    I do not believe Mr. Obama is anti coal, but I do believe that he, like many on our planet, believe that coal is contributing to climate change and it is certainly causing pollution problems our people and our world do not need.

  5. furnituremaker

    furnituremaker said, over 3 years ago

    burned coal in my cabinet shop one winter…never again!!!!!

  6. Darren Blair

    Darren Blair said, over 3 years ago

    I take it that you missed the stories of corruption and ridiculously flagrant spending at some of the “green” firms Obama’s been pushing?
    Seems like every time Obama gives his blessing to a specific company then it almost inevitably fails in a most spectacular fashion.

  7. Kevin Robinson

    Kevin Robinson said, over 3 years ago

    Obama is not Anti-Coal he is Anti-American.

  8. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 3 years ago

    Yeah so we are still dependent on our enemies and will cause another war in the middle east. Use the new clean coal tech and natural gas please.

  9. John Hiebert

    John Hiebert GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Obama is dithering on okaying the Keystone pipeline that will move crude oil from Alberta’s oilsands to the Texas refineries because he is catering to the climate change crowd. Yet the US’s coal-fired power plants 50 TIMES as much as the TOTAL greenhouse gas emissions of the oilsands production.

    All this because of the myth of climate change.

  10. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 3 years ago

    Dude why? Because of the sins of a few, 100 years ago, you want to punish everybody now. From the executive at the top, to the middle management, to the foreman in the mine, to the miners themselves to the customer who will get higher gas prices to the young men and women who will have to fight another war which is the most environmentally unfriendly thing in the world.

  11. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 3 years ago

    The Koch brothers are mostly into Oil.

  12. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Increasing endlessly our consumption of fossil fuels, any of them witout sensible conservation measures IS the problem. Driven by profits, real alternatives aren’t on the energy company agenda.

    “The Formula” was a “crime drama” with George C. Scott and Marlon Brando. It revolved around a Nazi formula to synthesize gasoline from coal. At one point, Brando, playing an American (multi-national) oil company CEO tells his aid how much to raise prices, and to hold off on the full increase. The aid then says, “it’s those damned Arabs.”. Brando’s response perfectly sums up reallity: “You idiot, WE ARE THE ARABS”.

    Coal remains both necessary in some areas, and extremely nasty and destructive to extract and burn. It can be “cleaned up” a tad, but the phrase “clean coal” is a joke, and technology can NOT make it totally true, period.

    All fossil fuels are finite, as is the ignorance of Americans with regard to where their food, or fuels, come from. “Deniers” expand that ignorance, with a dash of fear and loathing thrown into their formula for distraction and deception.

    People need to wake up.

  13. curtisls87

    curtisls87 said, over 3 years ago

    Except that it’s factually incorrect in several places. For example, hydrogen made through current methods including steam-reforming or electrolysis are not currently even close to the cost effectiveness of natural gas.
    Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see hydrogen become a viable source. Some estimates state that if we could produce it viably, there’s enough of it to last the world at current consumption rates another 400,000 years.

  14. Dypak

    Dypak GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Good, it’s past time for coal to go. If they can find a way to suck oil from sand in Canada we can find some way to use coal without destroying the environment.

  15. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 3 years ago


    Agree with most of what you said today but no the new clean coal tech is supposed to be very good. Just can’t get it deployed due to regulations.

    All you have to do is clean it with pretty much standard tech and inject the rest into the ground. Some have tried comparing it to fracking but that is not true, it is safe at a very shallow level, say about two hundred feet.

    All you really need is an emergency release valve incase something goes wrong, so for a day or two from time to time you will have the same issues any coal plant has but one, two or even five or six days a year out of three hundred and sixty five is great.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (5).