By Ramona Schindelheim for WorkingNation.
Broadcast version by Nadia Ramlagan for West Virginia News Service reporting for the WorkingNation-Public News Service Collaboration

As the country transitions to green energy, and natural gas has become more affordable, the appetite for coal continues to fade. By 2025, electricity powered by solar energy is forecast to jump significantly in the United States, while coal production is expected to hit its lowest level since the 1960s.

Employment in the coal mining industry has been on a steady downward path since the mid-1980s when there were 178,000 people employed in the industry. Compare that to roughly 43,000 today.

For regions like Appalachia, once the country's leader in coal production, the impact is stark. West Virginia - the only state entirely in the Appalachian region - has been particularly hard hit.

At $27,346, its per capita income level is the second-lowest in the country, only slightly bigger than Mississippi. Its labor participation rate of 54.8% is also one of the lowest in the country and many young people are leaving the state to find opportunities elsewhere.

It's those kinds of financial realities that are the driving force behind a new generation of West Virginians determined to stay put and rebuild Appalachia's economy.

"We're not here to demonize the coal industry. We're here to build upon its legacy and continue our birthright to produce energy, but through new tools," says Jacob Hannah, CEO of the nonprofit Coalfield Development, which is training and hiring workers in growing industries.

Embracing a Diversified Economy That is Creating Jobs

"When folks look at Appalachia, you hear a lot about the loss of jobs, loss of employers, due to the coal companies shutting down and other companies shutting down because of that. There's a large amount of people who have given up looking for work because there's either not a lot of employment near their isolated community in Appalachia, or they've been impacted by the dilapidation of coal," explains Hannah.

Coalfield Development serves 21 counties in southern West Virginia and is headquartered in Huntington, one of the cities hardest hit by the opioid overdose epidemic.

"We focus on hiring people facing barriers to employment and connecting them to our personal, professional, and academic development model. These are folks coming out of incarceration, coming out of recovery, and coming from being laid off from the coal mines or other industries."

Hannah says there's a combination of need and opportunity right now in West Virginia and the nonprofit's strategy is to learn from the past and move away from an economy that was so dependent on one industry.

"Our solution to avoiding those challenges, and reversing some of the damage, is to go from a mono economy to a diversified economy where there's multiple opportunities and multiple markets that can bring up the workforce."

The nonprofit wholly or partially owns a number of employment-based social enterprises, "enterprises that exist for the purpose of advancing the well-being of its employees."

It's through these businesses that Coalfield Development offers paid on-the-job training in what it sees as industries with a future in West Virginia, including renewable energy, construction, manufacturing, re-use and recycling, and agriculture.

"We have what you would call 'brain drain' in the region. A lot of people in their 20s have left for other opportunities. That leaves a large swath of people either just coming out of high school, or folks in their 30s or older. We've had trainees as old as in their 60s," says Hannah.

He adds, "There's no shortage of people that need jobs and there's no shortage of employers that need the people. It's a matter of connecting the two."

The most comprehensive program requires a three-year commitment. Workers receive 33 hours a week of paid on-the-job training, six hours of community college to obtain an associates degree, and three hours of mentoring and coaching to remove barriers such as regaining a driver's license for people who might be justice-impacted. A shorter model offers paid on-the-job training as an introduction to one of the sectors, along with mentoring support for six months.

"You're also in a union job, so it's paying good wages with good benefits," says Hannah.

There is also a free one-month program offered around in-demand industries such as solar energy and construction. "They're not on our payroll. They're community individuals that are looking for information on a topic that aligns with the employment demand in the community or region," he adds.

Mining the Sun in West Virginia

Coalfield Development has hired more than 1,700 people for local jobs through its training programs since its founding in 2010. Hannah estimates that 75% of the trainees have remained in the workforce, with another 25% choosing to continue their education.

The nonprofit has supported or started 72 new businesses, creating another 800 new jobs, according to Hannah.

The biggest social enterprise in the Coalfield Development ecosystem is Solar Holler, one of the largest solar installers in West Virginia. The jobs provided through the training program are IBEW union apprenticeships.

Solar Holler's website says its mission is to "Mine the Sun" and touts that "For generations, Appalachians have powered America. We continue that legacy with clean energy that empowers our neighbors and renews our communities."

In just over a decade the company has completed more than 1,400 solar installations in homes, businesses, and nonprofits.

Solar Holler and Coalfield Development are part of a broader coalition called ACT (Appalachian Climate Technology) NOW that competes for federal dollars to have a bigger impact. The coalition has been awarded roughly $88 million dollars in federal grants and matches from non-federal sources.

That investment has translated into a bigger push to train workers in the solar energy industry in the region, a trend that is evident around the country. The demand for solar installers nationwide is expected to grow 22% over the next eight years.

In West Virginia, where the minimum wage is $8.75 an hour, solar installers average nearly twice that amount at $17.31 an hour.

'I was pretty much just scheming to get out, pretty much as soon as possible'

When 21-year-old Dylan Albright discovered there was a free, one-month program to learn more about solar energy jobs, he was intrigued.

He says he and his friends have long been interested in sustainability, but after high school he went to a trade school and boot camp for computer systems repairs. While he was offered part-time jobs, he says the wages were not much different that what he was earning in a warehouse for a retailer and believed he'd need to leave West Virginia.

"For pretty much my entire middle school, high school, and even some of my early adult life, I was pretty much just scheming to get out, pretty much as soon as possible," says Albright.

When they learned about the free program at Coalfield Development, he and his friends signed up.

"When we heard that there was a program teaching people about the ins and outs of solar, including installation and how it worked, it was kind of a no brainer for us to hop on that and learn as much as we could about it," says Albright.

Last fall, Albright says, he learned everything from design and installation of solar panels to how to operate a forklift and eventually earned certifications that included the OSHA 10-Hour Construction Certification.

He now works full-time as a solar installer for Solar Holler, with insurance and benefits through his union. "I'm comfortable knowing that if I needed to, I could live alone without a roommate. I could support myself and still be building savings."

Albright says he likes his new job, but cautions it may not be for everyone.

"You're working long hours, up on a roof, and on a harness. It does get the back and upper body working, for sure. But if you like moving your body, and you like having a variety in the tasks that you can do, it's a pretty nice job." he says. "Honestly, it's the best job I've had by far, I feel pretty good. I feel like I could stick around for a lot longer than I used to think."

'For me, it's deeply personal'

Coalfield Development CEO Hannah is a fifth generation West Virginian. Three generations of his family worked in the coal industry and he is personally invested in building a better future for Appalachians through a more diversified economy, one that builds on the energy that powered it for so long.

"We're not here to just mine coal, we're mining the sun. Coal is just sunlight that's trapped in the soil for a billion years and we are just cutting out that middle man of the billion years and going straight to the source.

"For me, it's deeply personal. It's deeply spiritual. It's what I consider a just transition, something that's been needed for the last 100 years.

"This work is what I would have wished my dad had the chance to do. I saw him get laid off from the coal mines and get his last check in the mail. I've seen businesses in my community shut down. I, myself, had to leave to go to school to find better opportunities.

"Now, it is seeing folks be able to have agency and dignity again, and for our region not to continue to be this battleground area for this narrative that it's down in its mouth, down on its luck, and just doesn't wanna work. None of that's true. This is a way to give us the tools to prove that in a way that honors our legacy, as well."


Ramona Schindelheim wrote this article for WorkingNation.


get more stories like this via email

Advocates and lawmakers want New York's Power Authority to amend its draft plan to build at least 15 gigawatts of renewable energy.

The current draft calls for building 3.5 gigawatts with an expectation the projects will not move ahead. It comes as reports showed the state will not reach its 2030 climate goals at the pace it is currently developing renewables.

Andrea Johnson, a member of the Public Power Coalition, said money is a major reason clean energy development has slowed in New York.

"Private developers are dependent on their investors and there's been issues with the supply chain, and rising costs that they're citing," Johnson observed. "They're basically saying to NYSERDA (the New York State Energy Research Development Authority), who issues the renewable energy credits, 'it's not enough,' so they're canceling the projects."

She pointed out many of these projects are expected to rebid. Another reason is the state needs to build up its transmission infrastructure which has led to a long queue of projects waiting to be connected to the state's electrical grid. However, the RAPID Act, passed in the budget bill, is intended to make clean energy projects' permitting and interconnection more efficient.

The state of New York has many avenues for developing clean energy but Johnson feels the state is at capacity with hydroelectric power. Only last year did the state's first offshore wind come online off the coast of Long Island. She said the power authority must provide greater consideration to clean energy projects at different scales.

"That can mean distributed energy, working with communities rooftop solar. We see a huge opportunity to work with SUNY (State University of New York) and CUNY (City University of New York) campuses," Johnson pointed out. "So, public institutions such as CUNY, SUNY, NYCHA (the New York City Housing Authority), MTA (the Metropolitan Transportation Authority) and municipalities across the state are existing customers."

Johnson thinks the power authority can develop projects on brownfields and other state-owned lands with fewer uses. Building the projects could help the Renewable Energy Access and Community Help program, which reduces energy costs for low-income communities but it only happens if clean energy projects are being built.

By Seth Millstein for Sentient Climate.
Broadcast version by Edwin J. Viera for Connecticut News Service reporting for the Sentient-Public News Service Collaboration

We talk a lot about carbon emissions in the context of climate change, but some of the most dangerous emissions aren't carbon at all. They're methane - a colorless, odorless glass that's primarily produced biologically and warms the planet much faster than carbon dioxide. The Biden administration took some good first steps to reduce America's methane emissions - but will President-elect Donald Trump build upon these steps when he assumes office, or claw back the progress that's been made?

Understanding Methane Emissions

Methane is one of the three main greenhouse gasses, along with carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide. The Earth and its various ecosystems produce methane naturally; freshwater lakes, wetlands and permafrost are the primary natural sources of methane. It's also the main component of natural gas.

However, a 2021 United Nations report found that currently, roughly 60 percent of methane emissions are anthropogenic, or the result of human activity. Agriculture produces more methane than any other sector around the world, and around 90 percent of anthropogenic methane emissions come from one of three sources: agriculture, fossil fuels and waste.

The line between anthropogenic and naturogenic (naturally-occurring) methane emissions can be blurry. For instance, a major source of methane is cow burps (and, to a lesser extent, farts). While cows are obviously "naturally-occurring," animal agriculture is not, and neither is the amount of cows we've brought into existence. The sheer amount of methane produced by cows is the result of our domestication of them, not any sort of natural process.

Similarly, methane is the main ingredient in natural gas, and natural gas existed long before humans came around. But it's the extraction of natural gas that actually causes this methane to enter the atmosphere, and natural gas extraction is a human activity.

Semantics aside, one thing is certain: There's a lot more methane in the atmosphere than there would have been had humans never existed. And that's not good.

Why Is Methane a Problem?

Like other greenhouse gasses, methane contributes to climate change by warming the atmosphere and the planet. But it works a bit differently than carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas.

Carbon dioxide makes up almost 80 percent of all greenhouse emissions, whereas methane constitutes just over 11 percent. In addition, methane dissipates rather quickly; it only sticks around in the atmosphere for around a decade, whereas carbon dioxide can linger for up to 1,000 years.

This might have you thinking that methane isn't that big of a deal, at least insofar as greenhouse gasses go. The problem is that methane traps much, much more heat than carbon dioxide - so much so that, over a 100 year period, methane has 27-30 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide. Over the course of 20 years, it has 80 times the warming potential.

In addition to warming the environment, methane also makes the air dangerous to breathe, because when sunlight interacts with methane, it forms a pollutant called tropospheric ozone. Although tropospheric ozone only stays in the air for a few weeks at most, it can be fatal; it's estimated that up to a million people die every year from respiratory diseases caused by ozone pollution, and methane is a major contributor to this.

How Do Farms Contribute to Methane Emissions?

Around one-third of all anthropogenic methane emissions come from livestock. There are two main reasons for this.

First, there are the burps. A number of animals produce methane as a natural byproduct of their digestive systems; these animals are known as ruminants, and they include not only cows but also sheep, goats, yaks and more. When ruminants burp, they release methane into the air. These are called enteric methane emissions.

The other main source of livestock-related methane emissions is the animals' manure - or, to be more precise, the manner in which farmers store the animals' manure.

Manure management is a significant component of livestock farming. One of the more common ways of storing manure is to put it in large lagoons or pits; this prevents it from leaking into nearby soil and waterways, and also allows farms to more accurately monitor and track their farms' manure output.

Over time, however, the top layer of manure in the lagoon hardens, which prevents oxygen from reaching the manure below. And this is a problem, because when manure is placed in an oxygen-free environment, the microorganisms that produce methane thrive and proliferate, thus increasing its methane emissions. That's exactly what happens in manure pits.

These two factors - enteric emissions and manure (mis)management - account for 80 percent of agriculture-related methane emissions. The other 20 percent comes from rice farming. Rice is a semi-aquatic plant that requires a layer of standing water to grow; this water prevents oxygen from reaching the microbes in the soil, allowing them to reproduce and create methane in a manner similar to manure in a lagoon.

The problem of livestock-related methane emissions is exacerbated by the fact that global meat production has been on the rise for the last 60 years, on both an absolute and per-capita level. This makes reducing these missions all the more important - but how?

How Can Farmers Reduce Their Methane Emissions?

A number of solutions have been proposed, and in some cases implemented, for reducing methane emissions.

Many of these involve new or emerging technologies. There are feed additives that reduce the amount of enteric methane production in ruminants' stomachs, for instance, and manure aeration systems that allow oxygen to flow into stored manure on farms. One company is even developing a methane-trapping mask for cattle to wear while grazing.

Other methane reduction strategies are decidedly more low-tech, such as selectively breeding animals to produce less methane. Simply making livestock farms more efficient on the whole can also have an impact, as this results in increased output with no corresponding increase in methane emissions.

All of these solutions, however, face obstacles. Fernanda Ferreira, Director for Agriculture Methane at Clean Air Task Force, tells Sentient that one of the biggest challenges in methane mitigation is the simple fact that production facilities and logistical operations vary wildly from farm to farm.

"Let's look at the U.S.," Ferreira says. "When you think about goats, sheep, beef and dairy farmers, you have a little over a million farmers. So we're talking about one million different ways of managing these animals. Even if you zoom in into one specific region - let's say the West, or a state like California - there will be variation."

This variation, Ferreira says, complicates efforts to implement methane mitigation technologies on a wide scale, because every farm is a unique operation with slightly different needs, capabilities and restrictions.

"When you zoom in, you have a lot of variation of how farmers handle these animals," Ferreira says. "And this is directly linked to the challenge of adopting [methane reduction] technologies."

Another major challenge is cost. Many of these solutions are expensive, and the cost of implementing them falls on the farmers themselves. But while methane reduction benefits all of humanity in the long run, it doesn't offer farmers any benefit in the short run. As such, farmers largely aren't incentivized to adopt these technologies.

Lastly, there's the simple fact that a lot of this technology is still in the research and development phase. As of this writing, only one synthetic methane-reducing feed additive has been approved by the FDA, and that approval only came six months ago. Other proposed additives are prohibitively expensive, not very effective or come with other drawbacks. The methane-trapping cow mask also has several logistical issues, and has been criticized as a potential form of greenwashing.

What Has President Biden Done About Methane?

In 2021, the Biden administration unveiled the U.S. Methane Emissions Action Plan, a 20-page document with various initiatives and proposals for reducing U.S. methane emissions. They include incentives for farmers to reduce their methane emissions, new regulations aimed at doing the same, and the formation of an interagency task force to collect methane and use it for "on-farm renewable activities."

"The U.S. Methane Emissions Reduction Action Plan provides the framework for the work on agriculture methane emissions," Ferreira says. "The most important outcome that it supports is the deployment of climate smart-initiatives, such as the use of methane-reducing feed additives and the implementation, more broadly, of manure management practices."

In 2023, the Biden administration announced The National Strategy to Advance an Integrated U.S. Greenhouse Gas Measurement, Monitoring, and Information System (yes, that's the official name). This set of policies is geared at improving the tracking, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse emissions, both inside and outside of the government.

These two action plans, Ferreira says, are important first steps in tackling the methane problem-head on. In addition to all of this, the Inflation Reduction Act, passed in 2022, contained funding for a selection of "climate-smart" agricultural practices, including some aimed at reducing methane emissions from farms.

The Inflation Reduction Act also expanded the EPA's authority to regulate methane emissions, and created the Methane Emissions Reduction Program for the purpose of doing so. The Biden administration allocated $1 billion to this program in 2023, and in December, introduced new limits on methane emissions via the EPA.

However, these initiatives only apply to the oil and gas industries, so they won't have any effect on agricultural methane emissions.

What Will Trump Do About Methane?

Methane emissions weren't a central focus of the 2024 campaign, or even a tertiary one, and President-elect Trump made no policy pledges regarding methane. However, actions that he took as president during his first term strongly suggest that he'll seek to undo the Biden administration's progress on methane reduction.

During his time in office, Trump withdrew or weakened a number of federal regulations aimed at tracking and reducing methane emissions, including Obama-era rules that required oil and gas companies to monitor and fix methane leaks at their facilities and take steps to reduce methane emissions on public and tribal lands.

After Trump's 2024 victory, the Biden administration finalized a rule that fines oil and gas companies for their methane emissions, and there's been widespread speculation that Trump will scrap this rule once he assumes office.

Trump, who once said that climate change was a hoax perpetrated by China to make U.S. manufacturing less competitive, withdrew or weakened over 100 environmental regulations during his first term. Nothing he's said or done indicates that he's changed his tune on climate matters since then, so it seems likely that he'll continue rolling back environmental protections, including those aimed at reducing methane emissions.

While this would be unfortunate, Trump is just one person, and America is just one country. There are plenty of other leaders around the world, both in the private and public sectors, making efforts to curb methane emissions.

Canada, Mexico, Japan and several other countries have made significant investments in methane reduction as part of the Global Methane Pledge, for instance. In addition, almost 100 mayors around the world have pledged to reduce their cities' emissions in accordance with the Paris Agreement, which Trump withdrew the U.S. from. Meanwhile, Bill Gates has invested millions in a feed additive company aimed at reducing enteric methane production in livestock.

There are, in other words, plenty of opportunities for global action on methane that don't involve the U.S. president.

The Bottom Line

Reducing methane emissions is no easy task; there are technological, financial, logistical and even dietary hurdles. But given methane's rapid-fire warming potential, overcoming these obstacles isn't optional, but necessary.

Our planet won't remain liveable for future generations without a sharp reduction in methane emission. The Biden administration took some good first steps in bringing about such a reduction, and hopefully, more steps from other world leaders will follow, even if the Trump administration rolls back progress on the issue.


Seth Millstein wrote this article for Sentient.


get more stories like this via email

Connecticut is the subject of an offshore wind study which aims to identify supply chain opportunities for the state and the Northeast region.

Connecticut is committed to creating 100% zero-carbon electricity by 2040. So far, it has procurements for 1.5 gigawatts of offshore wind. The state's first offshore wind farm will be operational next year.

Kristin Urbach, executive director of the Connecticut Wind Collaborative, said the study can explore many offshore wind priorities.

"To pinpoint areas where supply chains currently fall short to propose actionable items to strengthen it," Urbach explained. "Also to boost our local economic growth with the support of local manufacturers for its infrastructure development while promoting job creation and sustainable growth in Connecticut."

Urbach pointed out the state can fill supply chain gaps by utilizing the 12,000-person shipbuilding and repair industry. Some experts believe tapping into this workforce can build up offshore wind development.

Connecticut's offshore wind future is strained. Gov. Ned Lamont paused a multistate deal, delaying Connecticut's ability to reach its 2030 goals. The study's findings will be released next spring.

Similar studies are underway in Louisiana, Maine, and South Carolina. Like them, Connecticut can generate sizable amounts of offshore wind power.

Courtney Durham Shane, senior climate mitigation officer for the Pew Charitable Trusts, said offshore wind has quickly become a lucrative business nationwide.

"The United States has already seen $25 billion in offshore wind supply chain investment to date," Durham Shane noted. "Projections are showing that there could be upwards of $100 billion in private investment and nearly 50,000 jobs that are up for grabs domestically."

The New London State Pier terminal became the first East Coast offshore wind marshaling terminal with unobstructed ocean access. It can speed along the staging and assembly of several states' offshore wind projects. New York State's first offshore wind farm created 75 jobs at the facility, a number which is slated to double.