Talk:Coal power in the United States

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Climate change Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reversal Trends[edit]

Should be addressed by im lazy. Here is a source summarizing recent decisions to NOT build new coal. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.140.188.143 (talk) 23:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That has a lot of good information. Thanks. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

My concern is that the Coal Power... page is already too long. It is true that most of the coal in the US is used for power generation, but then we would have to add coal mining, transporation, import and export to this page, and that sounds like a topic of it's own. So, I would vote against the move. Xenonice (talk) 00:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm neutral to the move. We have Coal power in China, and to be a consistent set of "by country" articles... meh, I could see the argument. But it would be all the same stuff. If someone wanted to add information about mining and transportation onto this page, I would have no problem with it and think it would be a welcome addition.

Also, we have a Coal mining in Australia article. If we move this article, I would recommend moving both to have a set of "coal in..." articles. And plus, the coverage for both of these seems a little lopsided. We should have stats about mining and usage in both. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merging coal mining and coal power articles. Both topics are sufficiently complex to warrant separate articles. Alternative proposal: merge article on Coal Power in the United States with article on Coal in the United States, because they substantially overlap. Coal production by state needs to be updated with data from U.S. EIA for 2006. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 20:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article supports the article: Electricity sector of the United States. Since this alternative is supported, I remove the "Merge to": Coal in the United States template. Watti Renew (talk) 12:35, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Top coal producers in the U.S.[edit]

Which are the top coal producers (mining companies) in the United States ?. I suggest an article about coal mining in the United States --Nukeless 14:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

There is already an article on Coal Mining in the United States, and its a good one. Check it out. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 20:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The most toxic environmental impact is probably fine particle pollution, and it should be added.[edit]

The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule announced by the EPA on July 7, 2011 is expected, when fully implemented, to save about 34,000 lives annually, primarily by averting serious cardiac, pulmonary, and carcinogenic consequences of fine particle pollution (P.M. 2.5) including nanoparticles / ultra-fine particles.

The rule requires 27 states to significantly reduce power plant emissions that contribute to ozone and/or fine particle pollution. By 2014, combined with other final state and EPA actions, the new rule will reduce power plant sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions by 73 percent and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions by 54 percent from 2005 levels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.190.133.143 (talk) 14:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Confused[edit]

This page redirects from Clean Air Watch? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.96.144.121 (talk) 16:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs an update[edit]

I came to the article looking for an explanation of the policy changes that President Obama announced for coal-generating plants on 25 June 2013, and have found nothing. The article should be updated?

In the meantime, does anyone know where in Wikipedia this might be covered at present? Cheers. N2e (talk) 11:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]