Video Analysis: The Last Mountain

Jobs and protecting the environment, important or not? George Will wrote his essay, “What Price Clean Air?” to convey the message that most of the Navajo Nation run and work at the power plants in Arizona, but as the growing change in protecting the environment, those Native Americans are forced to alter their livelihoods. George Will directs his essay to the American people, to persuade them to help find a change. Using the best equipment and spending billions of dollars on new technology may be affected by the uncertain environmental movement. With ethos, logos, and pathos, George Will effectively uses the rhetorical devices to convey his argument about the social and economic damage brought on by the federal government.

With the well-being of future generations in mind, environmental concerns have begun to establish a permanent residence atop the priority ladder for a vast array of Americans. Consequently, writers and political pundits alike are seizing this opportunity to capitalize on advocating their stance on the issue. Information, representing all positions, pours in at an unrelenting and unfathomable rate. For the average American it can be an arduous process sifting through all the rhetoric in attempt to find the real truth regarding our impact as humans on the environment; one such example is Susan Brown’s article The EPA’s Mercury Problem. In this article Brown attempts to expose hypocrisy among progressives by paralleling the Environmental Protection

Environmental justice links a number of social movements—anti-racism, Aboriginals rights, and the mainstream environmental movement—and addresses the problem of environmental racism (Gosine & Teelucksignh, 2008, p. 11). The concept of environmental justice in the U.S was associated with the struggles over toxic waste sites and the call for equal treatment of all communities, radicalized or not (p. 9). It was about looking at human health rather than preserving areas deemed as “playgrounds for the rich.”

“Environmental racism is real…so real that even having the facts, having the documentation and having the information has never been enough to provide equal protection for people of color and poor people” “It takes longer for the response and it takes longer for the recovery in communities of color and low-income communities.” (Bullard, 1994:36)

Are you for coal or against coal? Maybe better yet, are you for the preservation of the mountains and nature or are you against it? These questions held such a deep meaning and understanding that on the surface seemed immaterial to large corporations such as the Coal Mining Industry or political leaders within the State of West Virginia. Combating Mountaintop Removal by Bryan McNeil gives us the views of what it looks like from a grassroots environmental activist within the West Virginia coal country. In the book you see how the social and moral arguments are framed from different agents such as the Ant-MTRM (Mountain top removal) organization, the Coal Miners and Union works, to the Coal Mining Companies, and finally the State through political

The article on “NAACP Report Reveals Disparate Impact of Coal-Fired Power Plants” talks about how coal pollution from the coal-fired power plants will negatively impact the environment surrounding it, including the population in the surroundings, and the harm it will bring upon them. It suggests that Americans that reside near a coal power plant has a lower average income than most of the Americans in the nation. Furthermore, it also pointed out that 39% of Americans that live near a coal power plant are “people of color”. This article claim that coal pollution from the coal power plant is killing population that has a low income and people of certain races. According to the article, climate change is also a negative impact brought on by coal

Pezzullo investigates in this article the strategies of environmental justice advocates in Warren County, North Carolina. The rhetorical efforts shown by these advocates vigorously urged the state of North Carolina to clean up a local toxic landfill caused by a truck illegally dumping oil contaminated with PCBs in the middle of the night.

Environmental justice “is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies” (www.epa.gov.). The case of Navajo-Hopi Struggle to Protect the Big Mountain Reservation provides evidence of an environmental justice framework.

“The NAACP and its allies released a research report titled Coal Blooded: Profit before people.” This report tells how coal pollution impacts low income and the colored community’s the most. Cold blooded uses demographic factors to show proof that the coal pollution impacts the low income and colored community the most. Coal blooded states “that coal pollution is literally killing low-income communities and colored communities.” Coal blooded also states that emissions controls are not sufficient “Coal blood has laid the frame work for individuals, organizations and policymakers to make a transition from coal to other energy sources.” We need to replace coal with clean energy alternatives. This report shows how harmful coal plants are to the

In the research report “Coal Blooded: Putting Profits before People” by the NAACP, they explore devastating health, economic, and environmental effects of coal pollution in low-income communities and communities of color. The NAACP and their allies ranked 378 coal fired power plants nationwide based on their Environmental Justice Performance. They discovered the average income of communities surrounding coal plants are lower than the nationwide average and almost half are people of color. In addition to rankings, they have asserted coal pollution isn’t just an environmental issue, but a civil and human rights issue. “This report will help put a human face on the life and death issue of coal pollution,” stated Executive Director of Indigenous

In an article written by Patrice Lumumba Simms, it is described that when looking at classic environmentalism so far, most of the policies implemented follow three broad categories. The first is pollution amelioration which targets reduction of pollutants. The second is hazard and risk management which, unsurprisingly, focuses on protecting humans from toxins that are hazardous to human health or the environment. The third, and final, is resource protection and conservation which seeks to prevent over utilization of natural resources and preserve nature. A common response to these categories is that they function as a “rising tide that lifts all boats,” (15) meaning that any type of environmental improvement is going to improve conditions for everyone. When using this argument, there is no problem with the classic environmental thinking because everyone benefits, potentially minority and low-income individuals more than anyone else. However, this argument is false. When creating policies, the EPA and organizations like it usually “do not approach programmatic decision-making with an eye toward ensuring comprehensive protection of every community” (16). For example, when discussing hazardous waste regulation, the EPA has regulations in place to manage disposal. However, many

The film ‘Frackman’ (2015) was truly an inspirational documentary to me since it changed and developed my perspective on my future accounting profession. Frackman was a documentary about how the government allowed fracking (extraction of coal gases in a way that causes more air and environmental pollution (Jackson, et al 2014, pp. 346) – But is seen as something acceptable since it boosts the economy of the country) in a block of land which led to severe environmental and societal impacts on the wildlife and the people that lived near the fracking area. The companies were most likely being subsidised by the government, and were simply extracting the gases while simultaneously ignoring the adverse effects that it had on the people. But looking

The Last Mountain, directed by Bill Haney, is a documentary that dives into Mining in the Appalachian Mountains, how that affects the community, the environment, employment factors, as well as the protesters and other means that can replace this disastrous way of retracting fossil fuels within our world. Bill Haney is an entrepreneur and an inventor, he started off by creating an air pollution control system for power plants, with immense focus on environmental issues and trying to prevent them. We can view Bill Haney as a credible filmmaker due to his involvement in the problem at hand. He has spent his whole life trying to counteract our involvement in harming the environment, as well as helping people as a whole. This makes him worthy to create a film that embarks on problems and solutions that he has personally dealt with in his life.

Oh America, the land of the free and the home of the brave where we’re run by big time corporations and the individual voice isn’t listened to. Environmental problems worldwide have been an ever growing problem based on our ignorant attitudes towards hazardous waste and an increase of CO2 being released by big time corporations. There are only so many things the public can do to change the spatial limitations of environmental destruction, yet governments care less about the environment and more about the money they make from destroying the environment. Humans are essentially the parasites of this world. In the movie “In Our Water”, Frank Kaler emphasizes his concern for the water pollution in South Brunswick and how getting help from local, county, state, and federal governments is like asking if Rutgers can give you free tuition for being an ordinary student. Frank Kaler’s emphasis on “making it more expensive to pollute than not to pollute” is a very strong solution to maintain the environment, yet to do this would be extremely hard from a political point of view because the public would have to pay more for electricity and other utilities. When Frank Kaler went to different levels of government in seek of help, he was told that they didn’t know what the problem was and told him to go ask someone else (run around strategy), which is what happens a lot to environmentalists seeking answers from the government.

As our population grows the production and demand of fossil fuels (oil, coal and natural gas) will grow considerable if we don’t do something about it now before the supply runs dry. Geothermal energy for example, which is the energy used from the heat of the earth, is being used in geothermal heat pumps to heat and cool buildings. Another example is nuclear power frequently used in steam engines in nuclear power plants that turn the generated heat into electricity. The article, Is Mining Sustainable, illustrates an example of villages and people who live in the areas of fossil fuel mining have been run out of their homes and villages destroying their way of life and as such can no longer provide substance for their people. This is an example of what I would not accept, which is running people from their homes and livelihood, however I would accept it if they miners repair the damage that was done to the properties and villages so they can once again sustain for their