Clean coal is a widely used and highly contested term in debates over energy policy and climate change in the United States. While the discourse of “clean coal” originated in industry and government circles, it has been debated, shaped, and contested by a wide range of players, including environmental and social justice groups. In this article, I examine how different local, regional, and national environmental and social justice groups participate in debating and defining these technologies and their implications for the energy future of the region.
FalkE. (2003). Legislative issue advertising in the 107th Congress. Washington, DC: Annenberg Public Policy Center.
14.
FuntowiczS.RavetzJ. (1985). Three types of risk assessment: A methodological analysis. In WippleC.CovelloV. T. (Eds.), Risk assessment in the private sector (pp. 217-231). New York, NY: Plenum.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2005). IPCC special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
McAdamD.BoudetH. (2012). Putting social movements in their place: Explaining opposition to energy projects in the United States, 2000-2005. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
21.
MeyerJ. M. (2008). Populism, paternalism and the state of environmentalism in the US. Environmental Politics, 17, 219-236.
22.
MontrieC. (2003). To save the land and people: A history of opposition to surface coal mining in Appalachia. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
23.
NaritaD. (2012). Managing uncertainties: The making of the IPCC’s special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage. Public Understanding of Science, 21(1), 84-100.
Natural Resources Defense Council. (2010, March12). Coal: Myths and realities, fighting bronx pollution, carbon capture and early earth day call for clean energy on Capitol Hill [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/nrdcnews/in_a_news_10_living.html
26.
NordhausT.ShellenbergerM. (2007). Break through: From “The death of environmentalism” to the politics of possibility. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin.
SlovicP. (2000). Perception of risk. London, England: Earthscan.
37.
StarS. L.GriesemerJ. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387-420.
