Since he began reporting full-time, in 1991, Ken Ward Jr. has embodied the credo of Ned Chilton III, The Charleston Gazette’s late publisher, that the “hallmark of crusading journalism is sustained outrage.” In his twenty years covering the coal business in Appalachia, the forty-four-year-old Ward has exposed regulatory and enforcement breakdowns, as well as the corruption of corporations and individuals. In person he can be quiet, even shy, but his reporting is fierce and his sense of injustice unwavering. His work has been cited by everyone from Andrew Revkin at The New York Times to The Washington Post, PBS, and NPR. He is a three-time winner of the Scripps Howard Foundation’s Edward J. Meeman Award for Environmental Reporting. He also has received the Livingston Award for Young Journalists, an Investigative Reporters and Editors medal, and an Alicia Patterson Foundation Fellowship. In 2009, he launched Coal Tattoo, a blog on the Gazette’s website that takes its name from a Billy Ed Wheeler song. Coal Tattoo, driven by Ward’s smart, data-driven coverage, quickly became a must-read for reporters who want to understand the coal industry in the United States. CJR’s
Brent Cunningham interviewed Ward in Charleston earlier this year.
Bearing Witness
Maybe fifteen years ago, I drove up Cabin Creek hollow. This is twenty miles from the capital in Charleston, and one of the poorest areas in Kanawha County. It was Earth Day, I think, and there was some coal company-sponsored event where they were going to plant some trees. This is where the big mine at Kayford Mountain is. You’ve seen photos of Kayford Mountain, showing the effects of mountaintop removal, on the front of The New York Times and any number of places. I’m driving up there and there are kids playing along the side the road, by open sewers, because at the time they didn’t have city water and sewer service. I did a calculation—I can’t remember the numbers now but I put it in a story at the time—of how much coal is hauled out of that particular hollow every year. It was like a billion dollars. I mean, who would stand up and say that’s okay? Would the president of the company that’s mining that coal really say it was okay that he was pulling a billion dollars’ worth of coal out of there and the kids who live there are playing in open sewers? I don’t think so. But yet, if it’s kind of hidden away and the story isn’t told, then it makes it okay.
Ken Ward is awesome. We are so fortunate he chose to stay home. There's no telling how many lives he's saved, and the breadth of the impact his reporting has had on life in West Virginia is simply immeasurable.
#1 Posted by Dave White, CJR on Mon 28 Nov 2011 at 11:48 PM
So much of journalism is crumbling, but it's good to know that there are still heroes out there like Ken Ward. I follow his work, I've never lived in West Virginia, and what he reports is not exactly beckoning me to move there, but there's nothing nobler and more courageous than speaking truth to power, and nowhere in America where it's more needed. Reporters like Ken are tragically rare. Even rarer are editors and publishers who back up reporters like Ken, so congrats to the paper's leadership, too.
#2 Posted by Peter Dykstra, CJR on Tue 29 Nov 2011 at 11:17 AM
Glad to see a story on Ken Ward, Jr. and his fact-driven journalism. It's in stark contrast to some of the lazy stenography and meme-chasing that goes on.
#3 Posted by Beth Wellington, CJR on Tue 29 Nov 2011 at 12:42 PM
History has shown that when you give the EPA, or any regulatory agency for that matter, the power to regulate something it will regulate it to the extent that it is legally allowed to and many times beyond the original intent and scope of the law. While you laugh at the “spilled milk” regulation, given the government’s past behavior, it is not inconceivable that the EPA would at some point in time move to regulate bulk storage of milk as it would have fallen under the authority of the SPCC rule as written. Granted, there was an exemption proposed for the dairy industry, but that had not made it into the final rule at the time this was being discussed. It’s a similar story with the “farm dust” myth. While the agencies new proposed PM10 standards don’t specifically label dust from agricultural activities as a contributing factor in PM10 levels, any reading of the law would concluded that agricultural dust is most certainly implicitly covered. Barring specific congressional legislative action, whether or not the EPA would choose to enforce this regulation as it applies to farmers is entirely up to the EPA, but I could easily see a environmental organization that hates “big Ag” suing the EPA and forcing them to regulate bulk dairy storage under the SPCC or farm dust under the Clean Air Act. As I write this, the EPA is attempting to classify hay as a pollutant in an attempt to shut down several small ranching operations, as they could never afford to comply with the EPA’s ruling.
And yeah, coal mining is a dangerous way to make a living, but we all can’t work for Solyndra.
#4 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Tue 29 Nov 2011 at 01:06 PM
Really good to hear from Ward in his own words. The work he's been doing at the Charleston Gazette shows exactly what journalism should be about. He reads those thousand page environmental impact statements and permit documents, and he shows why it matters.
Ken Ward is a national treasure in a regional paper. He knows what matters.
#5 Posted by walden, CJR on Tue 29 Nov 2011 at 04:53 PM
Thanks for this excellent interview with Ken Ward, one of my heroes. The Charleston Gazette has for decades courageously kept the light of honesty and integrity burning in a State where the corporate money has had great sway in so many areas of life, to try to hide the truth. I don't know Mrs. Chilton, the publisher, but I am guessing that there are very few people who have done as much as she has in running the Gazette in West Virginia for the cause of free inquiry -- and that old chestnut "the rights of man" (and woman.) A great, great, newspaper. (full disclosure -- they printed my picture on page one last week. A stellar choice, readers agreed. LOL.)
#6 Posted by Thomas Rodd, CJR on Tue 29 Nov 2011 at 07:25 PM
Thank you, Ken Ward. You have done more for your fellow West Virginians than so many others, some of whom are greatly celebrated for their efforts. I agree with Tom Rodd: you are a hero.
#7 Posted by Colleen Anderson, CJR on Tue 29 Nov 2011 at 10:54 PM
How wonderful to read this interview with Ken in Ken's words. Nobody tells it better, and he has been telling the story of the proud men and women of West Virginia, lovingly, for years. Holding corporations accountable doesn't make him an enemy of prosperity; it means he wants the best for the neighbors and the state he chooses. Thank you again and again.
#8 Posted by Hilary Chiz, CJR on Wed 30 Nov 2011 at 01:00 AM
A very inspiring article for young journalist on the writing and the importance of place in journalism. Nice job CJR and Brent.
#9 Posted by John Russo, CJR on Wed 30 Nov 2011 at 07:12 AM
to: Mike H
Where O where is this documented history you speak of? Where did you get that information. I'd like to read it. Show me any regulatory agency that has done this.
Many do not even enforce the laws on the books in the first place.
I would be happier if the regulatory agencies would just enforce the original intent and scope of the law that created them. Take a look at MSHA and the Office and Surface Mining.
#10 Posted by Erle Wright, CJR on Wed 30 Nov 2011 at 04:57 PM
@ Erle Wright
I got one right off the top of my head: CO2.
Now before you start whining and kvetching about how CO2 is the most deadly plague unleashed upon man since daminozide in apple juice let me explain to you the basics of the Clean Air Act. The Clean Air Act mandates the EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for hazardous airborne pollutants that are "requisite to protect the public health". At the time, this referred to things like PM10, SOx, NOx, mercury, etcetera. These standards are based primarily on quantifiable health concerns and are irrespective of compliance costs. Until Massachusetts v. EPA, the EPA had no authority to regulate green house gasses as it is was never deemed a direct threat to human health, as per the original scope of the law, unless you could argue that anyone in their right mind in 1971 would have voted for a bill that gave the Fed the power to limit CO2 emissions.
So now the EPA has the authority to regulate GHG’s …. which everyone knows only refers to fossil fuel power plants (the wicked engines of progress and wealth that they are) … but what about the next step. Cars and truck, that’s a gimme, but these new rules will have the scope to cover beer and soft drinks (as its carbonated with CO2), paintball parks, farms and ranches, and yes even the lowly humble backyard compost pile.
Want to be a good steward of mother earth and take care your own trash in an eco-friendly manner … whoops, better apply for that New Source Review permit, or you will be in violation of the law!
The first step is always to get your nose under the tent (Massachusetts v. EPA) and the next steps are always to increase your authority (classifying hay as a pollutant) and selectively exercise that authority when it suits political considerations (having to hire an additional 230,000 employees to enforce a rule).
#11 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Wed 30 Nov 2011 at 05:58 PM
Except Mikey-boy, outside of your Patriot newsletter that never happens.
So yeah, aside from that, good point.
Oh. And you better take off your tinfoil hat. I hear the EPA requires you to register it so as to prevent metal poisoning. (though that too may be a plot, oooooh!)
#12 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 1 Dec 2011 at 03:31 AM
Ken Ward is the closest thing we've got to a real journalist. Unfortunately he's far from perfect when it comes to nailing down politicians over their flaws.
More than once Ward has "buried the lead" so deep within a crucial story that his own editors couldn't find it. Otherwise neither they, nor the UMW likely would ever have endorsed Joe Manchin to the U.S. Senate, considering the role his "Retail Government" policy likely played in both disasters.
One prime example is what Mr. Ward missed in his April 12, 2010 article at this link when at the end of his report he insinuated that former governor Joe Manchin publicly admitted that he'd told his Environmental Protection Agency administrators the following:
The problem isn't just what Ward left out, but the way he wrote it.Had this piece been properly composed, it would have been front page news that Manchin trotted out top administrators of not just his DEP (as Ward asserts), but Manchin's top mine safety administrators as well! Ward also left out the part where Manchin presented his regulators like they were his own personal trained show ponies ajust before he pandered -er "explained" his lethal Retail Government policy to his corporate benefactors.
That Manchin had told his agency heads to not shut the mines down when they saw grievous safety violations after the Sago deaths and prior to Upper Big Branch explosions wasn't the only time Ward missed his mark by miles.
More recently, when the UMWA issued its report called "Industrial Homicide" regarding the Upper Big Branch mine disaster, although he was there, Ward missed his opportunity to ask UMW president Cecil Roberts why his team of investigators hadn't even gone as far as an earlier report which had all but placed the responsibility onto Manchin's lethal "Retail Government" policy.
Someone else asked Roberts the question, but unfortunately Ward has been deleting that reporter's comments about Manchin's culpability and Roberts' answer from his precious Coal Tattoo blog. MUCH MORE HERE
#13 Posted by One Citizen, CJR on Thu 1 Dec 2011 at 11:42 AM
Except Mikey-boy, outside of your Patriot newsletter that never happens.
Except, of course, when it does.
#14 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Thu 1 Dec 2011 at 11:52 AM
Which, for the most part, it doesn't.
#15 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 1 Dec 2011 at 03:53 PM
You are arguing that the EPA isn’t being consistent in its application, I am arguing that it continually pushes its scope. These two concepts, amazingly enough, are not mutually exclusive.
Reading comprehension will save you some embarrassment in the future.
#16 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Thu 1 Dec 2011 at 05:28 PM
"You are arguing that the EPA isn’t being consistent in its application."
No Mike. You got this habit of trying to win arguements by sticking what you'd like your opponent to have said in his mouth and then making a big show of refuting it. Are you a child?
My arguement has been consistent, the EPA in its application of power has been consistently weak and pro-industry, and this is a symptom of a conservative problem. You have an agency which conservatives hate and undermine whenever they have a snippet of power. They appoint pro-industry people to head and purge it, they threaten to cut its funding in congress if it gets to aggressive, and the people they regulate sent bought politicians to their doors to shut down individual investigations.Many career workers at the EPA are often frustrated because they cannot fight the battles that require fighting and maybe some career workers take on insignificant and easy battles because they know the people they're fighting don't have the resources to win, and winning is what counts come time for promotion, and I say that based on my analysis of a similar situation at the SEC. But those cases are minority cases.
The majority of the time, business is allowed to pollute/kill people and then leave the government in charge of cleaning up their mess. And the EPA basically conducts studies on toxics and makes suggestions on what should be done about it. While you cry about what the EPA has done to some shumck who paved over a wetland over the advice of his own advisors and state officials, people are getting toxic fish on their plates that have absorbed the emmissions from coal power plants and factories and no one is doing much to stop them. You want to talk about the EPA overreach while the industries in America are making choices that kill people? Is killing people not an overreach?
Have kids someday in the shadow of some of these belching wonders, or better yet, move to Bejing where they don't have any overreaching product safety laws or environmental protection. Hopefully the experience will help you grow up.
#17 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Fri 2 Dec 2011 at 02:57 AM
My arguement has been consistent, the EPA in its application of power has been consistently weak and pro-industry, and this is a symptom of a conservative problem.
Spoken like someone who doesn’t deal with the EPA on a daily bases. Don’t worry, I'm sure you will find something from Grist that will facilitate continued wallowing in your happy ignorance.
You want to talk about the EPA overreach while the industries in America are making choices that kill people? Is killing people not an overreach?
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr said that taxes are the price we pay for civilization, he would have been more accurate if he said pollution is the price we pay for civilization. Everything from creature comforts to necessities generate industrial waste, to think that this can be eliminated with perfect or even near perfect efficacy is delusional.
#18 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Fri 2 Dec 2011 at 11:04 AM
"Everything from creature comforts to necessities generate industrial waste, to think that this can be eliminated with perfect or even near perfect efficacy is delusional."
Oh I know, that is why we should settle for a life that is Bejing in environmental quality and never adapt any processes that produce, process, or store waste to mitigate the environmental damage done. Cause when your kids have cancer, you're going to be wanting some creature comforts to numb the pain of watching them slowly die.
#19 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Fri 2 Dec 2011 at 11:34 AM
Oh I know, that is why we should settle for a life that is Bejing in environmental quality and never adapt any processes that produce, process, or store waste to mitigate the environmental damage done.
I know liberals aren’t too keen in the technical arts and sound like mouth breathers when it comes to this stuff, but are you really that slow? An entire industry exists to deal with industrial pollution.
By every single quantifiable metric, emissions of HAP’s in the US have declined significantly over the past 40 years. There just aint no arguing that. So you can perch yourself on your soapbox and rail against the evils of polluting enterprises and all the mythical cancer clusters choked full of sick black and brown babies, but the fact of the matter and what is incontrovertible is that all these “wicked” engines of wealth have cleaned up their acts to such a significant degree, that there is little regional or even local health impacts from them.
Is the CAA and CWA responsible for this decline, yes. Does the EPA abuse its scope and regulatory control of the CAA and CWA, once again, yes. Does the EPA’s abuse of both its scope and authority unfairly target individuals, companies, and activities that no reasonable person would believe they have authority over, yes, and the courts have ruled on this many a time.
#20 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Fri 2 Dec 2011 at 02:19 PM
"I know liberals aren’t too keen in the technical arts and sound like mouth breathers when it comes to this stuff, but are you really that slow? An entire industry exists to deal with industrial pollution."
Oh look, could Mikey be making the argument that even having a minimal agency like the EPA and minimal environmental laws attach costs to businesses which spur improvements that would otherwise not happen, like in China?
No, it sounds to me like Mikey-child is getting upset with how ineffectual his weak arguments are proving to be. Need a time out Mikey-boy? *pinches cheek*
#21 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Fri 2 Dec 2011 at 02:57 PM
Wow, mouth breather … is that all you got? Has your argument so horribly collapsed that all you are left with is garbage like this.
I guess I shouldn’t be supposed, because as well all know, facts have a well known conservative bias.
Don’t worry, I’m sure you will find something from Grist or the Nation that helps will help you sleep tonite.
#22 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Fri 2 Dec 2011 at 03:10 PM
On the topic of coal, 40% of plants don't have the basic scrubber technology to take out mercury and sulfur dioxide. Why? Because they didn't have to so they didn't bother.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/11/29/131642/can-coal-plants-afford-epas-new.html
"Constellation broke ground to build the scrubber in June 2007 and finished in September 2009. At the peak of construction, 1,385 people worked on it.
Allen said he'd heard the complaint that the EPA wasn't giving industry enough time.
"That doesn't square with our experience," he said. As with any construction project, there was a trade-off between how much was spent and how fast the work got done. The state deadline made Constellation move fast, and it spent $885 million. It also added 30 jobs to run the pollution-control equipment — and it remains profitable.
Today, the white plumes rising from two new stacks at the plant emit mostly water vapor and carbon dioxide. The scrubber — a large chemical plant next to the plant — cuts 95 percent of the sulfur dioxide, which contributes to soot, and 90 percent of the mercury.
Allen said it was a good time for the power industry to invest in reducing toxic air pollution, because the price of electricity has gone down in recent years as a result of cheaper natural gas supplies from horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing."
But not everybody took advantage of that good time:
""We support what the EPA is trying to do relative to emission reductions at our power plants," Akins said in an interview. "What we are arguing about is the timetable."
Under the EPA's pending rule, companies would get three years, until 2014, with a possible extension to 2015. But Akins said scrubbers took five years to build, including time to get permits. There will be too much demand for labor throughout the power industry to get all the equipment built within three or four years, he said.
American Electric Power wants to stagger its plant retirements and pollution controls until 2020.
"It would be great if we could do all this stuff overnight," Akins said. "We just need a chance to make that progress.""
Over a decade of time wasn't enough of a chance. Why was that?
"Unlike Constellation, American Electric Power operates in states where it needs approval from regulators to recover costs. In areas with no state rules on toxic air pollution, it wouldn't be able to get such regulator approval before the EPA puts out a final rule, company spokesman Pat Hemlepp said."
When they say "recover costs" read "raise rates". In other words, they won't begin complying with regulations until they can pass on the costs to the consumers, which they can't do until their states pass regulations to justify rate increases.
Which means instead of investing in available technology to limit mercury and sulfur emissions out of concern for their fellow people or fear of pending federal regulation, they're going to push it until the day the EPA decides to enforce the edict and ask for extensions.
You know what? If that's the attitude they want to have, let them have it. If they violate the federal rule the day after the timetable, shut their plants down until they get the work done or solar and wind eat their lunch. Then try to pay for your improvements with a rate increase on zero power produced, idiots.
Have they earned sympathy?
#23 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 4 Dec 2011 at 09:29 PM
"pay for your improvements with a rate"
increase on zero power produced, idiots.
(So close to 600 words.... so close)
#24 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 4 Dec 2011 at 09:40 PM
Let's remember that the fact of the matter is that the people of McDowell did want the project and voted to approve it in a binding referendum by a 10 point margin after a through and detailed debate. The people of McDowell did decide that it was an important economic development effort and, whether others agree or not, it was their decision to make. Democracy is an odd little creature sometimes.
#25 Posted by Jack, CJR on Tue 6 Dec 2011 at 02:43 PM