ASHLAND — America is shoveling coal to the sidelines, reported a story by Associated Press energy writer Jonathan Fahey. If he’s right — and he certainly had the statistics to show that Amertica’s use of coal to produce its electricty is rapidly decling — then its does not bode well for the future of this region which relies so heavily on the production of coal.

Despite all the environmental problems caused by coal — both in getting it out of the ground and in burning it to produce electricity — coal creates the vast majority of high-paying jobs in their region and fuels the economy of many rural counties where non-coal jobs are scarce and mostly low paying. Simply put, when coal jobs disappear in this region, there simply are no other comparable jobs available to replace the lost jobs. A coal miner earning more than $50,000 a year can suddenly find himself either working at a minimum wage job — or not working at all.

Yet the number of coal-related jobs in this region and throughout the U,S. are expected to continue to decline. The share of U.S. electricity that comes from coal is forecast to fall below 40 percent for the year — the lowest level since the government began collecting this data in 1949. Four years ago, it was 50 percent. By the end of this decade, it is likely to be near 30 percent.

“The peak has passed,” says Jone-Lin Wang, head of Global Power for the energy research firm IHS CERA.

Utilities are aggressively ditching coal in favor of natural gas, which has become cheaper as supplies grow.

Kentucky Power Co. recently abandoned plans to spend nearly $1 billion to bring the coal-fired Big Sandy Power Plant in compliance with EPA clean air standards. Speculation is that the plant near Louisa will either shut down completely in three years or so or be converted to burn natural gas instead of coal. If those are the only options, we hope it it is converted to natural gas. While that still will result in the eliminaiotn of many coal jobs throughout the region, it at least will preserve jobs at the power plant, and the loss of those jobs would have a tremendous economic impact on Lawrence County.

It is not hard to understand the appeal of natural gas. You don’t have to be an environmental scientist to know that it burns much cleaner than coal, and while coal requires trains and trucks to transport it to the power plant, natural gas can be transported by underground lines. Unlike the coal trucks that traverse our highways, the gas lines do no damage to our highways and make them safer by removing a lot of coal trucks from them.

With it costing nealy a billion dollars on improvements to the Big Sandy plant to allow it to continue to burn coal, one can understand why even an electric company based in the heart of coal country would find natural gas so appealing.

While coal use is declining, natural gas use is rising. Natural gas will be used to produce 29 percent of the country’s electricity this year, up from 20 percent in 2008. Nuclear accounts for 20 percent. Hydroelectric, wind, solar and other renewables make up the rest.

The shift from coal is reverberating across Appalachia, where mining companies are laying off workers.

Coal does have its advantages. The U.S. is the world’s second-largest coal producer after China, and it has the world’s biggest reserves — enough to last more than 200 years.

Coal has also enjoyed strong political support because of the jobs it provides in mining and transportation. That helped coal thrive even as environmental concerns over mining practices and air quality grew.

Because it is so abundant and produces so many jobs, it does not make sense to abandon coal as a major source of energy to produce electricity. Instead, we should concentrate on finding more affordable ways to mine coal without permanently scarring this region’s landscape and without burying our streams under tons of dirt and rocks removed from the tops of mountains.

People in this region point the finger of blame directly at President Obama’s EPA for coal’s rapid decline, and the President Obama is a far cry from his predecessor, George W. Bush, who showed little interest in protecting the environment duirng his eight years in office.

But even with the Obma administration, the long-term economic prospects for coal are not good. “Even without the EPA rules, coal is not really competitive,” Wang says. 

Coal executives are hardly giving up. Nick DeIuliis, president of Consol Energy, a coal and natural gas producer based in Canonsburg, Pa., doubts the EPA’s restrictions on greenhouse gases will survive long term because of the economic harm he says they will inflict.

Consol and other U.S. coal companies hope to be able to keep mines active by exporting more of the country’s huge reserves. Last year U.S. coal exports hit a record 107 million short tons. High grade coal that is used to make steel is in particular demand in developing countries such as China, India and Brazil.

DeIuliis says the price of natural gas will rebound over time and that coal will once again account for half the nation’s electricity. “This is a cycle,” he says.

Is DeIuliis right and the downturn is just temporary? Don’t count on it. Coal has many enemies, including some who live in the coalfields and are active in Kentuckians for the Commonwealth.

Bruce Nilles, director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign, says the shift from coal to gas was accelerated by the low price of natural gas. That, along with tougher environmental rules and alternatives such as wind and solar will keep the pressure on coal. “We won’t go backwards,” he says.

And so the fight continues. It should not be a choice between saving the environment or saving jobs. Instead, we must find a way to preserve jobs without leveling our mountains, burying our streams and polluting our air. An impossible task? Well, it won’t be easy but it is the best hope of keeping coal an important source of energy.