Being surrounded by Mountain Justice, the Sierra Club, VT Beyond Coal, and all my friends in the Environmental Coalition, I have always believed that Mountain Top Removal (MTR) practices were horrendous.
Turns out.... there are more sides to this issue than I thought.
This is a hugely controversial issue, so first the basics: Why MTR? It is cheaper, safer, and more efficient.
Most of us know this. What is interesting is what is not talked about which could have some potential: When the tops of mountains are blown off and flattened to travel across and strip then transport the coal, the resulting topography is much different. After reclamation to try to restore the vegetation and habitat, the land is flatter and development is then possible. In these very rural areas of WV,
Also, unfortunately, coal is a huge part of the economy in some of the aforementioned areas. There have been huge protests from residents to not kick out the coal companies (“Coal turns on the lights.”) There is even a festival, museum, and Miss WV Coal Festival Pageant in WV celebrating coal and how the livelihood of the town depends on it. However, it is also been argued that with an increase in coal production, there has been a decrease in available jobs in these areas for many reasons, such as better machines and less human labor demand.
So while MTR practices are generally condemned, I am just arguing that it is a MUCH deeper issue that needs to be very intensely evaluated. Of course, alternatives (wind farms, hydroelectric, etc) should be considered and reclamation efforts need to be more intensive and thorough. But we need to be aware of the entire issue when protesting MTR, so we can more effectively argue for a more environmentally-conscious practice. As we should because overall MTR is irreversibly destructive to the beautiful mountains and the effects have been proven to be dirty and detrimental.
Though there are definitely benefits to the coal companies for participating in MTR, the majority of the profits do not reach members of the affected communities.
ReplyDeleteSurface mining operations employ far fewer people than deep tunnel and wall mines, because of the shift to MTR in West Virginia, the region's leading producer of coal, over 50,000 coal mining jobs have been lost in the last 50 years with only 1% of the work force employed on mountaintop mine sites today. The profits from mining typically go to out of state corporations, making West Virginia the country's second poorest state despite its vast stores of resources.
As it stands, only about 3% of reclaimed mining sites have been developed, but thousands of miles of streams, and about 250,000 acres of hardwood timber have been destroyed. This timber is a natural resource which, managed sustainably, could easily provide gainful employment for thousands. Furthermore, tourism and recreation which relies on these forests and streams could provide much needed income to the state.
In reading your blog I think you make some good points, however I do not agree with most of them. Mountaintop removal is a safer alternative for coal miners, but has devastating effects on the local ecosystem. Homes that are nearby feel the shakes of the explosion and debris can even fall on their property. Imagine feeling the blast of dynamite everyday in your own home and not being able to do anything about it. Over 3 million pounds of explosives are exploded everyday in West Virginia, the same amount that the Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh used.
ReplyDeleteAs far as creating creating flat land from mountaintop reclamation this is true however, these properties are in no way the same as they were before. Critical habitats have been completely destroyed and by simply planting trees and grass this will not compensate the destruction that occurred.
I am from West Virginia so I feel I have a strong opinion about coal. My family was not from a mining area we lived in the suburbs of Charleston, the capital. However, effects from mountaintop removal occur as close as 17 miles from the capital such as polluted drinking water. The state is dependent on coal. Coal companies in West Virginia give numerous amounts of money to the state and local governments, thus allowing for them to pretty much do whatever they want.
I am not entirely against coal mining because we cannot transition to cleaner alternatives overnight. However, I think more stringent regulations should be in place. The Clean Air and Clean Water Acts should do something in order to protect citizens of the United States. It is more of an issue than just jobs. Mountaintop removal actually employs less workers than traditional underground mining. The excess money made by coal companies does not trickle into the community. The people surrounding mountaintop removal sites actually pay more in terms of their health. 98% of people in Prenter Holler, West Virginia do not have gallbladders. They also have to deal with kidney disease and heavy metal poisoning in their drinking water.
Overall coal powers our nation, but other alternatives should be used even if that means going back to underground mining. I feel as though humans could come up with a new method of mining other than simply blowing the tops off of mountains.
I have to agree with Mandi,you make some good points and it's always important to take into account the other side of the issue. I think we can all agree though, what is more important is to think about how it all weights together. The effects that MTR has on the local ecosystem. The ecology within the areas that are affected are cleared by flat land that in the end has no longer the same natural value it did before. Another important point is how the many families that affected by sludge that comes down to destroy homes and pollute rivers. Not only wildlife is at stake but citizens well being as well. How many cases of cancer have we herd from these areas, and think on how expensive that has been for the healthcare system. Do the pros out weight the cons?
ReplyDeleteYour post is informative and serves as a different point of view but I think Mandi addressed each point well the only think I would add though is that I think it's important to also keep I mind the intrinsic value that these mountains have. Shouldn't we have more respect for Mother Earth that has giving us so much already.
I have to agree with Eli and Rachel. Although you make some great points for the other side which I, just as you had never heard before. Mountaintop removal does not just harm the environment through the ways of pollution. It also hinders the ability to put clean energy alternatives on that land once it has been flattened.
ReplyDeleteIn Appalachia, wind energy is a very viable alternative to coal. However, the areas in which MTR has already been practices cannot be used for Wind farms because its wind potential is no longer economically viable to develop for wind turbine use. This is due to the fact that wind energy is strongest when it is in areas with varying ecology, meaning the varying heights of mountains. Once this variation is flattened by MTR the area no longer has strong enough winds to warrant the placement of wind turbines. This is a shame because in Appalachia alone 1 million acres of land could support roughly 38,000 turbines that could annually produce 3-4% of total US electric demand. The footprint of these turbines would be about 10,000 acres, leaving 990,000 acres untouched.
This is a wonderful way to provide cleaner energy for the United States; however, it is not possible if MTR continues to ruin the land necessary for wind turbine placement.
In Ms. Moore's post she makes the point that once land is leveled off by MTR, development is easier and more viable. The purpose of development is to bring in money to a community. I think the point of the Walmart is rather hollow as we all know money spent at a big box store does not stay in a community like a locally owned store does. Currently, only rich corporations like Walmart that sell cheap products can develop that land viably. What else could you build there? Perhaps new homes? And yet anyone who would like to buy a home in West Virginia wants gorgeous mountain views, not views of an artificial Midwest. I believe the case for development is bogus and ultimately, money brought into a community by development on MTR sites will never pay off the debt of the cost coal has caused on health, ecosystem destruction, and stress it's put on our atmosphere.
ReplyDelete