CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world. Subscribe today!


Fossil Fuels The U.S. EPA has warned Mingo Coal that it may veto its application to expand mountaintop removal in West Virginia.

Published on October 18th, 2009 | by Tina Casey

8

EPA Warning Could Mark Beginning of the End for Mountaintop Removal

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

October 18th, 2009 by
 
The U.S. EPA has warned Mingo Coal that it may veto its application to expand mountaintop removal in West Virginia.

Mountaintop removal, the hyper-destructive practice of blowing up entire mountains to get at coal near the surface, is in for a rough ride.  Though in technological terms mountaintop removal is downright third-world compared to the high tech sustainable energy industry, it’s still been going nonstop right here in the Appalachian mountains of our own northeastern U.S..  The result has been hundreds of mountains destroyed in one of North America’s richest ecosystems, hundreds of miles of streams buried, and an economic and public health climate that is among the worst in the nation.  Now all that is poised to end.  Earlier this year the U.S. EPA suspended the mountaintop removal permitting process and Raw Story is now reporting that the first permit veto is immanent.

[social_buttons]

According to Raw reporter Joe Byrne, the Mingo Logan Coal Company was notified this past Friday by the EPA that the mountaintop removal permit in the pipeline for its Spruce No. 1 mine in West Virginia faces a veto due to “a high potential for downstream water quality excursions under current mining and valley fill practices.”  With financial backers like Bank of America cutting their ties with companies that practice mountaintop mining, the impending veto could be a harbinger of more to come.

Mountaintop Removal and Green Jobs

As Byrne reports, environmentalists have been fighting the Spruce operation for years.  The opposition to mountaintop removal also includes Appalachian residents and community activists along with coal workers and their families.  The involvement of coal workers might seem counter-intuitive, but it makes sense when you consider that compared to conventional mining, mountaintop removal is a highly mechanized process that creates far fewer jobs.  The Appalachian region has been bleeding mining jobs ever since mountaintop removal came into vogue, despite the greater quantities of coal being shipped out.  Now that green jobs are starting to revive the Rust Belt, Appalachian residents may be on to the idea that their region’s natural beauty and low cost of living could prove attractive to green start-ups, too.  It makes no sense to squander irreplaceable resources on an old-school industry when the new green economy is on the rise.

Mountaintop Mining and Occam’s Green Razor

Without a competing source for massive quantities of energy, at one point in time mountaintop mining had at least a germ of logic to it, much the same way that a wood-reliant nation’s need for energy would result in destructive deforestation.  In fact, it could be argued that the development of fossil fuel resources in the U.S. played a key role in the development of sustainable forest stewardship.  It’s a sort of environmental Occam’s Razor (William of Ockham was a 14th century logician whose writings lead to the principle that the simpler of two competing theories is the better): the less destructive energy source should eventually win out.  The green razor certainly applies to the question of why we would blow apart mountains when we could collect energy in much less destructive ways.  It doesn’t necessarily mean an end to using coal – lots of people in the U.S. still heat with wood, for that matter – it just means the marginalization of coal as an energy source, to the point where in limited quantities it can be more sustainably harvested and used.  Just as wood stepped aside for fossil fuels, now it’s time for coal to step aside for a  more sustainable future.

Image: JW Randolph/”friend’s work” on Wikimedia Commons.

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

Print Friendly

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags: , ,


About the Author

Tina Casey specializes in military and corporate sustainability, advanced technology, emerging materials, biofuels, and water and wastewater issues. Tina’s articles are reposted frequently on Reuters, Scientific American, and many other sites. Views expressed are her own. Follow her on Twitter @TinaMCasey and Google+.



  • Sawyer Guide

    Greetings,

    I am interested in enviromentally responsible use of coal. I am just beginning research. I would appreciate any recommendations on obtaining knowledge on coal, both pro and con. This may include industry organizations, environmental groups/organizations, agencies, books, web sites,research/white papers, etc.

    Thank you, Sawyer Guide

  • Sawyer Guide

    Greetings,

    I am interested in enviromentally responsible use of coal. I am just beginning research. I would appreciate any recommendations on obtaining knowledge on coal, both pro and con. This may include industry organizations, environmental groups/organizations, agencies, books, web sites,research/white papers, etc.

    Thank you, Sawyer Guide

  • http://wellescent.com Wellescent Health

    Given the extreme environmental damage and risks to human health from coal extraction, coal use and the coal fly ash, it is about time that EPA takes action on this front. They are also trying to shut down the ponds holding carcinogenic coal ash because of their risk for escaping into neighboring water systems.

  • http://wellescent.com Wellescent Health

    Given the extreme environmental damage and risks to human health from coal extraction, coal use and the coal fly ash, it is about time that EPA takes action on this front. They are also trying to shut down the ponds holding carcinogenic coal ash because of their risk for escaping into neighboring water systems.

  • Matthew

    Oh yeah coal is cheap and reliable my ass. We are spending billions to clean up the problems with dirty energy. Then you take into account the cost of destroyed mountains, and what it does to the quality of air we breath etc.

    It is unbelievably expensive.

  • Matthew

    Oh yeah coal is cheap and reliable my ass. We are spending billions to clean up the problems with dirty energy. Then you take into account the cost of destroyed mountains, and what it does to the quality of air we breath etc.

    It is unbelievably expensive.

  • Watcher

    Interesting that this huge (non-union) m t r mine got the veto when another huge (union) m t r mine recieved the “green” light to mine.

  • Watcher

    Interesting that this huge (non-union) m t r mine got the veto when another huge (union) m t r mine recieved the “green” light to mine.

Back to Top ↑