Will Obama Reverse "Parting Gift" Coal Decision?

MORGANTOWN, W.Va. — Angry environmentalists launched an online campaign Wednesday urging President-elect Barack Obama to undo a federal rule that clarifies when coal companies can dump mining waste in streams, calling it a long-awaited "parting gift" from the Bush administration.

North Carolina-based Appalachian Voices and others blasted Tuesday's Environmental Protection Agency decision to endorse the mining rule as the death of freshwater streams and the likely start of a new surge in mountaintop removal surface mining across Virginia, West Virginia, Tennessee and Kentucky.

Although the regulation would apply nationwide, mountaintop removal operations are of special interest in Appalachia, where surface mines now outnumber those underground.

An EPA study estimated 400,000 acres of forest were wiped out and nearly 724 miles of streams buried between 1985 and 2001 by mountaintop mining, in which forests are clear cut and holes are drilled to blast apart rock. Massive machines, some with buckets big enough to hold 24 compact cars, scoop coal from the exposed seams.

The rock and dirt left behind is dumped into adjacent valleys, changing the natural shape of the earth, lowering the height of the mountain and covering streams.

The rule, proposed by the federal Office of Surface Mining and expected to take effect next month, would govern how mining companies can encroach into a buffer zone designed to protect streams. The Bush administration finalized the rule Wednesday and it will be published in the Federal Register later this month.

West Virginia attorney Joe Lovett, who has filed several lawsuits over mountaintop removal mining, said the rule essentially handicaps Obama, taking away a tool his administration could use to rein in the practice.

"For the industry, this is a parting gift," Lovett said.

Story continues below

advertisement

But the National Mining Association says environmentalists are misrepresenting the rule as a free pass for Big Coal. It argues operators will have to conduct even more rigorous, time-consuming analyses of their disposal plans before mining begins.

"The rule does not make it easier to conduct mining activities within the stream buffer zone," said NMA spokeswoman Carol Raulston.

Dumping excess rock and soil has always been allowed, she said, as long as operators comply with federal water quality laws.

"Enforcing a law and removing a law are two different things," countered Naoma resident Vernon Haltom, co-director of Coal River Mountain Watch, an environmental group trying to stop a mountaintop mine and preserve the site for a wind farm.

"To me," he said, "it's the difference between having traffic cops that are sleeping on the job and having no speed limit."

Lawmakers and the governors of Kentucky and Tennessee had urged the EPA to block the regulation.

At issue is how to interpret regulatory language that says surface mining operations can't disturb land within 100 feet of a perennial or intermittent stream.

Kentucky Coal Association President Bill Caylor said that if mining operations had to stay back 100 feet from every ephemeral stream _ one that grows when it rains and dries up when it doesn't _ or dry ditch, there would be no place to put leftover rock and dirt.

"The environmentalists are misleading the public into believing that this regulation will allow us to dump waste into rivers and dam up rivers," Caylor said. "I don't know how to respond to that. It's just not true."

But Appalachian Voices, which maintains the ilovemountains.org Web site, estimates 470 mountains have already been destroyed.

EPA's action this week is "absolutely egregious," said Appalachian Voices program director Matt Wasson. "It's just an exclamation point on what we've been seeing for the last eight years.

"It's about making it easier for a few coal companies to engage in mountaintop removal."

Wasson's group launched a campaign Wednesday urging Obama to stop mountaintop mining during his first 100 days. Comments posted through ilovemountains will go directly to the Obama Transition Team Web site.

___

Associated Press writer Brian Farkas in Charleston contributed to this report.

___

On the Web:

Appalachian Voices: http://ilovemountains.org/obama/

National Mining Association: http://www.nma.org/modern/5_ws.asp

West Virginia Coal Association: http://www.wvcoal.com/

Comments

[care4mypeeps]

President elect Barack Obama will do the right thing, he is thoughtful and deliberate in his decision making process. The enviornment is near and dear to his heart.

As long as we join him in his quest to put things back in order, mother earth will recover from the abuse she has suffered thoughout the years.

[research]

Hopefully Obama will fund

wind and solar

to replace coal and nukes,

Agree to a pollution cap and trade system: Greenhouse gases, Radiation, etc...

Bush and the GOP think they are clever.

History does not agree.

[orangepetal]

If think water quality should be a main consideration. I think that town halls with the local folks is the only way to resolve the priorities of the people. I would hope that we can slowly move away from coal by focusing clean energy opportunities in the communities that depend on coal for jobs.
Laws promoting solar panels could cut consumption of these resources. I am all for productivity and industry but the Appalachian mountains are a heritage. I guess I'm a sucker and truely love mountains. I have seen footage of how the companies do put the mountains together again though. I think the local people who live there know best.

[t squared]

CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVES!

[SailFree]

And badger them into doing something extremely stupid.

"I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part. "
--Animal House

And our esteemed legislators are just the guys to do it.

[falcon17]

Tell your representatives to work with Pelosi to use the Congressional Review Act of 1996 to repeal this reg along with a bunch of others Bush & Co managed to get finalized by the deadline.

Congress has only used the Act one time in 12 years but if they'll get off their rear enders and act, they can dump all this toxic crap from Bush.

[SailFree]

One notes the "clean coal" advertisements on TV now LYING about coal being "the main cause of global warming." The evidence is becoming clearer by the day that it is SUN CYCLES which caused the very slight warming of recent centuries and that we are now going into a solar-systemwide cooling phase. Don't throw away your parkas and mittens, kids.

The degree of duplicity and disingenuousness among the global warming fanatics is astounding, and that they can get away with it because journalists, teachers, and the average citizen are pitifully ignorant about data and the scientific process is even more stupefying.

[gracie99]

Even strip mining was an environmental horror, churning the earth so deeply that nothing could grow on the mined land and resulting in huge mudslides, all for a very dirty source of power.

It makes me shudder to think what the current practice of mountaintop removal has done to West Virginia: West Virginia is all mountain and valley and has coal nearly everywhere.

The pro-industry people are trying to make it sound like there is a reasonable way, that is not environmentally destructive, to remove THE ENTIRE TOP OF A MOUNTAIN and throw most of it into the valleys around it as long as they keep it 100 feet from an active stream.

Their arguments about preserving jobs are also dishonest: The main reason for mining via mountaintop removal is that almost all of the labor is done by huge equipment, cranes many stories high, that require very little human labor.

Even under the current rules, vast amounts of forest have been destroyed by mountaintop removal. And communities are becoming uninhabitable. A mountaintop removal project provides a few years of employment for a handful of people in an area, utterly devastates it with property values crashing, then moves on, leaving an uninhabitable wasteland.

As strip mining was, this mountaintop removal is done back away from main roads, where most passing through never see the devastation. The people most affected live in the countryside and in small towns -- isolated, powerless, and largely defenseless.

[SailFree]

This source of power contributed greatly to the industrialization and the progress made in America and the western world in general. One notes that the life expectancy has markedly increased during this period in that part of the world while improving much less so in the impoverished Third World that did not participate so extensively in the industrial revolution.

The degree of disconnection from reality of many of the posts here is astounding.

[bjefrz]

yeah, and much of the country was built on slave labor followed by outrageously unfair labor laws. Does that mean we should have continued those practices? Of course not.

What separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom is our ability to reason. And one of the most reasonable things that we have learned is "don't poop where you eat." And since we now know that environmental damage goes everywhere, we have to be very careful about the damage that we do.

[DuganS1]

"Communities becoming uninhabitable" and "property values crashing". From what I've seen very few people live out in those areas and the reduced property values would affect very few people. It's also important to note that if people who live out there feel "isolated, powerless, and defenseless", they can always move, but for the most part they do not because not only do they like to live out there, their well-being either directly or indirectly is supported by the coal industry.

[SethBLiNK]

If Bush is going to virtually abdicate his Presidency in its last two months, standing by idly while the whole thing falls apart, could he also do no harm?

Is it too much to ask that he not undertake any awful rules or pardons that Obama is going to have to undue in his first months.

Who am I kidding? Of course that's too much to ask.

[SailFree]

Bush has not abdicated his presidency. It is congress which has been obstructing relentlessly any policies proposed by Bush for years now.

One notes that when congress proposed a spending plan and Clinton vetoed it, it was congress that got blamed for bringing the government to a standstill.

When congress refuses to implement any Bush plans, it is Bush who gets blamed!

The degree of mean-spirited vicious venom from the left is self-evident.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/12/they_wont_give_him_credit.html

[starlady7]

Unthinking Troll!! I don't know of anything worth while that Bush has put forth. Quite the contrary...everything he touches is *****!

[Mildmannered]

coal is what Bush should get in his Christmas stocking

[Emerald1943]

I live in western NC and the EPA rules here are very strict. You cannot build or put a septic system on land bordering some streams and rivers. These are good rules and we still have some clean streams and rivers as a result.

The very fact that the government would allow mining companies to dump their slag, polluting or entirely covering streams is an outrage. Contact your representatives and let them know. Otherwise, there will be little left here to enjoy!

We have to speak out to stop this!!!

[Mildmannered]

contact the EPA too as well as environmental organizations

[Greenguy25]

I have had the pleasure, or perhaps I sould say I have had the horrible experience of flying over areas of WV that have been ravaged by mountain top minning practices. This is a very tough situation we have got ourselves in over the last fifty years, we can't seem to curb our need for cheap power or collectively develop new forms on a mass scale, so this sort of environmental destruction will continue without an end in sight.

Look whats happening with oil prices, if you think that there is no connection between us electing a president that will demand increases in renewable energy funding and the arab oil cartel lowering oil prices, then maybe you missed the lesson of the 70's

It was reported today on CNBC that gasoline could drop to near a dollar per gallon sometime in 2009 and I ask you all, what do you think is going to happen to the urgency of renewables if that happens.

History on this subject has already been written and guess what, The Germans and the Japanese took all the technology in wind and solar that we developed in the 70's and now are the world leaders in those catagories. Don't confuse lower oil prices as good will of the arab nations it's simply a game of carrot on a stick.


www.mygreenscene.com

[Mildmannered]

you make sense Mr. Greenguy

[piggybackmom]

I agree that the lower prices in gas are due to the oil companies getting nervous.
America needs to advance, but our life styles need to change quickly for green and new technology to occur.

[chewie2008]

agree

[SailFree]

Strangely, the more that the environmental crazies prevent the exploration and utilization of KNOWN energy sources, the more expensive energy gets! Who would have ever thought that?????

The left wing has received its final divorce papers from reality.

[care4mypeeps]

We need to respect the earth as well as the polluting of our streams and altering our landscape.
The Appalatian people are right to demand protection from President elect Barack Obama to halt the destrution of their mountains and streams.

This is not just their problem it is Ours also. Lets join our voices with theirs and get the job done.

[luvmarketvolatility]

He is reversing himself again?

MAY NOT BE ENOUGH???

http://myrEalitytelevision.com/2008/12/obama-promised-change-the-first-thing-he-changed-was-his-mind/

[ConcernedAboutRFuture]

Isn't the EPA so useless and corrupt? They make me sick....literally!

[t squared]

The EPA became clearly and open about being useless after 911 when Bush demanded they put out news reports claiming the air in NYC was safe. They are about as helpful and true in their pledge to be environmental stewards, as the Army Corps of Engineers.

Bush AND his cronies (CHENEY-seen that devil lately?) seem determined to rape and pillage before they are no longer able to manipulate the system. Spoils of war...

I detest them both like no other beings living or dead.

[Sumocat]

I don't know why Appalachia keeps voting Republican. You're the ones living in and around those mountains. Why do you keep voting for the party that approves of "removing" your mountaintops?

[Bocado]

Religious fanatics aka Bible thumpers.

[DuganS1]

Because there are a large number of jobs on the line, plus the percentage of all Appalachia being mined is very small. The only way you can see most (almost all) the damage is if you fly over it. The issue of cutting trees is also not a good one as the entire area of Virginia from just outside DC all the way through West Virginia and Pennsylvania is very heavily wooded and the number of trees being cut down is very very small, plus trees can be replanted and new ones will grow naturally.

[cyndeewi]

Now the Appalachia wants Obama (Democrat) to help them while they vote Republican. Go ask Bush to help you and leave Obama alone.

[hufSfpoUguyX]

I thought Obama was the president "of the world"? Is he only going to bailout Democrat voters?

[Emerald1943]

Begging your pardon....but my county in western NC went Democratic this time! And so did the state of NC! We are not all hillbillies who vote against their economic interests!!!

[t squared]

NC is an oasis. I do love North Carolinians!

[wadenelson1]

I'm the biggest environmentalist there is. But if Americans insist on continuing their energy-inefficient ways, driving SUV's, failing to conserve, insulate, and save, we have few choices other than to import oil and dig all the coal we can. This may include the loss of West Virginia, at least the beautiful, forested, mountainous West Virginia we once had -- flowing with pristine streams.

Until there are massive Federal subsidies, and tax credits for alternative energy, to where more than half the homes in America have solar hot water or PV panels on the roof, or windmills everywhere, extracting coal is about the only option.

We can demand that coal power plants be cleaned up, (so we can avoid nukes), we can hope and wish for a lot of things, but the consumption of energy always comes with SOME environmental price.

[hufSfpoUguyX]

Why avoid nukes? Do you know how much mining is required to put PV cell on half the nation's homes? Just the cost of those cells, is more than enough to build several dozen nuclear reactors.

[t squared]

The waste of Uranium-238's decay product uranium-234 has a half-life of 246,000 years.

That means a radioactive component containing GAMMA RAYS is going to hang out for approximately 492,000 years.

We, as a nation/world, need to really think about that. The containers we claim can contain these elements will NOT last that long (standard requirements are too basic).

Gamma rays are THE MOST POWERFUL radiation ray of which we presently know.

Essentially it can not be contained, controlled, or manipulated.

Nuclear Energy is another "quick fix" that denies the true harmony that is needed to continue to live on this living planet.