iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Mountaintop Removal Mining Birth Defects: New Study Suggests Controversial Coal Operations Linked To Adverse Health Effects

First Posted: 06/27/2011 4:54 pm Updated: 08/27/2011 5:12 am

Researchers found "significantly higher" rates of birth defects in babies born near mountaintop removal mining sites than those in non-mining areas, according to a new study released last week.

Mountaintop removal mining is a particularly environmentally destructive type of resource extraction that involves using explosives to blow the tops off of mountains to expose coal underneath the soil and rock. The unusable dirt and gravel are then disposed of in adjacent valleys and streams. MTR is used prominently in the Appalachian region of the eastern United States.

The mining study, published in the journal Environmental Research, examined over 1.8 million live birth records from 1996 to 2003 using National Center for Health Statistics data from the central Appalachian states of West Virginia, Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee.

It found that rates for six out of seven types of birth defects -- circulatory/respiratory, central nervous system, musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal, urogenital and "other" -- were increased near MTR sites. The research suggests that contaminants are released into nearby environments from MTR, and that many of the contaminants are known to impair fetal development.

"Rates for any anomaly were approximately 235 per 100,000 live births in the mountaintop mining area versus 144 per 100,000 live births in the non-mining area," the study says. Although not as high as near MTR sites, it also found increased incidences of birth defects in communities near underground mines.

"This is monumental," said Bob Kincaid, the president of Coal River Mountain Watch (CRMW). He told The Huffington Post that this latest research is just one more among a dozen or so earlier studies "that shows that the coal industry, especially mountaintop removal, is engaged in the wholesale poisoning of Appalachia."

"For those who actually pay attention to science, it's irrefutable,” Kincaid said. "Would it be more obvious if the coal industry were using machine guns or gas chambers?"

Another study published in May by researchers from West Virginia University found that residents of communities near MTR mining sites suffered poorer health and a lower quality of life.

While the recent Environmental Research study reveals a spike in birth defects near MTR operations, the data can't be used to conclusively pin any specific environmental factor as the cause, the study's co-author said. "What we think is happening is that there isn't just one type of exposure. There is air quality problems in some areas, water quality problems in other areas," Dr. Michael Hendryx told The Huffington Post.

Furthermore, the study noted various socioeconomic factors could account for a variance in birth defects, but said that they "remain elevated after controlling for those risks." Critics of the research argue that these factors weren't fully accounted for.

A spokesperson for the World Coal Association told The Huffington Post that it hasn't yet "processed the results of this study." Still, WCA claimed, "It is clear that focusing on only one aspect of an issue will inevitably lead to skewed results."

The response from the National Mining Association was similar.

"While the authors say they controlled for [socioeconomic factors], it does not appear, based on their summary, they have done so," said Carol Raulston, the senior vice president of communications for the NMA, in an emailed statement. While she conceded that her organization hasn't had the opportunity to thoroughly review the study, Raulston said that other papers by the same researchers "have had methodological deficiencies" and that this particular study "merits further investigation."

"Our studies have limitations, they do not have 'deficiencies' and the choice of this word illustrates the bias of the mining industry," said Hendryx. He asserts that any study published in any journal has "limitations," but insists they used available data to control for risks -- from education to smoking during pregnancy, among others.

This study is unprecedented, Hendryx added, in the amount of individual records that were looked at: It extends previous research beyond mere county aggregates. He also said it's the first academic paper to truly look at the potential effects MTR could be having on children.

Moving forward, Hendryx hopes to begin doing direct field assessments, such as collecting air and water samples in the communities experiencing high birth defects near MTR sites. Preliminary results could come within a year, but a definitive study would likely take at least several more.

But for some activists, these initial findings are all the evidence they need to escalate their fight against MTR operations.

"If a foreign power was doing this to us, we'd be at war with them," Bob Kincaid said of the mining companies behind the controversial process. The new health findings will be the "the centerpiece" of CRMW's fight against what he calls "the single greatest human rights crisis facing the Unites States today."

Nothing about the research is surprising to Kincaid. In fact, he just considers it validation for what anti-MTR mining activists have been alleging for years.

"We are going forward with a very plain message: They are killing us," he said. "It is scientifically proven now."

But not all activists agree the study is a silver bullet needed to end MTR mining.

"I don't know that having one more piece of scientific evidence that coal is hurting our health is going to tip the balance," said Mary Anne Hitt, director of Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign. "It's kind of like tobacco: We had piles and piles of evidence that it was bad for our health, but took years and years of work to turn around."

Regardless, Hitt said Sierra Club, which recently launched an interactive website about coal pollution's effect on health, plans to draw attention to the latest research.

The practice of MTR mining has recently become a subject of the national dialogue, with opponents' efforts being backed by a variety of notable figures and celebrities. A new film featuring Robert Kennedy Jr., "The Last Mountain," has drawn a lot of attention to the issues surrounding the mining controversy in Appalachia, and more than a thousand people recently descended on Blair Mountain in West Virginia to protest planned MTR operations at the historic site. Earlier in the year, the Environmental Protection Agency revoked a permit for West Virginia's largest MTR mine due to environmental and health concerns.

Despite a renewed sense of purpose among activists, some in the industry remain undaunted.

"It's an injustice to everyone involved and to the science itself to present this data as though its worthy of some conclusion," Vice President of the West Virginia Coal Association Jason Bostic told The Huffington Post. He contends that there is "no connection" between coal mining and birth defects, and brushes off the study as "a fairy tale."

"If anything, the involvement of the coal industry helps offset what would otherwise be worse health defects from poverty, isolation and lack of access to preventative medicine," Bostic said. "We're the ones providing health benefits and wellness plans to our employees and their dependents. Take us away and see how well it goes."

Paige Lavender contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

 
 
  • Comments
  • 439
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
05:55 AM on 07/14/2011
ya know, if the coal industry didnt operate in WV, i dont think the people would have as many health problems, so their claim that they're "helping the people" by paying for doctors is ludicrous because they are partially at fault for why people have a low quality of life, and why they are as sick as they are in the first place.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dragontech
Looking for a good micro-brew
07:43 PM on 06/29/2011
Since Huff Post seems to have missed it, in their rush to talk about lost penguins, Texas drought and VW, there is a more significant story happening for those wanting green happening.
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/06/denmark-say-goodbye-fossil-fuels-2050.php?campaign=th_rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+treehuggersite+%28Treehugger%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

Denmark is swearing off fossil fuels all together. Even the not-so-clean coal we are killing our children do get. Wrecking mountains, birth defects, all unnecessary if we could be bothered to invest in clean energy, renewable energy. While such a "backwards" country as Denmark (Danish welfare system is characterized by economic growth and a high standard of living due to the relatively equal distribution of income.) is pulling the plug on coal, oil and natural gas, the "progressive" USA is deforming it's own kids to dig out more.
08:49 PM on 06/29/2011
That's great news, but I'm skeptical as to our ability to pull of the same feat in the same amount of time here. First of all, Denmark's energy needs are substantially less than those of the United States. Second and more importantly, Denmark has been laying the groundwork for this shift for years. If you google "energy consumption Denmark," one of the first entries is an article from 2006 citing Denmark as a world leader in alternative energies. This points to a cultural difference between our countries. We are a long way from the cultural shift that would enable us to even be taken seriously in proposing an end to fossil fuels. Good for Denmark, but America is not ready to make that commitment.

While keeping up the pressure politically is essential to bringing this shift about, it is also important to focus on what is possible in the immediate future. The top priority right now should be to reduce emissions as much as possible from fossil fuels as we push for the further implementation of alternative energies.

There is a "clean coal" plant about to be built in Texas that has carbon capture technology that stops 90% of carbon emissions from reaching the atmosphere.
http://blogs.forbes.com/jeffmcmahon/2011/06/26/texas-clean-coal-power-plant-finds-a-customer/

This technology is the bridge to the future. For now we are stuck with things like coal, so we should at least make it as clean as possible.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dragontech
Looking for a good micro-brew
08:42 PM on 06/30/2011
America SHOULD be ready to make that commitment, but too many in power get money from preventing it. The PACs funneling money to Congressional campaigns are designed to prevent progress for that would obsolete the old, overgrown companies that produce power in the US currently. We need to commit to change, and coal is NOT a change. Clean coal is a myth, the technology in Texas has been tried before and never reaches the levels of emmission control advertized.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:59 PM on 06/29/2011
Progressive? ROTFLMAO.
The US are consistently a few decades behind the rest of the developed world in health and social issues.
09:52 PM on 06/29/2011
Yes, and that is why we need the EPA to crack down on emissions standards. The coal companies themselves by and large won't modernize on their own unless they absolutely have to.

The technology is there to burn coal at much greater levels of safety (far from perfect, but better than what we had before). We are fossil fuel dependent for the foreseeable future. We should therefore be pushing for clean coal technology and better emissions standards to hurry along its wider implementation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dragontech
Looking for a good micro-brew
08:40 PM on 06/30/2011
Hence the quotes around progressive, the sarcasm was intended to be DEEP. The US is so far behind the rest of the world technologically, and our government wants to cut education which will only make that worse.
photo
VeryGrood
only class worse than micro-bio was molecular-bio
02:53 PM on 06/29/2011
That representative from the WVCA (Jason Bostic) is a model republican- decry science and tell people that the poison is actually good for them.

"See, without the money from big coal (that primarily goes into the bank accounts of company executives), you wouldn't be able to pay for the medical treatment required when your child is born with a birth defect. We're actually helping you!"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JoePesci
Needs Sarcasm Font
02:20 PM on 06/29/2011
while I do not doubt the dangers, this is a very flawed study. The areas they mention are those where people have less access to health care and pre-natal care, Most consume well water in those areas, lower than average first pregnancy age, Higher than average multiple/ serial pregnancy and a higher percentage of women past their prime still reproducing. I Hate pollution, strip mining, Fracking, off-shore drilling, etc.. but let's not use skewed/false facts to defend our position. If I wanted to do that, I'd Be Republican.
photo
VeryGrood
only class worse than micro-bio was molecular-bio
02:56 PM on 06/29/2011
Those are all valid points... and subset analyses are required for a more accurate picture...

But the reaction from the West Virginia Coal Association is despicable.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dragontech
Looking for a good micro-brew
07:47 PM on 06/29/2011
OK add this to the consideration. The people where the mining is being done have less access to healthcare, so that would mean the people working there are not getting health care from the mine that employs them. They mostly consume ell water, this implies the mine is destroying the ground water. Lowe than average first pregnancy age, higher percentage past their prime still reproducing, hallmarks of poor education, so the miners families are not getting educated. This all goes to tie the birth defects right back to the mine either through ground water contamination, air pollution or not taking care of their workers.
04:15 AM on 06/29/2011
Mining companies are adopting techniques that promote the Blue Economy Model...so that waste is not wasted and resources contribute as much as their capacity...unless we reduce our energy demands how we expect mining companies to stop mining?
06:01 AM on 06/29/2011
Solar power is already cheaper for the consumer. Companies and residences who can afford the up front cost to install solar panels SAVE money. It's like buying an annuity. Some companies lease them for less than your electricity bill. Coal is just a better profit producer for corporations.

I live next to the Fisk coal plant in Chicago. The power it produces isn't needed. It's stored and sold to out of state grids. The plant isn't compliant with the clean air act. It was grandfathered in and was supposed to upgrade but it never did. The people in the neighborhood suffer asthma and heart disease at an incredibly disproportionate rate due to the pollution. I have a constant cough and I can't even open my windows without soot collecting on the window sill. I feel like I live in a third world country. The ONLY reason the plant stays open is lack of political will. Local politicians (on the take from the plant) claim the EPA has the sole authority to close it. Not true. Chicago has home rule authority to protect public health which the courts would uphold. The EPA is anemic and thus the plant remains open.

So as you can see Coal is neither environmentally friendly nor are we forced to depend on it. Please do not post such garbage.
02:34 PM on 06/29/2011
Long term, we are certainly not dependent on coal, and thank God for that. However, the cultural change required for solar to make up the huge margin in consumption (19.8 QUADS coal vs. .11 QUADS solar) will continue to be slow in coming. About half the country will refuse to go solar precisely because their refusal pisses us off. In the meantime, as long as we remain largely dependent on fossil fuels, the least we can do is employ so-called clean coal technology to minimze the damage done to us.

As far as the Fisk plant, the power it produces isn't needed in Chicago, but is needed elsewhere, as they are able to sell the power to out of state grids. If the government doesn't have the will to shut down the plant or force it to follow Clean Air guidelines, perhaps a class action lawsuit could force the issue (providing you can prove causation)? There has to be a way to encourage cleaner coal implementation.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lenguss
02:01 AM on 06/29/2011
This isn't research, it is propaganda. Real research is peer reviewed, published in a recognized journal, by authors with real degrees from recognized universities, and certainly not in propaganda media. "Studies" like this are sheer fabrications, sort of like the 'global warming studies' where all contrary information was suppressed and UN employees outright lied.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JoePesci
Needs Sarcasm Font
02:26 PM on 06/29/2011
I am certain we do not agree on anything.. but this. Hiding behind flawed/skewed or just plain False data does nothing positive to the cause. Hyperbole and out-right misleading statements do nothing more than hurt the cause of logical debate. There is enough real data about it's effects without making up baseless data to scare the under-informed.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
OneTop
Uh, is that a beer hall?
12:40 AM on 06/29/2011
""If anything, the involvement of the coal industry helps offset what would otherwise be worse health defects from poverty, isolation and lack of access to preventative medicine," Bostic said. "We're the ones providing health benefits and wellness plans to our employees and their dependents. Take us away and see how well it goes.""

How magnanimous of them.

I wonder if they are associated with Doctors without borders?
11:58 PM on 06/28/2011
When the coal companies leave, THEN you have poverty in that area. As long as there are coal mines in the area, for the unskilled general labor of a miner, they get paid well. Here is a report I found from the Univ. of KY about their Coal Mines..... I think you will find it interesting.
http://cber.uky.edu/Downloads/Roenker02.htm
I wonder if miners get "Hazard Pay"?
photo
TCPITS
One big global union of all the workers
12:35 PM on 06/29/2011
Thanks for the link. Very informative. And you are correct once the coal and the mountains are gone Appalachia will be so poor as to be basically uninhabitable. This is the way with all extractive industries -- boom and bust. The first boom for the Appalachian mountains was actually timber that was used in a housing boom in the Northeast. Today there are only a few hundred acres of primal forest left in the region. As Joni Mitchell sang, "they put 'em in a tree museum and charge all the people a dollar and a half just to see 'em."
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:01 PM on 06/29/2011
The miners' grandchildren are the ones who will have all the fun with a destroyed environment and no coal left.
11:56 PM on 06/28/2011
The government says it's ok. We can trust them.
11:33 PM on 06/28/2011
Believe it or not, these researchers are not "environmentalist wackos" with an agenda any other than improving the health of a population basically raped by Big Coal. I'm a little disgusted to read these comments and anyone who calls themselves progressive or liberal should be, too. "excess of funny looking kids," " now I know why they talk funny"? Really?! Are we not all American? Poor people need a voice, too, and these researchers are attempting to provide this impoverished community a chance to be heard. Yeah, we need money, how about giving this community, or the entire state of WV for that matter, their coal profits... God knows they don't see a dime.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kamact
Market Observer
08:55 PM on 06/28/2011
Okay,...just as long our companies made a solid profit,...not
06:12 PM on 06/28/2011
Hum..Now i know why they talk funny...and vote Republican.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
06:54 PM on 06/28/2011
Spotting an excess of funny-looking kids in WV is going to take some fancy pageant countin'
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kamact
Market Observer
08:56 PM on 06/28/2011
Logic?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whitechicuva
06:06 PM on 06/28/2011
ok Huff. Post the comments already!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alteredstory
Hold on to the center
10:53 PM on 06/28/2011
I don't mind the whole moderator thing, but it IS annoying to not have a comment show up for hours at a time.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Edward Goodwin
Hey! I'm walk'n here!
06:03 PM on 06/28/2011
Too bad. China needs the coal and Wall Street needs the profits. There's plenty more babies where those came from. Didn't you get the word? We're broke! No more taxes! No more freeloading babies! No more danged eco-terrorist regulations from the job-killing EPA!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JoePesci
Needs Sarcasm Font
02:31 PM on 06/29/2011
just great logic there.. The Earth is our Mother.. would you Pimp your mother to the Chinese for a quick buck??
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Neil Pharr
06:02 PM on 06/28/2011
well it could be