Mountaintop Removal Mining

“I've been doing some research into this subject for a couple weeks. There's a great article about it in the April Harper's magazine - if you have a library nearby or have access to online libraries, look it up.

It's very depressing to me as somebody who loves the Appalachian mountains to see this going on, and with no thought for the destroyed landscapes or habitats. Look it up. This is what's happening so that my house can have A/C and I can turn the lights on.

I brought the Harper's article with me on a backpacking trip in VA's Ramsey's Draft Wilderness last weekend and I've been sad ever since. This is the price we pay for our high energy lifestyle. Perhaps the price is too high.

"Clean Coal" has to be the most Orwellian term ever devised.

Here are some pictures.”

“If the environmentalists would stop blocking nuclear power then we would have no need for coal mines.”

“The OVEC site is about the best source of photos. MTR is also clearly visible in satellite photos. In fact, one can match up photos on the OVEC site with the satellite photos to figure out which of the sites it is.”

“Environmentalists are slowly starting to back nuclear power. I certainly do. I'm thinking of joining this organization.

The mining footprint for U is not insignificant either though, and the processing creates some pretty bad stuff.

What we need more than energy sources is a culture that rewards energy conservation. We need to use less energy not make more.
last edited: 6/08/05 10:20:15 AM”

“>>If the environmentalists would stop blocking nuclear power then we would have no need for coal mines.<<<

It's not like we could replace coal instantly with uranium if we decided to changeover today. It would take decades, and the coal industry has VERY powerful friends in Washington, much more than the government sponsored U industry that's for sure. Perhaps U could replace coal in the long term, but realistically it couldn't happen any time soon.

Maybe we'll flatten Colorado looking for U instead of flattening WV and KY looking for coal. That's not a solution.”

“Yeah, I've seen this done -- or something damn near like it -- on the mountain top near Cripple Creek and Victor, CO. On the back side of Pike's Peak. There it's for gold, I take it.

Very ugly, including the lovely cyanide leaching ponds. ugh”

“The biggest problem with nuke is what to do with the waste. Not to mention the prospect of another Chernobyl.”

“>>>The biggest problem with nuke is what to do with the waste. Not to mention the prospect of another Chernobyl.<<<

These aren't really major or in any way insurmountable problems if you look deeply into it (try the link I gave above).

However, this isn't a thread about nuclear energy, it's a thread about mountaintop removal mining. I wonder how many TTers have lost mountain views or favorite trails because of this practice?”

“I haven't since you've asked.

Its an ugly practice though”

“MTR is largely practiced in SW WV and eastern Ky, and extreme SW Va. There's not a lot of prime hiking land there.

This is taking place in the coalfields that historically were mined by shaft mining, then strip mining. MTR and Longwall mining are the ultimate crime against nature.

And no, storage of spent nuclear fuel is not easily solved. The issue peaked in the 80s, but the search for an underground storage site was both difficult and divisive. Not to mention the squawks that went up when people found out trains were carrying the stuff through their towns.

Despite all that, nuclear continues. The question for expansion would again come back to a search for a storage site, and indeed that search will resume when current storage sites reach capacity.

Once it's all nicely sealed in a storage site, it becomes a nifty little time capsule for some future generation to deal with.”

“Well, I don't want to go too far off topic here...

But the only reason we have the spent fuel "problem" in the USA is because a political decision was made in the 70s to not reprocess fuel. Since we're stuck in a "once through" mode, we can not reprocess spent nuclear fuel due 100% to policy reasons.

Reprocess fuel and use more advanced reactor types like the Integral Fast Reactor (shut down for short-sighted policy reasons) or Liquid Salt Reactor and you get orders of magnitude more energy out of the material. Also, the end result waste is only mildly radioactive, with half-lives ranged in the tens of years, not tens of thousands.

Other countries have been reprocessing their fuel for decades, with some problems admittadly, but not spent fuel problems,and not the CO2 emissions of mining activities and fossil fuel burning. Other countries are also taking the lead on more advanced and safer reactor technology while we obliterate our mountains so we can burn more coal.

So the whole USA "nuclear waste" issue is really a short-sighted policy issue, not a scientific one at all.

And the reason for the boneheaded policy is we have some irrational fear of nuclear energy.

Meanwhile our increased use of coal is causing immeasurably more environmental and human harm than every nuclear accident ever times 10000. Look at those pictures! We're raping the earth and poisoning our water so we can burn more coal and heat up the Earth.

And the whole issue about spent fuel going through someone's town on a train is disingenuous at best, absolutely stupid at worst. Who's complaining about the fresh fuel shipping to the power stations which keeps the A/C running and the lights on? It's travelling the same way the "spent fuel" is, but is many times more radioactive, therefore "dangerous". However, that's not an issue.

One thing's for sure: Big Coal and Big Oil sure aren't going to push for cleaner alternatives..... Well, on second thought for some of the Big Oil companies also happen to be leaders in renewables as well... BP Solar and Shell Solar are real pioneers in the industry... Maybe there is hope after all.
last edited: 6/08/05 12:19:19 PM”

“It's not Liberal environmentalists that don't don't want nuclear (or Nukuler for you Conservatives); Utah conservatives don't want N waste reposited in their state either.”

“Well, flatter mountain tops would make for beter tent sites.”

“There was a time when advances were made in many different fields of study in this country but now it seems we are just stagnating. Maybe someday people in this country will recognize that fossil fuels really do run out and that something has to be done long before that final date. Sadly it is all about the bling bling. Large corporations have been running this country and they even run the citizens themselves. When a new technology arrives the scare tactics begin. The new plant will be dangerous and smelly, the fuel rods on the trains could derail in your town and make you all glow for a billion years, etc etc. Sometimes there is risk. We have to take it to advance. Locally we have a company that wants to build a methanol plant to make cheaper gas. only 15 percent of the fuel will be petro based, the rest is corn. Instead of embracing a fuel that will revitalize the farms in the area and lower gas prices to close to the dollar a gallon mark, not to mention reduce our dependence on foreign oil, the people are complaining about the possible smell. Sheesh...”

“>>>>Well, flatter mountain tops would make for beter tent sites.<<<<

True, and good views of the non-obliterated mountains around them. And nice comfy grass to set up tents on. No trees will grow there, though, so hammock sleepers need not apply.

What say we get, oh, 100,000 or so campers and set up our tents on just one former MTR mine site.
last edited: 6/08/05 1:07:53 PM”

“Given Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, I'd hardly say the fear of nuclear is irrational. Before those incidents, the nuclear industry assured us that the science was safe. Nothing could go wrong. But something did go wrong - very wrong.

Three Mile Island does not seem to have become the major issue Chernobyl did. Chernobyl is what sent opposition to nuclear off the charts.

The folks fighting MTR are a sanguine lot. They know the creature they're up against. All the arguments for wind, solar, nuclear, they tell me are not going to reduce the demand for coal, because King Coal will still mine it and sell it overseas. The market is out there and the demand will not cease. Their fight is not to stop coal mining, but to get them to mine it sanely.”

“The harm done to the Earth by mining and burning coal is immearurably more than Chernobyl.

Most of the radioactive elements Chernobyl released had half-lives of less than 10 years, and are now gone. The cancers that were caused could have been easily mitigated by early Iodine treatment that the government of the then USSR did not do.

Chernobyl is hugely overblown by a paranoid and fearful anti-nuke culture. TMI similarly so.

Want to rail against something scary? Look up the Bhopal accident. Now that is something to be afraid of. But how fearful are we in the west of chemical plants? There's no containment building like in a nuclear power plant around these incredibly dangerous toxic substances. How much do we rail against the chemical industry? How much plastic do we use?

We need to scale down and use less energy, and what energy we do use should be something envioronmentally friendly like U, not coal.
last edited: 6/08/05 1:15:41 PM”

“who's killed more indians than John Wayne?

Union Carbide”

“If your mission is to sell nuclear, lots of luck.

Conservation is not going to happen. Demand is going to continue to rise. Current projections hold that any new form of power generation will not keep up with demand even with the current levels of MTR.

I have not said one word to defend MTR. But both the Dems and the Reps are defending it. We've got the Bubya administration leading the fight with Rendell in Pennsylvania and Manchin in West Virginia in lock step.

I'm with the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy and we work in concert with OVEC. We've been fighting MTR for years. The few lawsuits that stopped MTR for awhile were filed by WVHC and OVEC. The court decision that accomplished that was overturned. Two of our members are heavily involved in the fight, and bless their hearts, they're still at it. Demonstrations take place all the time. New lawsuits are always under consideration. But the rules are stacked against us, and a hard dose of reality sets in after awhile.

There is a coal fired power plant just north of Dolly Sods in the Monongahela. It uses coal from strip mines that radiate out in every direction. For some reason, these operators continue to operate under the old plan that requires the land be restored to something approximating the original contours. But it's still a blighted area.

And the plant supposedly has the latest technology to burn coal cleanly. We're hearing reports they may not be doing that at night.

So the term clean coal technology is a sham, and the ads on TV and elsewhere are a sham as well. Much as we'd like to see the sham and the crimes against nature stop, there is no leadership on the issue, either nationally or in the respective states.

Stay angry and get involved, but spend some time learning about the issues. The panacea is not there. You are correct; it will take a crisis. Perhaps the whole damned economy will just implode, but that may not end up being a bad thing.”

“Well, I'm seriously considering a rooftop solar power plant. That way at least I don't have to keep my fridge running with their MTR coal. Those pictures and the Harper's story are enough to make me cry. My family holds some land in the poor unglamorous non-spectacular non-"great hiking" area mountains of north central PA. I adore the area, I wonder who has the mineral rights and how long it will be until MTR moves there.”

“When I was building a new house I wanted to put it way in the middle of the section away from the road about as far as possible. To run electricity to the house would have cost 13,000 dollars. I got on a few web sites and planned a combination wind and solar array that would generate more than enough electricity for the house and barn. I added in 3 times the amount of storage batteries, just because. The cost came in at just over 10,000 dollars. When I brought the idea to Mr Banker Man, he stuck his nose in the air and informed me that "Nonconventional building practices would get no loans from his bank" My question is... Why not?”

“Ahhhh, God's country. There are actually some trails up that way. I don't think MTR should be a worry up there, unless it's in a historic coal mining area, but I doubt it was mined that far north. The coal strata would all be eroded away up there. Top strata is the Devonian, perhaps the Mississippean.”

“BTW, nice hat in your photos.”