Removed from Mountaintop Removal
In the last days of the Bush Administration I wrote of one of the frustrating deregulatory actions taken by the Bush EPA involving the mining companies that use the controversial mountaintop removal method to get to that sweet sweet anthracite. In short, the EPA revoked a rule requiring those mines to leave a buffer on either side of streams when dumping tailings. As if mountaintop removal mining wasn’t harmful enough from an environmental perspective, the removal of this restriction is enormously harmful to those who live in Appalachia, as it’s essential dumping heavy metal rich mining runoff in their drinking water. Even ignoring the environmental aspect, it’s a public health disaster.
At the very least, this restriction was reinstated in the early days of the Obama Administration, with a promise that it will be enforced more vigorously that his predecessor. That’s the least we can expect, and a wholesale re-evaluation of the entire practice of mountaintop removal mining should follow but if reports are accurate we’ll be waiting a bit longer for that. From a Robert Kennedy Jr column in a recent Washington Post…
Instead of acting to enforce these laws, administration officials indicated last month that they will allow more than 100 permits to go forward while they carefully review their regulatory options.
I realize Obama is a shrewd politician, but this is not a policy that requires a great deal of political wheeling and dealing. Mountaintop removal mining is a problem for more than just the environmental mess it leaves behind. Coal companies have been switching to this practice as opposed to traditional mines because they get the coal out of the hill faster and use less, and often non-union, labor. For states like Kentucky and West Virginia, where union coal miners are a big part of the work force, this means high unemployment. For all his talk about creating jobs, Obama’s non action on mountaintop mining is taking jobs away.
100 permits going forward. This is more than just a non-action, it’s actively working against what should be a cut and dried environmental, public health and labor issue. It’s clear that it goes part and parcel with the Administration’s obsession with climate change at the expense of biodiversity and the selling of the misleading “clean coal” as a legitimate means to reduce our nation’s carbon footprint. This is clearly a move that Obama hopes will ultimately be justified, but the scarred landscapes of Appalachia won’t be easily forgotten, and the ends just don’t justify these means.
I should say, however, that I’m in no way against taking on these issues nationally even if I think the methods employed by the Administration, namely “clean coal” and cap and trade, are poor ways of affecting much of anything. Moreso, if they’re used as an excuse to ignore the blight of mountaintop removal mining, it’s actively working against the ideals the Obama Administration claims to represent.
Comments are closed.
Good post! I really don't understand the forces that are moving Obama to allow this abuse of the land. Is it a low priority item, one he is not fully versed upon, or has someone convinced him that clean coal exists, like Midland Archer Daniels convinced him that ethanol is a viable form of renewable energy? It seems inconsistent with his public policy, at best, and deceptive, at worst. I just don't get it from a consistent Obama viewpoint, especially since it takes jobs away from this poverty stricken area at a time of economic crisis. Thanks for the information. The words of John Prine's Paradise come to mind…..
It's of a piece with using sensitive public lands for big solar arrays. After six months of seeing the Obama administration in action, I get the sense that his appointments are not that interested in preserving biodiversity if it comes at the expense of major energy interests.
I suppose we shouldn't have been completely surprised. The "environmental" platforms of the all of the candidates were long on climate talk and short on diversity and conservation talk. It's simply not an issue on Obama's agenda, and I can accept that to some extent.
However, the lack of action, the wishy-washyness, on MRM is nothing short of a tragedy. There's simply no good reason to allow it to go on short of an olive branch to coal state politicians and energy conglomerates, which may be a fine idea from a political point of view but is completely worthless by any other objective measure.
It goes to the idea that Obama, and democrats in general, are bowing down to the idol of "bipartisanship" and "consensus" when what really needs to be done is a pragmatic assessment of the situation and a solution that works, rather than a stop gap that is doomed to failure.
And that last paragraph hardly applies only to environmental issues these days.