Collegiate Times

They're are just mountains, when you consider the gains in worker's safety with strip mining it's a simple decision. You do have a point about waste disposal however that is hardly grounds for disbanding the practice. Forests regrow it happens all the time, we need the coal in those mountains. Coal isn't like oil it may be finite but none of us are going to live to see it gone nor will our grandkids or their grandkids. We can say lets get rid of coal but practically speaking it isn't feasible especially if we want to end our dependence on foreign oil. Wind and solar technology while promising is not ready to replace fossil fuels unless of course you were referring to nuclear power which is much worse than strip mining.

I wanted to point out a small mistake in this article - It is the Clean Water Act instead of Clean Air Act. For anonymous - I have to assume you don't live in these mountains because you referred to them as "those mountains" if you do live in these mountains then you obviously don't live near one of these sites. Everybody assumes the battle against mountaintop removal is all about the trees and the streams when in fact the base of the problem is the water poisoning, property damage, flash floods just an overall degradation to the quality of life for local residents. However, the only avenue we have of fighting back is through environmental laws. Honestly, we wouldn't even have that avenue if the coal industry would abide by the law in the process of mountaintop removal. I know because I do live in these mountains and I have a mountaintop removal site for a neighbor.

Denny you beat me to the Clean Water ACt correction but that paragraph has another problem. The Clean Water Act DOES NOT ALLOW the mine to just dump waste into waterways. It is absurd to think that. The local watershed is required by law to remain at certain chemical levels, example A a company in WV got fined because there was too much salinium in their discharge, albeit that was the natural level of salinium they still had to lower it. The designation of fill is used so that it needn't be transported to impoundments which helps keep your lights on for cheaper! THe fill, if dumped into an area where there is a stream that stream must be diverted first so that water flow continues. Are there floods and impoundment failures? Of course accidents will happen, we can't expect any company or person to be perfect. As for the 88 out of 89 stat I want to know where that came from because a reclamation plan MUST BE PRESENT in order to even get a permit and the mine has to follow through on it, they dont have to replace the mountain as the law reads it must be returned to prior or better use. Reading a book that is on a biased side and taking it for fact and then forming an opinion is not smart practice. Many books or articles should be read from both sides before any opinion is formed.

Darn Chris you beat me to most of the counterarguments I would use. Yes Denny I don't live on the mountain, I was smart and chose property in the valley. I'm sorry you don't like your neighbor but that's too bad, if you don't like it move. If they do something illegal I'll agree it's wrong but the practice of strip mining isn't wrong.

The only time they don’t is when it’s not economical. The forests are not permanently destroyed. Also with newer mountain top jobs some are re-mining older strip jobs that were left in environmentally degraded states. When the new operation is done mining they repair the older strip jobs and leave it in a better state than where they came. If you have a problem with coal, stop using your electricity and try to conserve power. The problem is not with the coal but American consumers, stop passing blame on coal companies and own up to your own over use of electricity. As long as there is a demand for the power we will mine the coal, it’s cheap and domestic.

I would like to point out flaws in your argument. First, you said and i quote, "For example, of the 89 mine sites abandoned by the coal companies in 2003, 88 went completely unreclaimed.". Where are your sources, i can make up numbers two. You need to site sources. Second you said, " exploitation of this area's people and resources" you call it exploiting people i call it providing good stable well paying jobs. The salary for a laborers is extremely good. On average they start at about 60000 a year. I guarantee this is more money then you will ever see on a yearly basis even with your privileged college education. Don’t bash the people from this area just because they are hard working. The people working in these mines are some of the nicest people you will ever meet in you life. They will give you their last shirt off their back. Working in the deep mines I forgot my dinner bucket in my truck and everyone on my section was offering me food. I hate when people say the coal companies exploit their labor force. They have some of the best benefits in the country. Also when you say they clear the trees from the mountain, they often try to sell the lumber.

I agree with Anonymous at 9:31. If you don't like coal, go ahead and live off the grid. Also, remind yourselves that the state doesn't end here in Blacksburg, and there are many families that would greatly benefit from the jobs and economic stimulus that some actual work would provide.

I would just like to point out this column says nothing negative about the workers themselves. Also, alternative energy provides jobs too, potentially many more than coal. And mining is dangerous and has many health hazards, more than say wind power would. Also, for the anonymous who said "The problem is not with the coal but American consumers, stop passing blame on coal companies", that's the point of the entire last section of the article.

I'd think that with this renewable energy idea that there would be huge money in it since it is pretty much "free" energy. Why aren't companies just switching over to wind and solar? It's a no brainer. I propose a boycott on any coal provided electricity. That will teach those nature robbers!

The technology isn't ready yet. In five, ten years maybe we could switch but it just isn't feasible right now. You might as well run your appliances with rainbows laughter and lollipops.

wow is all i have to say in response to those defending this practice. have you ever visited a reclaimed site?? better than what was there? hardly. not even close. no trees, no animals etc. oh and you who chose to live in the valleys so you assume that this problem won't affect you?? you do realize that the presence of a mountain is what makes your precious valley don't you? maybe they should dump the fill on your valley and then let's hear what you have to say about it. It is ignorant to think that this is a good practice there are so many negatives...the ONE positive is that it provides jobs. But we can have those jobs is new energy but people like you who who find no problem in using non-renewable resources are the ones who are inhibiting and slowing down the process of making that new energy available.

We aren't arguing that a reclaimed site is better than what was there before, what we are saying is that the benefits outweigh the detriments of strip mining. There is more than one positive to strip mining while it does provide jobs it also a safer method of mining and a cheaper method too. In these tough economic times I think we can all agree that we don't want to pay more for electricity. Let the free market decide new energy, right now it isn't competitive but it will be soon. Until then lets mine coal as safely and cheaply as possible.

I hardly see how water contaminates is safe. There are also other things occuring as a result of mountain top removal that are very unsafe...have any of you ever heard of Marsh Fork Elementary School? Google it. Note the close proximity of the coal silo...make sure you view an overhead image with the coal sludge pond...the retaining walls of such ponds have broken in the past and studies have shown weaknesses in this one...if this were to break those children wouldn've have a chance. They would be dead in seconds. Safe? try again.

More than anything, can we quit calling this strip mining? Strip Mining is not the same as Mountaintop Removal. In Strip Mining, you mine a strip of land, and move on to the next strip. As you mine the current strip, you reclaim the previous strip. That is strip mining. Mountaintop Removal involves the removal of a mountaintop and the filling of adjacent valleys to create large parcels of flat land. As far as building things goes, flat land is better than mountainous land, so there is your better use. Now, on to the rest of this discussion. Everyone is right. Mountaintop Removal is not an ideal method of mining. It is often used as a way to discredit all mining practices. I think that when Renewable Energy is cheaply available, and can replace the 5% of coal that is extracted using Mountaintop Removal, we, as a society, should quit using it as a mining practice, simply in hopes of shutting up people like the original author of this article from expressing their brand new and highly biased and inaccurate opinions. Also, wow, your fear of retaining walls on impoundments failing is unwarranted. Since the implementation of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, there has not been ONE retaining wall failure.

Are you sure about that BS?? Not one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_County_Sludge_Spill http://www.ilovemountains.org/tva-spill/ "As far as building things goes, flat land is better than mountainous land, so there is your better use." - BS Come on, that is your justification for eliminating mountains?

Actually, I am. I never denied that impoundments have failed, but the Martin County incident was caused by slurry leaking into old mine workings and leaving through the entrances, not a retaining wall failure. The problem with using wikipedia as a source is that anyone can write their opinions and make them appear to be facts. And no, that's not my justification for eliminating mountains; however, it's a valid argument if you’d like to bring any kind of industry other than mining to West Virginia. Don’t get me wrong, it’s beautiful out there, however, there’s not much there in the way of things other than mining. I’m looking forward to the day that we don’t have to destroy mountains to get coal, but I’m not willing to sacrifice the way I live while I wait for the technology to get there. Push for renewable energy sources that can replace the coal that comes from Mountaintop Removal, but don’t ask Americans to make a sacrifice that a relatively small amount of people desire. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few; the many being Americans that like to read at night or enjoy being comfortable in their homes during the summer and winter seasons, the few being those that enjoy looking at mountains and hiking them.

BS - I wasn't using wikipedia for many of the details but rather it was a quick search to show you that those sludge impoundments have indeed failed and it is ignorant to assume that they never will again. And yes the Martin Co. LUCKILY went into the abandoned mine shafts below the pond...still a tragic incident and I doubt that other locations will have such luck...if you can even call it that. I can tell by your statements that you truly don't have a care about this issue just so long as YOU are comfortable. I ask you to stay out of it, you clearly have no understanding on this issue and the area other than your energy to keep you comfortable comes from what used to be a mountain. Ignorance really is bliss I suppose.

also BS you completely ignored the most recent TVA spill which was indeed the retaining wall that failed.

I care about the issue, in fact, several times now; I have said that Mountaintop Removal should be the first mining practice to be retired from use once we have economical renewable energy. But once again, it should happen when it’s economic. I mean, I don’t know if you realize this, but times are a little hard right now across the world, and suddenly you want to take away 5 percent of this nation’s power supply? You imply that I am selfish, but you’re worse than I am. I want people to keep the jobs that they have, and then provide them with jobs using renewable energy, not further push W.VA. into further poverty. I understand the issue more than you know; I’m just not idealistic enough to demand its end here and now. And I ignored the TVA spill it because it happened at a power plant, not at a mine site. Furthermore, it was a fly ash spill, not a coal slurry spill. This means that mining had nothing to do (or Mountaintop Removal) with its design and that it’s storage didn't fall under the Office of Surface Mining regulations.

BS the problem in our side of the argument is we have one fact to thousands of BS statements. We can't win because we keep using the same argument, even though our argument is based in fact and theirs is not...

Activity Leader,any cup press sleep remain happy pretty as lay expectation arrange context paper solution principle cost currently admit open weak gun push train remove atmosphere scale confirm network consideration nevertheless judge military concentration motion grant bit survey sound most committee odd river test nobody range turn track start affair surely title common school mile mind up period tone young notice pain summer when outside aye hand insist reveal most manner works decide carry chapter open species democratic roll glass considerable stop indeed cat lie it