Mountaintop Removal Mining
From Envirowiki
Mountaintop Removal Mining (MTR) is a method of intensive coal and mineral extraction that uses heavy machinery to remove strata of rock in order to get at the desired product. It is an ostensibly economically efficient while also environmentally devastating process. MTR is, according to historian John Williams in "West Virginia: a History", "the swiftest and cheapest way to expand coal production..." [MTR] is the most costly method of producing coal, however, if social and environmental factors are calculated.
The process of MTR is as follows. First, the land to be mined must be completely clear-cut of all vegetation. The trees and shrubs removed by this process are either used for timber, or dumped as waste into the surrounding valleys. Secondly, the topsoil is excavated and left for future use in reclamation (see: mine rehabilitation. Thirdly, high-powered explosives are used to remove the rock on top of seams of coal. The rock and debris and pushed into the surrounding valleys by extraordinarily large pieces of equipment. This piling of rubble in the valleys is often termed valley fill. Finally, the desired seam of coal is extracted, and the process is repeated in order to reach the next lower seam of coal. The mining process is repeated to remove all the seams of coal from the mountain, with the result being the leveling of what once were mountains.
The creation of valley fill has many negative effects including the damming of thousands of miles of streams and the effective destruction of entire ecosystems. After all the debris has been pushed into the valleys, the soil that was initially set aside is used to semi-level the mined area. Once the soil is spread out, the area is seeded, and said to be “reclaimed” in accordance with the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SCMRA).
Contents |
[edit] 1 Controversy of MTR
[edit] 1.1 for
The process of Mountaintop Removal mining has proponents (mainly big business and corporate types as well as numerous coal miners) and has opponents that include the local populations and the coal miners that have lost their jobs due to the technological efficiency associated with the process. The proponents cite the economic efficiencies and profits that are gained by the huge amounts of coal able to be extracted through the process. They cite the notion that the large profits gained by the coal companies will “trickle down” and help the economies of local cities and towns. They also continually argue that if the process of MTR is restricted people and whole cities will lose their livelihoods, and overall state economies will suffer (the classic jobs versus the environment false bifurcation).
[edit] 1.2 against
Opponents of MTR cite its starkly adverse negative externalities that fail to be internalized into the coal companies’ revenue-cost models. Not only does MTR destroy entire mountains and mountain ranges (destruction that can never be restored or truly “reclaimed”), but it also causes “iron-laden sulfuric acid mine drainage pollution... which produces red-orange stained stream beds and renders watercourses ecologically sterile” (Nyden). The destruction and upheaval of the land lifts heavy metals from deep within the mountains and strews them across the resultant landscape, raising toxicity to high levels. In addition, when the strata of rock are shattered, the water tables are in turn decimated. What this translates into is a landscape that will be unable to harbor large plant species for many millennia. Opponents cite these, and other concerns as reasons implicating MTR as a process of total environmental destruction.
In addition to the environmental effects, opponents highlight the negative social costs of MTR. While proponents of the process cite the maintaining and creation of jobs as a major benefit of MTR, opponents highlight the fact that overall mine employment has severely dropped since the technologies that allow for MTR were developed. Many people living in the hollows of West Virginia were effectively coerced into selling their land to the large coal mining companies, and those who initially chose not to sell were convinced by having the areas around their land decimated by explosives. When ammonium nitrate and other high-powered explosives are fired for 8-12 hours per day, it is clear how individuals would quickly give up their will to stay on the land.
Also cited by opponents of MTR is the undue influence that the big coal companies (King Coal as they have been termed) have in local and state politics. The power asserted by these companies effectively disenfranchises large numbers of voters who have only a fraction of the combined lobbying power of the large corporations. Many cite this fact as an example of the blatant social injustices caused by MTR and the coal companies in general.
[edit] 2 Almost Level, West Virginia
“Because of cheap western coal, mountaintop removal suddenly boomed in central Appalachia in the 1990’s. Trucks and power shovels have grown to gargantuan sizes, and draglines swing shovels holding up to 100 cubic yards of rock. Mountaintop mines that reduce ridges and peaks by hundreds of feet now sprawl across more than 2,000 acres. An estimated 400 square miles of southern West Virginia mountains and ridges have been leveled and 1,000 miles of streams buried beneath debris blasted, shoved, and dumped into narrow valleys” (Nyden)
Should MTR be allowed to continue? The evidence against it is strong, and the benefits are mainly superficial. When one does a full cost-benefit analysis on the process of MTR, and incorporates the costs of destroying ecosystem services, it is obvious that Mountaintop removal is economically bankrupt. In addition to being an economic failure, the process is also socially, environmentally, and morally bankrupt as well.
[edit] 3 sources
- Nyden, Paul J. “From Pick and Shovel to Mountaintop Removal: Environmental Injustice in the Appalachian Coalfields.” Environmental Law 34.1 (Winter 2004): 21-107. 13 Mar. 2007 <http://googlescholar.com>. Path: Googlescholar.com; Paul J. Nyden.
