Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:17, 13 April 2017

Coal mining is the focus of much discourse around environmental justice in the Appalachian region of the United States. Studies have found that people living in close proximity to mines that extract coal via mountaintop removal Mountaintop removal mining (MTM), on average, have higher mortality rates and are more likely to live in poverty than people in otherwise comparable parts of the region. Once the leading producer of coal in the country, Appalachia has experienced a steady decline in output and mining jobs since the 1990s. This trend was predominantly driven by a rising demand for cleaner energy and a number of environmental policies and regulations set forth by President Barack Obama's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The election of Donald Trump to the Presidency on November 8, 2016 has caused environmental justice to remain relevant to coal mining in Appalachia. Throughout his campaign, Trump expressed his preference of coal over renewable energy sources like wind or solar, and promised to undo many of the previous administration's regulations that dampened Appalachia's ability to mine at historical rates.

The president has already begun to make good on his campaign promises. In February 2017, President Trump eliminated the Stream Protection Rule, which prevented coal mines from disturbing the hydrologic balance of nearby waterways.

Disparities in Appalachia's coal mining communities

Since 1995, the Appalachian region has produced about half of the United States' coal. Although Appalachia has played a large role in contributing to the coal supply of the United States, the communities surrounding such mining practices have suffered immensely. Although Appalachia has played a large role in contributing to the coal supply of the United States, the communities surrounding such mining practices have suffered immensely. Several studies have shown disparities between mining communities and non-mining communities in terms of public health, environmental degradation, pollution, and overall quality of life in Appalachia. Variations of surface coal mining techniques in the Appalachia include contour, area, high-wall, auger, and mountaintop removal mining (MTR).

Effects on health

Several studies have found that communities within the Appalachian region surrounding coal mining practices disproportionately experience negative health effects then communities with no coal mining. Such health disparities are largely attributed to the contamination of water and land associated with coal surface mining. MTR has increased salinity, metals, magnesium, and sulfates within Appalachian watersheds, threatening human health. Sixty-three percent of stream beds near coalfields within the Appalachia mountains have been identified as “impaired” due to high toxic chemical and metal contamination. Streams are reported to have a thirty to forty-fold increase of sulfate. Combustion waste and fly ash from MTR lend to toxic dusts pollute the surrounding air and have contributed to increased levels of cancer, heart disease, liver disease, and kidney disease. Public health costs of pollution in the Appalachia are upwards of 75 billion dollars a year.  In a comparative analysis of health-related quality of residences in counties with and without coal mining Appalachia "reported significantly fewer healthy days for both physical and mental health". The same study highlights strong correlations between heavy coal mining counties and a greater risk of depression and severe psychological distress. Areas in the Appalachia with coal surface mining exhibit greater rates of adverse health effects and reduced self-rated health in comparison to the national average. In addition, studies from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health have concluded a high “relationship between surface coal mining jobs and the prevalence of pneumoconiosis”. Lastly, through examination of mortality rates, county-level poverty rates, and coal mining within counties of the Appalachia, it was identified that coal mining areas of Appalachia experienced higher mortality rates then counties with no coal mining.

Environmental impacts

Coal surface mining has heavily altered the hydrological cycle and landscape of the Appalachia causing environmental degradation and contributing to ecosystem damages beyond repair. Surface coal mining in the Appalachian has contributed to the destruction of over 500 mountain tops, amounting to almost the size of Delaware. In addition, it has led to the clearance of over 1 million acres of forests and contributed to the degradation or permanent loss of over 12000 miles of streams crucial to the Appalachia watershed from 1985- 2001. Increased salinity and metal contamination of the Appalachian streams have led to toxic effects of fish and bird species. Mountaintop removal, or MTR, is a type of surface mining that has played a major role in negatively impacting the Appalachian environment. When mountaintop removal is used, it causes much of the contaminants from the process to be emptied into surrounding valleys which, often times, make their way into nearby streams. MTR, specifically, can produce over 750 million cubic yards of waste. These wastes are disposed in “valley fills” which have collapsed and produced heavy flash floods in Appalachia. The Environmental Protection Agency approximates that between 1985 and 2001, over 700 miles worth of streams in the Appalachians were covered by these "valley fills" due to mountaintop removal coal mining. Coal surface mining in Appalachia is responsible for 85% of US' CO2 emissions produced from electricity contributing to climate change as processes not only omit CO2, but also clear forests that act as CO2 sinks.

Social and economic impacts

Although coal mining industries is often associated with increased jobs and economic growth, Appalachia has represented a far different case with several counties containing the highest level of unemployment and lowest levels of incomes. More specifically, in Hendryx and Zullig’s comparative analysis of Appalachia counties, those with coal mining had greater economic disparities and more poverty then those without industry. The shift towards coal surface mining from underground mining has led to a 50% decline in mining jobs from 1985-2005. Coal surface mining jobs in West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia represent .89%, .03%, .01%, and .04%, respectively, of jobs within those states. Nasa states that promises of beneficial post-mining development of in the Appalachia region has reflected developments that had never materialized.

Legal protections

There are several legal protections for communities in coal mining production areas. The 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), which set regulations in respect to surface coal mining and protection for society and environment, was the first national surface mining law. In addition, the 1969 Coal Mine Health and Safety Act, 1969 National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and Stream Protection Rule offer legal protections for coal mining communities.

In 2017, following the inauguration of President Trump, the Stream Protection Rule was overturned with the intentions of expanding coal mining jobs. The Stream Protection Rule was set to protect over 6,000 miles of streams and 52,000 acres of forests from coal mining activities.

Politics

Controversies

Appalachia continues to be one of the most impoverished regions of the country. The advent of international markets preferring cheap and clean natural gas to expensive and dirty coal is resulting in less economic opportunity declining incomes and less education. Based on a nested linear model accounting for state level effects and controlling for other risks, mountain top removal—a prominent coal extraction method used in Appalachia—is independently associated with poverty and mortality. People living in mountain top mining areas generally experience higher mortality rates, higher poverty rates, and child poverty rates than people living in other counties in Appalachia. Poverty is higher in Mountain top removal areas compared to any other type of mining method.

A different study examines the effect of producing coal on neighboring communities. In the coal industry in Appalachia there is an unequal tradeoff between economic activity and environmental degradation. In other words, the coal industry produces fewer jobs relative to the damage those jobs do to the environment. Coal impoundments are "large, hazardous dams that hold billions of gallons of wastewater and slurry, a sludge-like by-product of processing coal." An examination of coal impoundments impact on neighboring Appalachia communities provides more evidence of the aforementioned unequal tradeoff. Spatial regression analysis concludes that neighborhoods closest to coal impoundments are "slightly more likely to have higher rates of poverty and unemployment, even after controlling for rurality, mining-related variables, and spatial dependence." In essence, resource extraction creates more inequality in coal mining counties in Appalachia.

Another study details who lives next to federal tourism lands which are undesirable to live by for a variety of reasons. The study indicates that "present location of federal tourism and recreation areas may be advantageous to white populations and disadvantageous to minority populations."

The Trump administration's new budget is set to cut EPA funding by one third and shrink the workforce by 3,000 people. Specifically, the Hazardous Substance Superfund account is planned to be slashed by 30%. The outcome of said environmental cost restructuring is still unknown.

EPA and Local Government Responses

Mountaintop removal, sometimes called strip mining on steroids, is described as "a form of mining that has major effects on the ecology and people of central Appalachia". West Virginia, in the heart of Appalachia, is the second largest coal producer in Appalachia. Usually taxes from coal drive the majority of West Virginia state revenues. Despite the widespread mining of land less than 1% of that land goes to productive use resulting in environmental degradation. Due to the economic impact and environmental fallout the EPA is focused on mountaintop removal. However, in some instances the EPA's responses haven't aligned with the way stakeholders see the problem, as evidenced by these judicial rulings.

Judicial Cases

There are many judicial cases pertaining to this topic. The EPA has ultimate authority as to who does and doesn't get permits for Mountaintop removal. These cases highlight that environmentalists challenge the EPA and other government agencies leniency in providing permits. The three judicial opinions below relate to the challenging of Mountain top removal by environmentalists that seek to limit the practice.

Bragg v. Robertson

Bragg v Robertson was a case that challenged the legitimacy of mountaintop removal. This ruling brought together Environmental lawyers and EPA against environmentalists, union leaders and state representatives over a dispute about the degree to which the EPA can approve permits. The EPA lost the ruling in trial court but won in the 4th Circuit. The trial court found that "the stream-buffer-zone regulations promulgated under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) prohibited valley fills and merited a permanent injunction against further permits." As part of the ruling, the trial judge decided economic effects were irrelevant in his decision and the defendants should reserve their argument for the US Congress. The case was appealed to the 4th Circuit which reversed the ruling on "state-sovereignty-immunity grounds."

Kentuckians for the Commonwealth (KFTC) v. Rivenburgh

Kentuckians for the Commonwealth v. Rivenburgh dubbed KFTC v. Rivenburgh, had the same defendants and plaintiffs as Bragg v. Robertson. The EPA and environmental lawyers were defending themselves against environmentalists, union leaders and state representatives. The judge ruled that the "joint rule making engaged in by the EPA ... was beyond the agency's regulatory power." The "intent was to allow valley fills rather than the interagency harmonization the agencies claimed." Thus, the judge ruled against the EPA and the lawyers. On appeal to the 4th Circuit decontextualized the case and ruled against the trial court by employing an administrative-law analysis of the EPA's powers.

Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition (OVEC) v. Aracoma Coal Co.

In OVEC v Aracoma the trial court was overruled by the 4th Circuit. In his analysis, the judge argued the issue is between the environment and energy producing jobs, "Coal mining has long been part of the fabric of Appalachian life, providing jobs to support workers and their families and energy to fuel the nation. Unfortunately, coal mining also exacts a toll on the natural environment. In particular, the mining technique at issue in these permits potentially results in dramatic environmental consequences." The analysis doesn't include the socioeconomic impact or disproportionate impact on underprivileged communities such as black or poor communities. In the end, the ruling rejected the permitting process. On appeal, the 4th circuit decontextualized the case and overruled the trial court. Their decision was rooted in statuary and regulatory interpretation instead of cultural and economic impact, which the US Congress is responsible for addressing through regulation.

See also

• Environmental justice
• Appalachia
• Social and economic stratification in Appalachia
• Stream Protection Rule
• Mountaintop removal mining
• Coal mining
• Hobet Coal Mine

References

1. ^ Hendryx, Michael (2011). "Poverty and Mortality Disparities in Central Appalachia: Mountaintop Mining and Environmental Justice". Journal of Health Disparities Research and Practice. 4: 44–53.
2. ^ Hodge, Dan (2016). "Appalachian Coal Industry, Power Generation and Supply Chain" (PDF). Appalachian Regional Commission.
3. Davenport, Coral (2016-09-22). "Donald Trump, in Pittsburgh, Pledges to Boost Both Coal and Gas". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2017-03-19.
4. "Stream Protection Rule". www.osmre.gov. Retrieved 2017-03-19.
5. "Goodbye, Stream Protection Rule". Sierra Club. 2017-02-01. Retrieved 2017-03-19.
6. ^ Paul R. Epstein, Jonathan J. Buonocore, Kevin Eckerle, Michael Hendryx, Benjamin M. Stout III, Richard Heinberg, Richard W. Clapp, Beverly May, Nancy L. Reinhart, Melissa M. Ahern, Samir K. Doshi, and Leslie Glustrom. 2011. Full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal in “Ecological Economics Reviews.” Robert Costanza, Karin Limburg & Ida Kubiszewski, Eds. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1219: 73–98.
7. ^ Hendryx, Michael, Zullig, Keith (2010). "A Comparative Analysis of Health-Related Quality of Life for Residents of U.S. Counties with and without Coal Mining". Public Health Reports (1974-). 125: 548–555 – via JStor.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
8. ^ EPA,OA,OEAEE, US. "Basic Information about Surface Coal Mining in Appalachia". www.epa.gov. Retrieved 2017-03-18.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
9. ^ Perks, Rob. "APPALACHIAN HEARTBREAK: Time to End Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining" (PDF). NRDC.
10. ^ Lindberg, T. Ty; Bernhardt, Emily S.; Bier, Raven; Helton, A. M.; Merola, R. Brittany; Vengosh, Avner; Di Giulio, Richard T. (2011-01-01). "Cumulative impacts of mountaintop mining on an Appalachian watershed". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 108 (52): 20929–20934.
11. ^ National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (1995). "Coal Mine Dust Exposures and Associated Health Outcomes" (PDF). Current Intelligence Bulletin. 64.
12. ^ Rebecca, Lindsey, (2007-12-21). "Coal Controversy In Appalachia : Feature Articles". www.earthobservatory.nasa.gov. Retrieved 2017-03-18.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
13. "What Is Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining?". iLoveMountains.org. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
14. Holzman, David (Nov 2011). "MOUNTAINTOP REMOVAL MINING: DIGGING INTO COMMUNITY HEALTH CONCERNS". Environmental Health Perspectives. 119 (11). {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
15. House, Silas; Smith, Jason (2009). Something's Rising : Appalachians Fighting Mountaintop Removal. Lexington, Ky.: The University Press of Kentucky. p. 2. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
16. ^ Morrone, M. & Buckley, G. L. & Davis, D. E. & Purdy, J.. Mountains of Injustice: Social and Environmental Justice in Appalachia. Athens: Ohio University Press, 2011. Project MUSE., https://muse.jhu.edu/.
17. "Trump, GOP lawmakers scrap Stream Protection Rule". MSNBC. Retrieved 2017-03-18.
18. ^ Greenberg, Pierce (2017-03-01). "Disproportionality and Resource-Based Environmental Inequality: An Analysis of Neighborhood Proximity to Coal Impoundments in Appalachia". Rural Sociology. 82 (1): 149–178. doi:10.1111/ruso.12119. ISSN 1549-0831.
19. Porter, Rob. "A Case Study of Environmental Justice and Federal Tourism Sites in Southern Appalachia: A GIS Application". Journal of Travel Research.
20. "Senators gear up for battle over Trump's Supreme Court nominee". Los Angeles Times. ISSN 0458-3035. Retrieved 2017-03-19.
21. ^ Evan Barret Smith. "Implementing Environmental Justice in Appalachia: The Social and Cultural Context of Mountaintop Removal Mining as Seen through the Lenses of Law and Documentaries" (PDF). William & Mary Policy Review. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url= (help)
22. John G. Mitchell (March 2006). "Mountaintop Removal Article, Coal Mining Information, Coal Industry Facts". National Geographic. Retrieved 2017-03-15.
23. "Bragg v. Robertson, 72 F. Supp. 2d 642 (S.D.W. Va. 1999)". Justia Law. Retrieved 2017-03-19.

• Proposed deletion as of 6 April 2017
• Appalachia
• Coal mining in the United States
• Environmental justice