Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiCoal's Ascent Is Re-Igniting Familiar Debate
TWILIGHT, W.Va. - Even the name of this place speaks of an end ahead.Surrounded by the rubble of mountaintops obliterated to mine coal, several of tiny Twilight's homes have been demolished. King Coal bought and removed them. Now, the town is on the same path as scores of other West Virginia communities that gradually lost their residents and died in the shadow of a vast mining operation.
When Maria Gunnoe drove through last week, she didn't think of stopping. Gunnoe, 39, a descendant of Cherokees and Scots in Appalachia, has received death threats lately for her fight against filling valleys with the coal trash from the mountaintop excavations. And for her, any place, even this rapidly shrinking one, doesn't feel safe anymore. She travels now with a bullet-proof vest and a can of Mace.
"If I stop, I could be a dead woman," she said.
Her battle in the Appalachian Mountains is set against a backdrop of a great global fight over coal.
Over the past several months in Washington, D.C., places such as Twilight have become the center of a growing debate over carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming, the US drive for greater energy independence, the economic future of a coal-producing region, and the health of people who live among the coal fields.
On one side: environmentalists who want to sharply curtail coal use because of carbon dioxide emissions linked to global warming and mining operations they say destroy the nature of a land and its people. On the other side: the coal industry and those who seek America's independence from foreign oil, who argue that technology can create "clean coal" by burying the emissions in underground caverns.
But almost no one in Washington - and none of the Democratic or Republican presidential candidates - has mentioned what increased dependence on inexpensive, plentiful coal means for the people living amid the excavations.
In Twilight, 350 miles southwest of the nation's capital, residents say decisions made in Congress and at the White House shake their world like the powerful explosions on Montcoal Mountain that rattle the foundations of their homes. Some say these uncertain times for coal miners - whose jobs hang in the balance - eliminate tolerance for dissent.
Even though the US coal industry has reaped billions of dollars in revenue - Peabody Energy reported $5.2 billion in revenues in 2006 - the coal-rich regions have some of the worst poverty in the country. According to the US Census, the median income for Twilight and the surrounding region is less than $20,000 a year, and more than a quarter of families live below the poverty line.
Twilight is simply a line of double-wide trailers with no general store, set in the folds of steep hills, on a road that ends at a mountaintop coal operation.
"The coal industry just wants to keep what's happening here a secret," said Steve "Spankey" Webb, 51, of Twilight, who now works in an underground coal mine, a 33-year veteran of the business. "I know the country needs coal, but they don't worry about the people who live in these areas. They just don't care, I reckon."
Added Robbie Blevins, the retired president of United Mine Workers Local 9177: "We need the jobs here. I think if the coal companies were a little bit more responsible about how they do this mountaintop removal, it wouldn't be near as bad."
Few are betting against the coal industry now.
Coal accounts for at least half of the energy used to meet America's electricity needs, and coal-fired power plants produce 40 percent of the country's carbon dioxide emissions.
Since 2001, coal consumption nationally has risen gradually, according to US government figures, but several industry officials have forecast that demand could double by 2017 - if plans develop to turn coal into a liquid fuel.
Last week, Congress passed a bill that would allow the government to give up to $8 billion in loan guarantees to develop "clean coal" power plants and create liquid coal. Meanwhile, the new energy bill provides up to $240 million a year through 2012 on projects that would capture and store underground the carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired plants.
Pro-coal lawmakers and industry officials contend that if emissions-capture technology works, the pace of removing coal would probably accelerate, bringing more jobs to West Virginia and an increase in the mountaintop removal of coal.
Mountaintop removal involves stripping trees and topsoil and blasting away layers of rock to get at coal seams underneath. The blasting and the removal of tons of debris often have literally buried streams; or sent a torrent of water tainted with heavy metals downhill, flooding areas; or coated towns with layers of coal dust.
In Appalachia, activists say, coal companies have leveled more than 470 mountains in the region since the late 1970s. That pace stepped up considerably after 2002, when the Bush administration changed just one word in federal environmental regulations; it reclassified mining debris "waste" - rock blasted from the mountain, then pushed into a valley - as "fill," allowing companies to dump debris into mountain streams.
The Department of Interior is considering an additional change in the Clean Water Act that would effectively end a Reagan administration ban on mining within 100 feet of a stream.
In a Washington speech last week, Senator John F. Kerry - Democrat of Massachusetts and the party's 2004 presidential nominee - said the United States should invest billions in clean-coal technology. "Coal is cheap, dirty, and abundant not only here at home, but also in countries like China," he said.
Kerry later said that while he opposes "blasting off mountains" to mine coal, the resource must be a part of the United States' long-term energy strategy.
West Virginia's governor, two US senators, and three US representatives, however, have supported the practice; each declined requests by the Globe to comment on mountaintop-removal coal mining.
Bill Raney, president of the West Virginia Coal Association, contends that the industry's future is extremely bright. He said 20,000 West Virginians are working in the industry, which has given residents "an opportunity to stay home in West Virginia and raise their kids here."
Coal is a promising solution to several urgent energy problems, he said: "We have plenty of coal resources in this country, we can make electricity with it, we can make liquid fuels with it, and we can sequester the carbon. I don't understand the hesitancy" to commit to it.
Raney also said the industry has made "tremendous strides" in environmental cleanup from mountaintop removal. "My conscience is completely clean," he said.
Gunnoe, a full-time organizer for the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, rejected the idea that coal can be a viable, environmentally friendly energy source. Since 2001, she said, seven floods - some possibly caused by waste water-containment pools that burst - have submerged almost five acres of her family farm and polluted her drinking water.
"Clean coal is a complete and total lie," Gunnoe said last week on her 24-acre property in Bob White, W.Va. "Coal is black, through and through."
Mountaintop-removal mining, she said, is a moral test for society: Will it choose cleaner alternatives, or will it choose to generate electricity from a process that "is helping kill off a whole culture" of people whose lives are intertwined with the region's wooded environment.
Gunnoe and others have filed lawsuits to stop mining companies from dumping debris into valleys; their aim is stop mountaintop removal of coal throughout the Appalachians.
After winning a case in October that shut down one mining operation, resulting in the layoff of 39 workers, Gunnoe and others received death threats. One person, she said, walked up to her and threatened to destroy her property if she didn't stop.
But Gunnoe, a slender, tough-talking mother of two whose brown hair reaches to the small of her back, said she and others will press ahead - carefully.
"The mining companies want to depopulate the area, like in Twilight," she said. "They can destroy the land and the water, but I'm not leaving. I'm here for the long haul. I'm going to continue fighting."
Joseph Williams of the Globe staff contributed to this story. John Donnelly can be reached at donnelly@globe.com.
© 2007 The Boston Globe
21 Comments so far
Show AllKem's copper mine story illustrates something that was happening even without global warming. There are limits to growth and exploitation of non-renewable resources, and the neocon capitalist philosiphies will have to be replaced with a new paradigm in the near future. The PNAC is just conservative nostalgia, but still dangerous.
The EU has started the International Material Data System so they know what every material in a recycled car or appliance is. Right down to the rivets and wiper blade pins. Its a start for sustainability.
A friend from TN told me three long trains of coal pass through Collierville every day from W Va just to supply one electic generator in Alabama.
A lot of things are coming together at the same time. Its going to be an interesting century if we survive it.
KEM -- See if you can find a copy of the book "The Giving Tree".
It spans an entire generation, with detailed interchanges between the initially young boy, through his capitalistic years, and through to his eventual retirement.
Through all of the years the "Giving Tree" lives 100% up to its name, and unconditionally does what ever it takes … just like the land giving it ALL up to the crazy white men.
There was an old town in central Arizzona, a historic western town. there was a large underground copper mine there. WEll, Phelps Dodge Corp decided to have open pit mining ___ and they did. That mile deep open pit now is about twenty miles across. Of course we need copper. For example: It requires more than a TON of copper, to make a radiator for one of those huge ore hauling trucks. There is 20 tons of copper wiring in a nuclear submarine. ~Good trivia~. If you put a small piece of copper tubing in a Brita filtered water pitcher, it will kill any bacteria in the water.
The town? Everyone had to leave, because it was in the way. It isn't there anymore. Oh, and the river that flowed through the picturesque town, there are still fish in it. ___ Don't eat the fish.
Amazing what man can and will do.
Two American Indians, Apache, were talking about the white man. "The white men are crazy. First they come and cut down all of the trees, then they go away. __ Later, they return and plant grass and raise cows and sheep. After awhile, the top soil is no good and the winds blow away the spoiled dirt until only bare rocks are left, the white man leaves. ___ Later, they come back and take the rocks, spoil the river and say that someday they will leave. __ Leave what?"
Methane burp BBR-001? Maybe only five years away bud.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071221222544.htm
Or, Google Arctic methane gas, there are several credible artilces there to give you ulcers.
BILL -- Why the attitude about electric vehicles?
Of course the source of the electricity is part of the calculation of their overall "carbon footprint".
Did you know that ~ 95% of all the energy released from our typical car's internal combustion engine is lost as heat, whereas modern coal-fired co-generation is capable of efficiencies beyond 90%?
Thus the direct equivalent result of the electric vehicle's pollution being generated, can be up to 20 times less (2000% less)
These modern efficient coal-fired plants also have developed technologies to eliminate the production of CO2 gases for a minuscule ~ 15% higher initial costs to build the factories?
When you hear about the electric car as a global warming solution. Think "coal". That's what runs it.
http://frepubtra.blogspot.com/
John Kerry really does not get it at all. Has he heard of global warming? Maybe the acid rain goes south of Massachusetts. We need a moritorium on increased coal consumption and a plan to start cutting back. At the very least, there should not be one more expansion or new facility permit issued until CO2 sequestration is proven and part of the package.
Will they run out of mountains in West Virginia? What happens when they get closer to "civilization" where the property values and political influence of landowners starts to increase? Can they just move right into VA, PA, Kentucky and Ohio...?
And the neocons haven't found an environmental reg they feel is necessary yet. Environmental laws are just bits of the vast liberal conspiracy to control your life.
Alberta is going next. Tar sands and oil shale. Dump trucks the size of gymnasiums. Trash everything in the way.
I hope Kem P is wrong about methane. Mauna Loa and Cape Grim test data say atmospherice methane is holding, but people say you can just see it bubbling out of the melting tudra and arctic lakes like fizz from a soda(pop).
BTW - Much of the rest of the world is going nuclear, and it won't be your Daddy's reactor. New stuff on the way. Just a little too late.
jungleboy ,
Garbage isn't the same as hemp. Besides, hemp prevents carbon dioxide from getting out of hand unlike most "garbage".
Our government has a lot of corrupt employees! Thats a lot of power we could make and it would free the white collar prisons for better uses like schools!
Round up all the crooks in government and business, and strap them into galley-like rowing machines to generate electricity. Justice and energy, both at the same time. Win-win.
The capitalist economy has a "mind of its own", it has to perpetually enlarge itself. This is why the capitalists shifted from underground coal mining to mountaintop removal. They used the pretext of black lung but their real motive was to expand the market for heavy machinery and fossil fuel while expanding coal production. Mountaintop removal probably consumes ten times the energy as underground mining. This is just a guess - it could be a lot more. Gasoline refining consumes 1.25 units of gasoline to make another unit of gasoline. Coal mining will too if left unchecked. The capitalist machine takes on a life of its own and dictates how things will be. More for it, and less for you.
They are going to burn the coal and then the planet. No big deal, just their stupidity as usual. The inability to change.
I recommend going to the site ilovemountains.org and seeing how closely connected we ALL are to this ongoing obliteration of the beauty of Appalachia.
Which garbage in DC were you thinking about?
maxpayne December 26th, 2007 2:02 pm
In case nobody knows, HEMP can replace OIL and COAL 100%.
Can you say "garbage"? I mean I like your Idea but cant we do the same with garbage if we filter the unburnables?
One less obvious problem with mining coal, burning it and burying the carbon dioxide is, why won't sequestered carbon dioxide leak out? The act of drilling a well to inject the CO2 underground shattered the nearby rock, creating possible pathways for the CO2 to leak out in the next 20 years. The act of inflating the earth underneath might cause things to shift around. Then there's always natural earthquakes to release the CO2. We've known about natural oil releases from the ground for centuries -- the world's first successful oil well was drilled near such an oil leak. CO2, a gas, is inherently in an unstable form. How many centuries do we think the CO2 is going to sit underground?
Another more sinister argument against scrubbing out the CO2 from coal is, why won't the coal company try to cheat, sinking only 10% of the burned carbon dioxide and accidentally (and very profitably) losing the other 90% into the atmosphere. Hey, accidents will happen. Oh, and who is going to monitor how much has been sequestered? The CO2 is deep underground. Why not fib?
"I know the country needs coal, but they don't worry about the people who live in these areas. They just don't care, I reckon."
About as much as the white people cared about the indians that lived there in the first place. I reckon.
Global warming has to be stopped at the supply side. If it is dug up, then it will be burnt - sooner or later - carbon offsets etc notwithstanding.
Can I also say, at this point, that I love that song "The Downeaster Alexia"? Awesome lyrics.
Coal burning will NOT stop, until the resulted global warming allows the methane gas, (which was until recently, safely trapped in the Arctic ice,) to escape into our atmosphere. When that big BURP of methane erupts in the next five to ten years, ___ everything will stop.
The oligarchy realizes ecologists are the greatest threat to their plundering ways. Since everyone is an environmentalist, we are all number one on Bush's terrorist watch list. This realization could make us vote Green Party.
"Clean Coal", the "Defense Dept"., "Operation Iraqi Freedom", "WMD". By using those names it's just another way to try to fool the public into believing that business and government is good and right, and if you don't agree with them you're wrong and anti-american and for the terrorists.
Isn't the ad (propaganda) industry doing a wonderful job of creating a positive image for big business and government?
In case nobody knows, HEMP can replace OIL and COAL 100%.
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/hempfuel.htm
PYROLYSIS IS THE TECHNIQUE of applying high heat to organic matter (ligno-cellulosic materials) in the absence of air or in reduced air. The process can produce charcoal, condensable organic liquids (pyrolytic fuel oil), non-condensable gasses, acetic acid, acetone, and methanol. The process can be adjusted to favor charcoal, pyrolytic oil, gas, or methanol production with a 95.5% fuel-to-feed efficiency.
Pyrolysis has been used since the dawn of civilization. Ancient Egyptians practiced wood distillation by collecting the tars and pyroligneous acid for use in their embalming industry.
Methanol-powered automobiles and reduced emissions from coal-fired power plants can be accomplished by biomass conversion to fuel utilizing pyrolysis technology, and at the same time save the American family farm while turning the American heartland into a prosperous source of clean energy production.
Pyrolysis has the advantage of using the same technology now used to process crude fossil fuel oil and coal. Coal and oil conversion is more efficient in terms of fuel-to-feed ratio, but biomass conversion by pyrolysis has many environmental and economic advantages over coal and oil.
Pyrolysis facilities will run three shifts a day. Some 68% of the energy of the raw biomass will be contained in the charcoal and fuel oils made at the facility. This charcoal has nearly the same heating value in BTU as coal, with virtually no sulfur.
Pyrolytic fuel oil has similar properties to no. 2 and no. 6 fuel oil. The charcoal can be transported economically by rail to all urban area power plants generating electricity. The fuel oil can be transported economically by trucking creating more jobs for Americans. When these plants use charcoal instead of coal, the problems of acid rain will begin to disappear.
When this energy system is on line producing a steady supply of fuel for electrical power plants, it will be more feasible to build the complex gasifying systems to produce methanol from the cubed biomass, or make synthetic gasoline from the methanol by the addition of the Mobil Co. process equipment to the gasifier.