In The Blogs

Bush Okays Blowing Up Mountains for Mining Companies

| Thu Aug. 23, 2007 10:59 AM PDT

Bush is set to release a regulation tomorrow that will allow mining companies to blast the tops off mountains and dump the resulting waste in nearby streams and valleys. Currently the practice, called mountaintop mining, exists in a hazy legal status but has been used regularly for the past two decades. The new rule will loosen a 1983 law which prohibits disturbing soils within 100 feet of streams (in the past, companies have been sued under the Clean Water Act for dumping mining waste into streams), essentially giving coal companies the go-ahead.

As we reported last year, the Appalachian mountains (where the majority of mountaintop removal mining takes place) have been so degraded that the public can take tours of the mind-boggling environmental damage. But mining companies and their coal mining advocates think they are providing a great service. Proponents claim that coal reduces our reliance on foreign oil and mountaintop removal provides more flat land for big box stores like Wal-Mart. Woo-hoo!

Advertisement

Jen Phillips is an assistant editor at Mother Jones. For more of her stories, click here.

Comments

Submitted by bobr900 (not verified) on Thu Aug. 23, 2007 2:31 PM PDT.

Well that works for the Bushie Republican's and the right wing religious enablers, including my religion. Wrecking our water supplies will bankrupt local public water utilities, which will in turn be forced to privatize and the Rethugs will make ever more money on the backs of 'we the people', the taxpayers.

And the Rethugs and their right wing religions just keep rolling along pushing their death agenda for ever more profits and political power over the lives of others. Dominion and domination are their gods.

They did a similar thing in Bolivia, and finally the Bolivians fought back and elected Evo Morales who rapidly turned American corporation control over their water back to the people of Bolivia who are the rightful owners of their own water.

Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Fri Aug. 24, 2007 10:35 AM PDT.

bobr900,

So, what do you think we need to regain control of our remaining mountains before they're all leveled? Remember, mountaintop removal sometimes does not mean just the top. It means the entire mountain. But, even the top is a huge loss.

Further, coal is the absolute worst source of power on the planet. In addition to creating about 4 times the carbon emissions of the same amount of power from gas, it also adds mercury to the mix. And, mercury travels around the globe in air and water currents.

People living in the most pristine places imaginable, the Inuit (a.k.a. Eskimos, though the term is derogatory), happen to have a diet that includes many top level predators. So, Inuit women end up with breast milk that is so high in mercury and PCBs that it can literally be classified as hazardous waste.

We've just got to stop burning this stuff. We have plenty of available home-grown energy. Wind, solar, and tidal power are all now mature and cost effective technologies. We must make a huge investment in these for our future. I'd suggest starting with the money from oil subsidies and then adding money from the Iraq war. Imagine if we'd been using these funds for this since Kyoto. We could be very far along already.

Here's a really nice video showing the beauty of mountaintop removal.

http://www.vbs.tv/player.php?bctid=494918454

Submitted by weee recycling (not verified) on Fri Aug. 24, 2007 2:55 PM PDT.

To borrow from Winston Churchill and apply it to Bush and his ilk - in the history of human endeavour, never have so few done so much damage to so many.
The Italians have a great saying - Governments are very like babies nappies; if you don't change them regularly they start to stink.

Submitted by GERHARDT (not verified) on Mon Aug. 27, 2007 10:56 AM PDT.

Mountain top mining is like a naturescape lobotomy -- ever driven through Appalachia and seen the wild rhodadendra and the spectacular gorges? Clearly a suite in the darkest cruelest corner of the Lubyanka is the best place for these despoilers...

Submitted by Dr. Fleischer (not verified) on Tue Sep. 4, 2007 11:23 AM PDT.

Al Gore's home is a 20 room mansion ( not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house, all heated by gas. In one month this residence consumes more energy than the average American household does in a year. In Al Gore's home,the average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2400. In natural gas alone, this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not situated in a Northern or Midwestern "snow belt" area. It's in the South(Tenn.).
House #2 Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university. This house incorporates every "green" feature current home construction can provide. The house is 4,000 square feet ( 4 bedrooms ) and is nestled on a high prairie in Texas. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat-pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F. ) heats the house in the winter and cools it in the summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas and it consumes one-quarter electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Surrounding flowers and shrubs native to the area enable the property to blend into the surrounding rural landscape. House #2 is President Bush's Texas home. Who is walking the talk?
(Canada Free Press, 8/26/07)