Mountaintop removal sp 09
Mountaintop Removal Mining
History
Political Climate & Laws
Technology Used
(Andrei's part-reminder to myself)
Economic Policy
Monetary & Job Benefits
Health Effects
Ecological Effects
Alternatives to Mountaintop Removal
While mountaintop removal mining is a one of the most profitable methods of extracting coal, there are less environmentally damaging methods of mining. The four less environmentally damaging methods of coal mining are shaft mines, slope mines, drift mines and open-pit mining. Additionally, there are numerous other forms of energy that can be substituted for coal as an energy source.
Coal Mining
(Andrei's part - reminder to myself)
Other Energy Alternatives
Corn-based Ethanol
(Andrei's part-reminder to myself)
Nuclear Power
According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), nuclear energy is the lowest cost producer of base load energy. Nuclear energy is not subject to unreliable weather or climate conditions, unpredictable cost fluctuations, or dependence on foreign suppliers. Furthermore, NEI states that nuclear plants produce nearly 20 percent of the United State’s electricity and has the ability to provide a larger share of the US energy market. While nuclear power is appealing to the NEI, environmentalist group Greenpeace [1] is against nuclear energy. In their own words, “Greenpeace has always fought - and will continue to fight - vigorously against nuclear power because it is an unacceptable risk to the environment and to humanity.” In addition, Greenpeace has three main concerns about nuclear energy – the safety of nuclear power, the radioactive spent fuel rods and their storage, and weapons proliferation.[2].
Oil
According to the US Department of Energy (USDOE) [3], “oil is the lifeblood of America’s economy.” Currently, it supplies the United States of America with 40% of its total energy demands and 99% of the fuel used in automobiles. Oil is considered to be plentiful and relatively affordable when compared to other energy sources available today.
On the other hand, one must also see the negative effects of oil. For example, offshore oil exploration (one of the many different types of oil exploration) can cause a variety of environmental issues [4]. Some are listed below:
- Discharge of toxic drilling fluids used on machinery
- Oil spills
- Operational noise that can disturb fauna
- Degradation of beaches
- Loss of habitat for flora and fauna
According to the United States Geological Society (USGS) [5], drilling for oil from the ground creates large volumes of water of “undesirable quality known as produced water.” Furthermore, the traditional form of drilling for oil on land masses (vs. offshore drilling) also has negative impacts on ecosystems [6]:
- Discharge of drilling muds and solids, specifically viscosifiers, thinner and deflocculants, polymers and lubricants
- Accidental discharge of unrefined petroleum
- Negative effects on the surrounding flora and fauna
Solar Power
(Andrei's part-reminder to myself)
Wind
The report, The Long-Term Economic Benefits of Wind Versus Mountaintop Removal Coal on Coal River Mountain, West Virginia [7], examined the economic benefits that wind power would have in West Virginia. It calculated the local economic benefits based on number of jobs, earnings and economic output. In addition, the study examined costs due to increased death and illnesses from mountaintop removal mining and the cost of local environmental problems in the future. In addition, it discusses that wind power is not without environmental impact and that the wind turbines will directly affect birds and bats and possibly affect the local wildlife. The report concluded that wind power is preferable to mountaintop removal in Raleigh County. The study claims that the economic benefits of mountaintop removal would end 17 years after mining operations ceased, while the environmental and social costs of mountaintop removal would continue to last. In economic terms, mountaintop removal mining provides $36,000 per year in coal severances paid to Raleigh County, whereas a wind farm would generate $1.74 million in local property taxes annually.
According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA)[8], wind power “can be harnessed to be a non-polluting, never-ending source of energy” to meet the world’s energy needs. Furthermore, the AWEA states that in good wind areas over 25 years, a large wind turbine project may offer cheaper energy than any other new power plant. In addition, concerns about the reliability of wind power are not supported with current evidence. In Demark, where over 20% of its energy comes from wind, there has been no loss of reliability of the electrical grid and there has been no need for expensive equipment or energy storage.
References
American Energy Wind Association (2007), "Wind Power Today" http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WindPowerToday_2007.pdf
Downstream Strategies (2008), "The Long-Term Economic Benefits of Wind Versus Mountaintop Removal Coal on Coal River Mountain, West Virginia" http://www.coalriverwind.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/coalvswindoncoalrivermtn-final.pdf
Greenpeace, "End the Nuclear Age" http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/nuclear
Nuclear Energy Institute (2009), "Reliable and Affordable Energy" http://www.nei.org/keyissues/reliableandaffordableenergy/
Images:
Alternative mining methods to mountaintop removal mining. http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/zencmed/targets/illus/ilt/T629100A.gif
Nuclear Power image courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/lungstruck/2303642958/
Wind Turbines image courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/
Authors
Applestein, Cara
Morgan, Arleigh
Rogers, Kelly
Vernon, Andrei
