Mountaintop removal MTR

=this was big source of HOPE? effective activismfaded? why? djt win big in appalachia? ctr-swing now?<a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Appalachia">https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Appalachia</a>obama reined in epa, army corps and ?cf KTY2 appalachia=<div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">January 27, 2017 ENFORCER // GROVER</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">
</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">The Count on Coal coalition launched a Congressional Scorecard for the 115th congress to track votes on coal-related issues.30</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">
</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">“Count on Coal ‘s scorecard was developed to ensure vital coal industry priorities remain at the top of members’ priority lists and are translated into action that provides coal communities with urgent relief from further economic harm,” the NMA press release reported.</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">
</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">One of the key votes tracked would be what NMA described as a “unnecessary” stream rule:</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">
</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">“Swift and decisive action on the Stream Rule is required to restore balance, save high-wage jobs and protect an energy source integral to our nation’s success,” said NMA president and CEO Hal Quinn. “The combination of unnecessary government overreach, regulatory duplication and harm done through this rule meets every test for CRA action and for a key vote to kick off our scorecard for the 115th Congress.”31</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">
</div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">On February 16, President Donald Trump signed an order to repeal the Stream Protection Rule. The Sierra Club noted that the rule covers waterways near surface coal mining operations including mountaintop-removal mines. The rule, introduced in 1983 and later strengthened by the Obama Administration, wrote that coal mines could not damage the “hydrologic balance” outside of their permit areas by doing things like dumping debris into valleys that could pollute rivers and streams with heavy metals such as selenium, mercury, and arsenic.32</div>=<a href="https://www.alternet.org/2021/05/west-virginia-coal-mines/">https://www.alternet.org/2021/05/west-virginia-coal-mines/</a>salonon Earth Day this year, as President Biden assembled world leaders to a climate summit to focus on a "<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/04/23/us/earth-day-climate-summit-biden?" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">clean energy future</a>," retired <a href="https://billmoyers.com/story/let-us-now-praise-coal-miner-chuck-nelson-american-hero/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">coal miner Chuck Nelson</a> hunkered down in the green hills of West Virginia, recovering from a recent stroke and with one remaining kidney, as thousands of tons of explosives from mountaintop removal strip mining operations detonated nearby with a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&feature=youtu.be&v=vTb9Bm2otxE&fbclid=IwAR2G8elsnYUPt75OH-bpy5XV4BmEh72Nzam8_5ADdvoiUdK46i9O4NT5ots" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">toxic haze of coal dust</a>.Yes, Greta (Thunberg), we still <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/powerful-new-film-captures-big-coals-enduring-trauma-1882095425.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">blow up mountains</a> in the United States to mine deadly coal.While coal mining has decreased dramatically in recent years, <a href="https://appvoices.org/2021/01/26/mining-on-coal-river-mountain/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">state permits for reckless mountaintop removal operations</a> by absentee corporations, which involve only small numbers of non-union heavy equipment operators and explosives, in contrast to labor-intensive underground mines, continue to be doled out in central Appalachia in a desperate attempt to shake down the region for a final coal tattoo.In fact, the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection celebrated Earth Day by rubber-stamping a <a href="https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/energy_and_environment/dep-approves-raleigh-county-surface-mine-application-despite-health-and-environmental-concerns/article_13aa2a95-df75-5682-ac92-b4bb871ff4c3.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">new strip-mining permit </a>for an out-of-state coal company, slated to destroy 1,085 acres of forested ridges and wreak havoc for neighboring communities for the next eight years, despite <a href="https://reckoninginappalachia.com/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">decades of protest </a>by local citizens and <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/12/13/787416262/michael-hendryx-how-is-health-in-mining-communities-affected-by-mountaintop-remo" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">reams of shocking health studies</a> on <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4224494/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">heightened cancer</a>, heart and<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935111001484" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;"> birth defect</a> rates associated with mountaintop removal mining dust.The <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/blood-on-the-mountain-new_b_7443652" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">endless war</a> on the central Appalachian mountains continues. Needlessly, we should add."Millions of acres of Appalachian mountains have been permanently destroyed, and thousands of miles of streams have been permanently buried," emailed Nelson, whose wife died from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 2019. "With a flow of permits being processed right now, thousands more acres are planned to be wiped away forever. As devastating as mountaintop removal mining is to our majestic mountains, and the people's health impacts, only 3% of it is for electrical demand — only 3%. Mountaintop removal mining goes against everything we're fighting for in trying to deal with the climate crisis. These are criminal acts carried out by criminal enterprises."Instead of recognizing the<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/spare-me-your-coal-requie_b_9517424.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;"> century-old legacy of ruin in coal country</a>, from Appalachia to Alaska and 20-odd states and several First Nations in between — including an enduring array of abandoned mines, dangerous coal slurry impoundments, fraudulent "reclamation" projects, <a href="https://today.duke.edu/2020/04/selenium-pollution-mountaintop-mining" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">polluted waterways</a>, desperate black lung victims, and gutted and sick communities with few economic options — the Biden administration risks falling into the trap of outdated policies.Two days after Earth Day applause, the Department of Energy <a href="https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-announces-1095-million-support-jobs-and-economic-growth-coal-and-power-plant" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">quietly awarded millions of dollars</a> "to boost the economic potential of coal and power plant communities," and subsidize "critical mineral extraction from coal and associated waste streams," as well as widely debunked <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/carbon-captures-litany-of-failures-laid-bare-in-new-report/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">carbon capture and storage</a> schemes.Listen here: <a href="https://grist.org/article/biggers-to-obama-free-appalachia-from-coal/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Advocates in coal country have been calling for a Green New Deal since 2008</a> — and a<a href="https://thesouthern.com/news/opinion/editorial/guest/biggers-time-for-coalfields-regeneration-fund/article_9c8ff3fb-d0fb-56a0-b5ba-71ade2aa3d93.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;"> coalfields regeneration fund</a> for everyone in coal mining communities, not simply the out-of-state companies, and not just throwing out a few job training opportunities for the dwindling ranks of largely non-union miners.If the Biden administration and Congress truly want to build back better, they should have passed the <a href="https://theallianceforappalachia.org/reclaim-blacklung/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">RECLAIM ACT years ago</a>, simply to start the process of reclaiming and reinvesting in all mining regions. And they should now double down on the commitment and make the Appalachian region, like all extraction zones from the Illinois Basin to the Navajo Nation to the Powder River Basin, a showcase for a clean energy economy, not a backwoods of denial.If the Biden administration and Congress want to end the war on Appalachia, they should simply pass the <a href="https://yarmuth.house.gov/press/yarmuth-again-moves-halt-mountaintop-removal-mining-permits-until-health-effects-studied" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Appalachian Community Health Emergency (ACHE) Act, </a>which calls for a moratorium on such devastating operations until a basic health study is completed.This is one of the most shameless realities in regulation: One of the Trump administration's first acts was to cancel a long-term health study on the impacts of <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/08/21/trump-administration-halted-a-study-of-mountaintop-coal-minings-health-effects/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">mountaintop removal mining</a>.The sad truth is that this humanitarian and environmental <a href="https://yarmuth.house.gov/press/yarmuth-again-moves-halt-mountaintop-removal-mining-permits-until-health-effects-studied" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">crisis</a> has been a federally sanctioned disaster since Jimmy Carter begrudgingly<a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jimmy-carters-next-urgent_b_240624." rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;"> signed </a>the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act in 1977, complaining that it would allow "the mining companies to cut off the tops of Appalachian mountains to reach entire seams of coal."Let's repeat that phrase, "cut off the tops of Appalachian mountains" — as in the tops of more than 500 <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mountaintop-removal-moratorium-now-campaign_b_895472" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">mountains for over a half-century</a>, literally clear-cutting deciduous forests and the region's ancient carbon sink, blowing ridges into oblivion with explosives and dumping the toxic remains and pulverized heavy metals in polluted streams, and ravaging the lives of citizens considered collateral damage, along with everything else in the way.It doesn't have to be like this. Last month, Canadian government officials reversed their own 45-year policy for open-pit coal mining, <a href="https://ca.news.yahoo.com/cp-newsalert-alberta-reinstates-1976-180116869.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">admitting</a>, "We didn't get this one right."It's time for Biden and Congress to get this one right in Appalachia and all mining communities.Just listen to Vernon Haltom, director of <a href="https://www.crmw.net/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Coal River Mountain Watch</a>, based in the frontline extraction zones of West Virginia, not in Washington, an organization that deserves as much support as possible:<blockquote style="margin: 1em 40px 1em -5px; border-left: 4px solid rgb(11, 13, 101); line-height: 32px; padding: 10px 20px 10px 24px; width: 602.543px; background: rgb(245, 245, 245);">With millions of Americans seriously ill or dead from the COVID pandemic, the stockholders and executives of Alpha Metallurgical Resources have no qualms about filling the air in Appalachian communities with carcinogenic blasting dust. Their enablers at the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection have no qualms about rubber stamping new and renewed mountaintop removal permits, "just following the law" to sentence innocent people to death and misery. People like WVDEP permit supervisor Laura Claypool face no negative consequences for their actions, apparently not even remorse, but the people face the consequences of death. How do they sleep at night? It's not as if they don't know about the dozens of peer-reviewed health studies demonstrating that mountaintop removal is a deadly public health threat. No, they sleep soundly in the comfort of a steady job doing the coal barons' bidding. The WVDEP has made it personal by approving the death of friends and family like Judy Bonds, Larry Gibson and Joanne Webb, so they shouldn't be surprised if we make it personal about their cold, inhumane decisions. But since they've proven their incapacity for basic human decency, we need the Appalachian Communities Health Emergency (ACHE) Act, H.R. 2073 in this U.S. Congress, to protect the people.
</blockquote><div class="around-the-web" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="from-your-siteheadline" style="font-weight: 700; text-transform: uppercase;">FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES</div><ul class="around-the-weblist" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline-block; width: 589.446px; list-style: none;"><li class="from-your-siteitem"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2021/02/joe-manchin-2650828737/" class="from-your-sitelink" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">Who made Joe Manchin 'The Decider'? Here's why West Virginia's ... ›</a></li><li class="from-your-siteitem"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2021/03/jim-justice/" class="from-your-sitelink" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">This billionaire governor's coal companies owe millions more in ... ›</a></li><li class="from-your-siteitem"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2018/03/voices-rust-belt/" class="from-your-sitelink" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">Mining History Museum Preserves the Labor History That Led to ... ›</a></li></ul><div class="around-the-webheadline" style="font-weight: 700; text-transform: uppercase; margin-top: 10px;">RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB</div><ul class="around-the-weblist" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline-block; width: 589.446px; list-style: none;"><li class="around-the-webitem"><a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/minewars/" class="around-the-weblink" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">West Virginia Mining | American Experience | Official Site | PBS ›</a></li><li class="around-the-webitem"><a href="https://www.americangeosciences.org/critical-issues/maps/interactive-map-coal-mines-west-virginia" class="around-the-weblink" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">Interactive map of coal mines in West Virginia | American ... ›</a></li><li class="around-the-webitem"><a href="https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/08/07/coal-rise-decline-west-virginia/" class="around-the-weblink" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">Life After Coal: The Decline and Rise of West Virginia Coal Country ... ›</a></li></ul></div>=<div>=</div><div>A<a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="https://insideclimatenews.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=7c733794100bcc7e083a163f0&id=763250a27d&e=06876ede6b" style="text-decoration-line: none;">ppalachia’s Strip-Mined Mountains Face a Growing Climate Risk: Flooding</a></div><div> BY: JAMES BRUGGERS</div><div> A new analysis of satellite images shows how the area of West Virginia with the most strip-mine damage is also the most susceptible to increased stream flow as the planet warms</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div></div>Lakey How We Win<a href="https://kpfa.org/episode/the-ralph-nader-radio-hour-february-11-2019/">https://kpfa.org/episode/the-ralph-nader-radio-hour-february-11-2019/</a>2011<a href="https://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/biggest-financers-of-mountaintop-removal-coal-mining-exposed.html">https://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/biggest-financers-of-mountaintop-removal-coal-mining-exposed.html</a>2011
, <a href="http://my.firedoglake.com/kgosztola/2011/06/07/anti-mountaintop-removal-coal-mining-activists-march-on-blair-mountain/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">hundreds of protesters</a> are marching to Blair Mountain in West Virginia to call for an end to mountaintop removal coal mining. The march commemorates the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Battle of Blair Mountain</a> – one of the most significant labor battles in American history, and one of the few times in history when a sitting U.S. president threatened to use air strikes against American citizens. The group <a href="http://appalachiarising.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Appalachia Rising</a> organized the march to draw attention to the practice of mountaintop mining, which is destroying large swaths of the Appalachian Mountains. Blair Mountain was added to a list of historic U.S.sites back in 2008, but due to <a href="http://my.firedoglake.com/kgosztola/2011/06/07/anti-mountaintop-removal-coal-mining-activists-march-on-blair-mountain/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">pressure from the coal industry</a>, the mountain was removed from the protected list and could now be subjected to mountaintop removal mining. 

Mountaintop removal mining (MTR) entails blowing the tops off of entire mountains in order to extract the coal seems within. The method became popular when coal companies realized that they could produce <a href="http://www.nma.org/pdf/c_most_requested.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">two and a half times as much</a>coal per worker hour by removing the tops of mountains, rather than traditional coal mining methods. As a result, some states have reduced the number of coal workers <a href="http://www.coaleducation.org/Ky_Coal_Facts/default.htm" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">by as much as 60%,</a> while output and profits have remained steady. 

In addition to the obvious loss of mountains, the practice is <a href="http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/d37fea38dd600608852577ae006f8cb9?OpenDocument" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">riddled with environmental dangers</a>. In order to  extract the coal, the areas around the mountain are clear-cut, destroying wildlife habitat and leading to soil erosion. The <a href="https://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/08/03/tzerman/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">waste products</a> from the coal extraction also leak into water supplies, contaminating them with mercury, lead, sulfur, and other dangers chemicals. It is estimated that by the end of 2012, a staggering 2,200 square miles of the Appalachian Mountains will have been destroyed thanks to mountaintop removal mining. 

<a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023247.php" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Massey Energy</a>, which was recently acquired by Alpha Natural Resources, has been the poster-child for mountaintop removal for years. And rightfully so. Massey / Alpha are responsible for the vast majority of MTR mining occurring in Appalachia. The company was <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-01/robert-kennedy-jr-fights-mountaintop-mining-in-new-documentary-interview.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">fined $20 million</a> in 2008 for violating the Clean Water Act, and has <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/massey-energys-past-shows-numerous-safety-violations-2010-4" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">an abysmal safety record</a>, including its infamous reputation for <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rollingstone.com%2Fpolitics%2Fblogs%2Fnational-affairs%2Fmine-blast-report-massey-blankenship-profoundly-reckless-20110519&ei=7yPyTba0Bsultwf4hPmJAw&usg=AFQjCNG4eF5cQfIlPNSix-LrChBZBtk0Iw&sig2=DI7Ql5IZwBHml1sjh2Wmog" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">operating “recklessly”</a> at the Upper Big Branch mine, which resulted in the deaths of 29 mine workers at the mine last year. On top of that, their former CEO Don Blankenship is a <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-01/robert-kennedy-jr-fights-mountaintop-mining-in-new-documentary-interview.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">self-admitted union buster</a> who has <a href="http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/massey-energy-not-so-fun-facts/blog-297043/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">given millions of dollars to Republicans and the Tea Party</a> movement who favor letting the industry do as it pleases. 

But as bad as Massey’s corporate reputation is, they aren’t the only villains in this tragic story. As media reports have focused on the deeds of Massey, the other mountaintop removal mining companies have been let off the hook, operating under the radar of most activists and the media. Here are a few of the other companies that are destroying Appalachia and other parts of America with MTR:  1. <a href="http://www.archcoal.com/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Arch Coal</a> – Boasting that they <a href="http://www.archcoal.com/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">supply more than 15% of America’s coal</a>, Arch <a href="http://www.archcoal.com/aboutus/lonemountain.aspx" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">sold 2.1 million tons</a> worth of MTR coal last year. Arch’s annual <a href="http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/razingappalachia/mtop.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">revenues top $1 billion</a>, making them the nation’s second largest coal producer. 

2. <a href="http://www.consolenergy.com/Powering/OurCoal.aspx" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">CONSOL Energy</a> – Recently <a href="http://www.law360.com/articles/231819/consol-to-pay-5-5m-over-cwa-violations" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">forced to pay $5.5 million in damages</a> in West Virginia for their mountaintop mining activities, and to spend <a href="http://ebionline.org/news-wire/548-consol-energy-to-spend-200-million-on-pollution-control" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">another $200 million on pollution control</a>.  Actively <a href="http://www.consolenergy.com/AboutUs/QuickFacts.aspx" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">working with the U.S. Department of Energy</a> on coal technologies, including coal-to-liquid technologies. 

3. <a href="http://www.intlcoal.com/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">International Coal Group</a> – Currently <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2011/05/26/mountaintop-removal-litigation-update-2/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">battling a lawsuit from the Sierra Club</a> for selenium pollution in Kentucky that is a direct result of their mountaintop removal mining activities.  4. <a href="http://www.jamesrivercoal.com/operations.htm" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">James River Coal Company</a> – <a href="http://www.hazard-herald.com/pages/full_story/push?article-Lawsuit+against+coal+company+ends+in+favor+of+Perry+couple%20&id=12857672&instance=secondary_news_left_column" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Forced to pay</a> tens of thousands of dollars for damages to homes and a Church from their mountaintop mining activities. 

5. <a href="http://www.patriotcoal.com/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Patriot Coal</a> – Operates 14 different mountaintop removal sites throughout Appalachia and Illinois. 

Together with Massey, these six companies <a href="http://www.coal-is-dirty.com/lexington-protest-shames-pnc%E2%80%99s-mountaintop-removal-financing" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">account for more than half</a> of all of the mountaintop mining activities in America.cf sw]<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining</a>Mountaintop removal mining (MTR), also known as mountaintop mining (MTM), is a form of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_mining" title="Surface mining" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">surface mining</a> at the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summit(topography)" class="mw-redirect" title="Summit (topography)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">summit</a> or summit ridge of a mountain. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_seam" class="mw-redirect" title="Coal seam" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Coal seams</a> are extracted from a mountain by removing the land, or <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overburden" title="Overburden" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">overburden</a>, above the seams. This method of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining" title="Coal mining" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">coal mining</a> is conducted in the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_Mountains" title="Appalachian Mountains" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Appalachian Mountains</a> in the eastern United States. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive" class="mw-redirect" title="Explosive" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Explosives</a> are used to remove up to 400 vertical feet (120 m) of mountain to expose underlying coal seams. Excess rock and soil is dumped into nearby valleys, in what are called "holler fills" or "valley fills".<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-ensnews-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[1]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-epaPeis-2" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[2]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-epa-3" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[3]</a> Less expensive to execute and requiring fewer employees, mountaintop removal mining began in Appalachia in the 1970s as an extension of conventional strip mining techniques. It is primarily occurring in Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, and Tennessee.The practice of mountaintop removal mining has been controversial. The coal industry cites economic benefits and asserts that mountaintop removal is safer than underground mining.[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed" title="Wikipedia:Citation needed" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">citation needed</a>] Published scientific studies have found that mountaintop mining has serious environmental impacts that mitigation practices cannot successfully address.[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed" title="Wikipedia:Citation needed" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">citation needed</a>] A high potential for human health impacts has also been reported.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-4" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[4]</a><div id="toc" class="toc" style="border: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); background-color: rgb(248, 249, 250); padding: 7px; display: table; zoom: 1;"><input type="checkbox" role="button" id="toctogglecheckbox" class="toctogglecheckbox" style="direction: ltr; position: absolute; opacity: 0; display: none;" /><div class="toctitle" lang="en" dir="ltr" style="direction: ltr; text-align: center;"><h2 style="background: none; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border: 0px; display: inline; line-height: 1.3;">Contents</h2><label class="toctogglelabel" for="toctogglecheckbox" style="cursor: pointer;" /></div><ul style="list-style-type: none; margin: 0.3em 0px; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Overview" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">1Overview</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Process" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">2Process</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Economics" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">3Economics</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-4" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Legislation_in_the_United_States" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">4Legislation in the United States</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-5" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Environmental_and_health_impacts" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">5Environmental and health impacts</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-6" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Art,entertainment,and_media" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">6Art, entertainment, and media</a><ul style="list-style-type: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 2em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-7" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Documentaries" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">6.1Documentaries</a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-8" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Non-fiction_books" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">6.2Non-fiction books</a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-9" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Fiction_books" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">6.3Fiction books</a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-10" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Music" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">6.4Music</a></li></ul></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-11" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#See_also" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">7See also</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-12" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#References" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">8References</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-13" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Cited_texts" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">9Cited texts</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-14" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#Further_reading" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">10Further reading</a></li></ul></div><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;">Overview[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal_mining&action=edit&section=1" title="Edit section: Overview" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>
The MTR process involves the removal of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_seam" class="mw-redirect" title="Coal seam" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">coal seams</a> by first fully removing the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overburden" title="Overburden" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">overburden</a> lying atop them, exposing the seams from above. This method differs from more traditional <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining#Underground_mining" title="Coal mining" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">underground mining</a>, where typically a narrow shaft is dug which allows miners to collect seams using various underground methods, while leaving the vast majority of the overburden undisturbed. The overburden from MTR is either placed back on the ridge, attempting to reflect the approximate original contour of the mountain,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-springerlink.com-5" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[5]</a> and/or it is moved into neighboring valleys.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-Copeland04-6" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[6]</a>Mountaintop removal mining (MTR), also known as mountaintop mining (MTM), is a form of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_mining" title="Surface mining" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">surface mining</a> that involves the topographical alteration and/or removal of a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summit(topography)" class="mw-redirect" title="Summit (topography)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">summit</a>, hill, or ridge to access buried coal seams.Excess rock and soil containing mining byproducts are disposed into nearby valleys, in what are called "holler fills" or "valley fills".<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-ensnews-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[1]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-epa-3" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[3]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-autogenerated1-7" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[7]</a>MTR in the United States is most often associated with the extraction of coal in the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_Mountains" title="Appalachian Mountains" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Appalachian Mountains</a>, where the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Environmental_Protection_Agency" title="United States Environmental Protection Agency" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">United States Environmental Protection Agency</a> (EPA) estimates that 2,200 square miles (5,700 km2) of Appalachian forests will be cleared for MTR sites by the year 2012.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-usatoday-8" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[8]</a> Sites range from Ohio to Virginia.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-Copeland04-6" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[6]</a> It occurs most commonly in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia" title="West Virginia" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">West Virginia</a> and Eastern <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky" title="Kentucky" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Kentucky</a>, the top two coal-producing states in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachia" title="Appalachia" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Appalachia</a>, with each state using approximately 1,000 <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonne" title="Tonne" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">tonnes</a> of explosives per day for surface mining.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-9" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[9]</a> At current rates, MTR in the U.S. will mine over 1.4 million acres (5,700 km²) by 2010,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-ilovemountains-faq-10" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[10]</a> an amount of land area that exceeds that of the state of Delaware.Mountaintop removal has been practiced since the 1960s.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-Copeland04-6" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[6]</a> Increased demand for coal in the United States, sparked by the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis" title="1973 oil crisis" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">1973</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_energy_crisis" title="1979 energy crisis" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">1979 petroleum crises</a>, created incentives for a more economical form of coal mining than the traditional <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_mining" class="mw-redirect" title="Underground mining" style="background: none; text-decoration-line: none;">underground mining</a> methods involving hundreds of workers, triggering the first widespread use of MTR. Its prevalence expanded further in the 1990s to retrieve relatively <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_coal" class="mw-redirect" title="Types of coal" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">low-sulfur coal</a>, a cleaner-burning form, which became desirable as a result of amendments to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Air_Act(1970)" class="mw-redirect" title="Clean Air Act (1970)" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">U.S. Clean Air Act</a> that tightened emissions limits on high-sulfur coal processing.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-burns-11" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[11]</a><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;">Process</h2><div>...</div><div>E</div><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;">conomics[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal_mining&action=edit&section=3" title="Edit section: Economics" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>As of 2015, approximately one third of the electricity generated in the United States is produced by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal-fired_power_plant" class="mw-redirect" title="Coal-fired power plant" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">coal-fired power plants</a>.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-US_EIA_FAQ-15" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[15]</a> MTR accounted for less than 5% of U.S. coal production as of 2001.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-ilovemountains-faq-10" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[10]</a> In some regions, however, the percentage is higher, for example, MTR provided 30% of the coal mined in West Virginia in 2006.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-16" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[16]</a>Historically in the U.S. the prevalent method of coal acquisition was <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_mining" class="mw-redirect" title="Underground mining" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">underground mining</a> which is very labor-intensive. In MTR, through the use of explosives and large machinery, more than two and a half times as much coal can be extracted per worker per hour than in traditional underground mines,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-17" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[17]</a> thus greatly reducing the need for workers. In Kentucky, for example, the number of workers has declined over 60% from 1979 to 2006 (from 47,190 to 17,959 workers).<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-18" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[18]</a> The industry overall lost approximately 10,000 jobs from 1990 to 1997, as MTR and other more mechanized underground mining methods became more widely used.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-19" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[19]</a> The coal industry asserts that surface mining techniques, such as mountaintop removal, are safer for miners than sending miners underground.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-20" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[20]</a>Proponents argue that in certain geologic areas, MTR and similar forms of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_mining" title="Surface mining" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">surface mining</a> allow the only access to thin seams of coal that traditional underground mining would not be able to mine. MTR is sometimes the most cost-effective method of extracting coal.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-21" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[21]</a>Several studies of the impact of restrictions to mountaintop removal were authored in 2000 through 2005. Studies by Mark L. Burton, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_J.Hicks" title="Michael J. Hicks" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Michael J. Hicks</a> and Cal Kent identified significant state-level tax losses attributable to lower levels of mining (notably the studies did not examine potential environmental costs, which the authors acknowledge may outweigh commercial benefits).<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-22" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[22]</a> Mountaintop removal sites are normally restored after the mining operation is complete, but "reclaimed soils characteristically have higher bulk density, lower organic content, low water-infiltration rates, and low nutrient content".<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-23" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[23]</a><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;">Legislation in the United States[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal_mining&action=edit&section=4" title="Edit section: Legislation in the United States" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a>]</h2><table class="plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Update" role="presentation" style="margin: 0px 135.797px; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 10px; border-style: solid; border-color: rgb(162, 169, 177) rgb(162, 169, 177) rgb(162, 169, 177) rgb(242, 133, 0); border-image: initial; background: rgb(251, 251, 251); box-sizing: border-box;"><tbody><tr><td class="mbox-image" style="border: none; padding: 2px 0px 2px 0.5em; text-align: center;"><div style="width: 52px;"><img alt="Ambox current red.svg" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/98/Ambox_current_red.svg/42px-Ambox_current_red.svg.png" width="42" height="34" srcset="//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/98/Ambox_current_red.svg/63px-Ambox_current_red.svg.png 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/98/Ambox_current_red.svg/84px-Ambox_current_red.svg.png 2x" data-file-width="360" data-file-height="290" style="border: 0px; vertical-align: middle;" /></div></td><td class="mbox-text" style="border: none; padding: 0.25em 0.5em; width: 996px;"><div class="mbox-text-span">This section needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (June 2017)</div></td></tr></tbody></table>In the United States, MTR is allowed by section 515(c)(1) of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_Mining_Control_and_Reclamation_Act_of_1977" title="Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977</a>. Although most <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining" title="Coal mining" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">coal mining</a> sites must be <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_rehabilitation" title="Land rehabilitation" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">reclaimed</a> to the land's pre-mining contour and use, regulatory agencies can issue waivers to allow MTR.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-24" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[24]</a> In such cases, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_Mining_Control_and_Reclamation_Act_of_1977" title="Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">SMCRA</a> dictates that reclamation must create "a level plateau or a gently rolling contour with no highwalls remaining".<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-25" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[25]</a>Permits must be obtained to deposit valley fill into streams. On four occasions, federal courts have ruled that the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Army_Corps_of_Engineers" class="mw-redirect" title="US Army Corps of Engineers" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">US Army Corps of Engineers</a> violated the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Water_Act" title="Clean Water Act" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Clean Water Act</a> by issuing such permits.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-usatoday-8" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[8]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-26" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[26]</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Energy_Company" class="mw-redirect" title="Massey Energy Company" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Massey Energy Company</a> is currently appealing a 2007 ruling, but has been allowed to continue mining in the meantime because "most of the substantial harm has already occurred," according to the judge.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-usatoday-8" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[8]</a>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W.Bush_administration" class="mw-redirect" title="George W. Bush administration" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Bush administration</a> appealed one of these rulings in 2001 because the Act had not explicitly defined "fill material" that could legally be placed in a waterway. The EPA and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Corps_of_Engineers" title="United States Army Corps of Engineers" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Army Corps of Engineers</a> changed a rule to include mining debris in the definition of fill material, and the ruling was overturned.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-usatoday-8" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[8]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-27" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[27]</a>On December 2, 2008, the Bush Administration made a rule change to remove the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riparian_buffer" title="Riparian buffer" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Stream Buffer</a> Zone protection provision from <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_Mining_Control_and_Reclamation_Act_of_1977" title="Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">SMCRA</a> allowing coal companies to place mining waste rock and dirt directly into <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source(river_or_stream)" class="mw-redirect" title="Source (river or stream)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">headwater</a> waterways.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-28" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[28]</a>A federal judge has also ruled that using settling ponds to remove mining waste from streams violates the Clean Water Act. He also declared that the Army Corps of Engineers has no authority to issue permits allowing discharge of pollutants into such in-stream settling ponds, which are often built just below valley fills.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-29" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[29]</a>On January 15, 2008, the environmental advocacy group <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Biological_Diversity" title="Center for Biological Diversity" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Center for Biological Diversity</a> petitioned the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Fish_and_Wildlife_Service" title="United States Fish and Wildlife Service" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">United States Fish and Wildlife Service</a> (FWS) to end a policy that waives detailed federal Endangered Species Act reviews for new mining permits. Under current policy, as long as a given MTR mining operation complies with federal surface mining law, the agency presumes conclusively, despite the complexities of intra- and inter-species relationships, that the instance of MTR in question is not damaging to endangered species or their habitat. Since 1996, this policy has exempted many strip mines from being subject to permit-specific reviews of impact on individual endangered species.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-wvgaz-30" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[30]</a> Because of the 1996 Biological Opinion by FWS making case-by-case formal reviews unnecessary, the Interior's Office of Surface Mining and state regulators require mining companies to hire a government-approved contractor to conduct their own surveys for any potential endangered species. The surveys require approval from state and federal biologists, who provide informal guidance on how to minimize mines' potential effects to species. While the agencies have the option to ask for formal endangered species consultations during that process, they do so very rarely.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-31" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[31]</a>On May 25, 2008, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina" title="North Carolina" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">North Carolina</a> State Representative <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pricey_Harrison" title="Pricey Harrison" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Pricey Harrison</a> introduced a bill to ban the use of mountaintop removal coal from coal-fired power plants within North Carolina. This proposed legislation would have been the only legislation of its kind in the United States; however, the bill was defeated.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-32" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[32]</a><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;">Environmental and health impacts[<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal_mining&action=edit&section=5" title="Edit section: Environmental and health impacts" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a>]</h2><table class="plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-multiple_issues compact-ambox" role="presentation" style="margin: 0px 135.797px; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 10px; border-style: solid; border-color: rgb(162, 169, 177) rgb(162, 169, 177) rgb(162, 169, 177) rgb(242, 133, 0); border-image: initial; background: rgb(251, 251, 251); box-sizing: border-box;"><tbody><tr><td class="mbox-image" style="border: none; padding: 2px 0px 2px 0.5em; text-align: center;"><div style="width: 52px;"><img alt="" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/Ambox_important.svg/40px-Ambox_important.svg.png" width="40" height="40" srcset="//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/Ambox_important.svg/60px-Ambox_important.svg.png 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/Ambox_important.svg/80px-Ambox_important.svg.png 2x" data-file-width="40" data-file-height="40" style="border: 0px; vertical-align: middle;" /></div></td><td class="mbox-text" style="border: none; padding: 0.25em 0.5em; width: 996px;"><div class="mbox-text-span"><div class="mw-collapsible mw-made-collapsible" style="width: 946.188px; margin: 0.2em 0px;"><span class="mw-collapsible-toggle mw-collapsible-toggle-default" role="button" tabindex="0" style="float: right; user-select: none; cursor: pointer; text-align: right; padding-right: 0.2em; padding-left: 0.2em;"><a class="mw-collapsible-text" style="background: none; cursor: pointer;">hide</a>This section has multiple issues. Please help <a class="external text" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal_mining&action=edit" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none !important; padding: 0px !important;">improve it</a> or discuss these issues on the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mountaintop_removal_mining" title="Talk:Mountaintop removal mining" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">talk page</a>. (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Maintenance_template_removal" title="Help:Maintenance template removal" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Learn how and when to remove these template messages</a>)<div class="mw-collapsible-content" style="margin-top: 0.3em;"><table class="plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-style ambox-sections" role="presentation" style="border: none; background: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; border-collapse: collapse; width: auto; display: block; margin: 0px 0px 0px 1.6em !important; padding: 0px !important;"><tbody><tr><td class="mbox-text" style="border: none; padding: 0px !important; width: 518px; margin: 0px !important;"><div class="mbox-text-span" style="display: list-item; line-height: 1.5em; list-style-type: disc; list-style-image: url(" en.wikipedia.org="en.wikipedia.org" w="w" skins="skins" vector="Vector" images="images" bullet-icon.svg="bullet-icon.svg">This section is too long to read comfortably, and needs <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Section#Subsections" title="Help:Section" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">subsections</a>. (July 2018)</div></td></tr></tbody></table><table class="plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content" role="presentation" style="margin-top: -1px; border: none; background: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; border-collapse: collapse; width: auto; display: block; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-bottom: 0px !important; margin-left: 1.6em !important; padding: 0px !important;"><tbody><tr><td class="mbox-text" style="border: none; padding: 0px !important; width: 786px; margin: 0px !important;"><div class="mbox-text-span" style="display: list-item; line-height: 1.5em; list-style-type: disc; list-style-image: url(" en.wikipedia.org="en.wikipedia.org" w="w" skins="skins" vector="Vector" images="images" bullet-icon.svg="bullet-icon.svg">This article's Criticism or Controversy section may compromise the article's <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view" title="Wikipedia:Neutral point of view" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">neutral point of view</a> of the subject. (July 2018)</div></td></tr></tbody></table></div></div></div></td></tr></tbody></table><div class="thumb tright" style="clear: right; float: right; margin: 0.5em 0px 1.3em 1.4em; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="thumbinner" style="min-width: 100px; border: 1px solid rgb(200, 204, 209); padding: 3px; background-color: rgb(248, 249, 250); text-align: center; overflow: hidden; width: 222px;">
<div class="thumbcaption" style="border: 0px; line-height: 1.4em; padding: 3px; text-align: left;"><div class="magnify" style="float: right; margin-left: 3px; margin-right: 0px;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hobet_Mountaintop_mine_West_Virginia_1984-09-18.jpg" class="internal" title="Enlarge" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent), url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" csvg="Csvg" viewbox="%220" width="width" height="height" cg="Cg" id="%22smallbox%22" fill="%22%23fff%22" stroke="%22%23000%22%3E" cpath="Cpath" d="%22M-1.499" h10.99v7.919h-10.99z="h10.99v7.919h-10.99z" e="E" h5.943v4.904h-5.943z="h5.943v4.904h-5.943z" c="C" g="g" display="display" block="block" text-indent="text-indent" px="px" white-space="white-space" nowrap="nowrap" overflow="overflow" hidden="hidden" user-select="user-select" none="none" xmlns="%22http://www.w3.org/2000/svg%22" xmlns:data="data" /></div><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hobet_Mountaintop_mine_West_Virginia_1984-09-18.jpg" class="internal" title="Enlarge" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent), url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" csvg="Csvg" viewbox="%220" width="width" height="height" cg="Cg" id="%22smallbox%22" fill="%22%23fff%22" stroke="%22%23000%22%3E" cpath="Cpath" d="%22M-1.499" h10.99v7.919h-10.99z="h10.99v7.919h-10.99z" e="E" h5.943v4.904h-5.943z="h5.943v4.904h-5.943z" c="C" g="g" display="display" block="block" text-indent="text-indent" px="px" white-space="white-space" nowrap="nowrap" overflow="overflow" hidden="hidden" user-select="user-select" none="none" xmlns="%22http://www.w3.org/2000/svg%22" xmlns:data="data">The </a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobet_Coal_Mine" title="Hobet Coal Mine" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Hobet mine</a> in West Virginia taken by NASA <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LANDSAT" class="mw-redirect" title="LANDSAT" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">LANDSAT</a> in 1984</div></div></div><div class="thumb tright" style="clear: right; float: right; margin: 0.5em 0px 1.3em 1.4em; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="thumbinner" style="min-width: 100px; border: 1px solid rgb(200, 204, 209); padding: 3px; background-color: rgb(248, 249, 250); text-align: center; overflow: hidden; width: 222px;">
<div class="thumbcaption" style="border: 0px; line-height: 1.4em; padding: 3px; text-align: left;"><div class="magnify" style="float: right; margin-left: 3px; margin-right: 0px;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hobet_Mountaintop_mine_West_Virginia_2009-06-02.jpg" class="internal" title="Enlarge" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent), url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" csvg="Csvg" viewbox="%220" width="width" height="height" cg="Cg" id="%22smallbox%22" fill="%22%23fff%22" stroke="%22%23000%22%3E" cpath="Cpath" d="%22M-1.499" h10.99v7.919h-10.99z="h10.99v7.919h-10.99z" e="E" h5.943v4.904h-5.943z="h5.943v4.904h-5.943z" c="C" g="g" display="display" block="block" text-indent="text-indent" px="px" white-space="white-space" nowrap="nowrap" overflow="overflow" hidden="hidden" user-select="user-select" none="none" xmlns="%22http://www.w3.org/2000/svg%22" xmlns:data="data" /></div><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hobet_Mountaintop_mine_West_Virginia_2009-06-02.jpg" class="internal" title="Enlarge" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent), url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" csvg="Csvg" viewbox="%220" width="width" height="height" cg="Cg" id="%22smallbox%22" fill="%22%23fff%22" stroke="%22%23000%22%3E" cpath="Cpath" d="%22M-1.499" h10.99v7.919h-10.99z="h10.99v7.919h-10.99z" e="E" h5.943v4.904h-5.943z="h5.943v4.904h-5.943z" c="C" g="g" display="display" block="block" text-indent="text-indent" px="px" white-space="white-space" nowrap="nowrap" overflow="overflow" hidden="hidden" user-select="user-select" none="none" xmlns="%22http://www.w3.org/2000/svg%22" xmlns:data="data">The Hobet mine in West Virginia taken by NASA </a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LANDSAT" class="mw-redirect" title="LANDSAT" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">LANDSAT</a> in 2009</div></div></div>Critics contend that MTR is a destructive and unsustainable practice that benefits a small number of corporations at the expense of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_community" title="Local community" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">local communities</a> and the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_environment" title="Natural environment" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">environment</a>. Though the main issue has been over the physical alteration of the landscape, opponents to the practice have also criticized MTR for the damage done to the environment by massive transport trucks, and the environmental damage done by the burning of coal for power. Blasting at MTR sites also expels dust and fly-rock into the air, which can disturb or settle onto private property nearby. This dust may contain sulfur compounds, which corrodes structures and is a health hazard.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-33" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[33]</a>A January 2010 report in the journal <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science(journal)" title="Science (journal)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Science</a> reviews current peer-reviewed studies and water quality data and explores the consequences of mountaintop mining. It concludes that mountaintop mining has serious environmental impacts that mitigation practices cannot successfully address.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-palmer-34" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[34]</a> For example, the extensive tracts of deciduous forests destroyed by mountaintop mining support several endangered species and some of the highest biodiversity in North America. There is a particular problem with burial of headwater streams by valley fills which causes permanent loss of ecosystems that play critical roles in ecological processes. In addition, increases in metal ions, pH, electrical conductivity, total dissolved solids due to elevated concentrations of sulfate are closely linked to the extent of mining in West Virginia watersheds.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-palmer-34" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[34]</a> Declines in stream biodiversity have been linked to the level of mining disturbance in West Virginia watersheds.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-35" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[35]</a>Published studies also show a high potential for human health impacts. These may result from contact with streams or exposure to airborne toxins and dust. Adult hospitalization for chronic pulmonary disorders and hypertension are elevated as a result of county-level coal production. Rates of mortality, lung cancer, as well as chronic heart, lung and kidney disease are also increased.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-palmer-34" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[34]</a> A 2011 study found that counties in and near mountaintop mining areas had higher rates of birth defects for five out of six types of birth defects, including circulatory/respiratory, musculoskeletal, central nervous system, gastrointestinal, and urogenital defects. These defect rates were more pronounced in the most recent period studied, suggesting the health effects of mountaintop mining-related air and water contamination may be cumulative.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-36" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[36]</a> Another 2011 study found "the odds for reporting cancer were twice as high in the mountaintop mining environment compared to the non mining environment in ways not explained by age, sex, smoking, occupational exposure, or family cancer history".<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-37" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[37]</a>A <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Environmental_Protection_Agency" title="United States Environmental Protection Agency" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">United States Environmental Protection Agency</a> (EPA) <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_statement" title="Environmental impact statement" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">environmental impact statement</a> finds that streams near some valley fills from mountaintop removal contain higher levels of minerals in the water and decreased aquatic <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiversity" title="Biodiversity" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">biodiversity</a>.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-autogenerated1-7" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[7]</a> Mine-affected streams also have high selenium concentrations, which can bioaccumulate and produce toxic effects (e.g., reproductive failure, physical deformity, mortality), and these effects have been documented in reservoirs below streams.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-38" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[38]</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-39" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[39]</a> Because of higher pH balances in mine-affected streams, metals such as selenium and iron hydroxide are rendered insoluble, bringing attendant chemical changes to the stream.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-40" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[40]</a> The statement also estimates that 724 miles (1,165 km) of Appalachian streams were buried by valley fills between 1985 and 2001.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-autogenerated1-7" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[7]</a> On September 28, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) independent Science Advisory Board (SAB) released their first draft review of EPA’s research into the water quality impacts of valley fills associated with mountaintop mining, agreeing with EPA’s conclusion that valley fills are associated with increased levels of conductivity threatening aquatic life in surface waters.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-41" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[41]</a>Although U.S. mountaintop removal sites by law must be reclaimed after mining is complete, reclamation has traditionally focused on stabilizing rock formations and controlling for erosion, and not on the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reforestation" title="Reforestation" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">reforestation</a> of the affected area.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-42" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[42]</a> Fast-growing, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduced_species" title="Introduced species" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">non-native</a> flora such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lespedeza_cuneata" title="Lespedeza cuneata" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Lespedeza cuneata</a>, planted to quickly provide vegetation on a site, compete with tree seedlings, and trees have difficulty establishing root systems in compacted backfill.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-autogenerated1-7" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[7]</a> Consequently, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiversity" title="Biodiversity" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">biodiversity</a> suffers in a region of the United States with numerous <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endemism" title="Endemism" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">endemic species</a>.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-43" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[43]</a> In addition, reintroduced <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk" title="Elk" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">elk</a> (Cervus canadensis) on mountaintop removal sites in Kentucky are eating tree seedlings.Advocates of MTR claim that once the areas are reclaimed as mandated by law, the area can provide flat land suitable for many uses in a region where flat land is at a premium. They also maintain that the new growth on reclaimed mountaintop mined areas is better suited to support populations of game animals.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-44" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[44]</a> While some of the land is able to be turned into grassland which game animals can live in, the amount of grassland is minimal. The land does not retake the form it had before the MTR. As stated in the book Bringing Down the Mountains: "Some of the main problems associated with MTR include soil depletion, sedimentation, low success rate of tree regrowth, lack of successful revegetation, displacement of native wildlife, and burial of streams."<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining#cite_note-45" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[45]</a> The ecological benefits after MTR are far below the level of the original land.<h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;">Art, entertainment, and media</h2><div>
</div><div>many hedges, strNGE as weather has been ...</div><div>...</div><div><div role="navigation" aria-label="Portals" class="noprint portal plainlist tright" style="clear: right; float: right; margin: 0.5em 0px 0.5em 1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170);"><ul style="list-style: none none; margin: 0px; padding: 0.1em; line-height: 13.09px; display: table; box-sizing: border-box; max-width: 175px; background: rgb(249, 249, 249); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><li style="margin-bottom: 0px; display: table-row;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aegopodium_podagraria1_ies.jpg" class="image" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><img alt="icon" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bf/Aegopodium_podagraria1_ies.jpg/32px-Aegopodium_podagraria1_ies.jpg" width="32" height="28" class="noviewer" srcset="//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bf/Aegopodium_podagraria1_ies.jpg/48px-Aegopodium_podagraria1_ies.jpg 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bf/Aegopodium_podagraria1_ies.jpg/64px-Aegopodium_podagraria1_ies.jpg 2x" data-file-width="800" data-file-height="700" style="border: 0px; vertical-align: middle;" /></a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Environment" title="Portal:Environment" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Environment portal</a></li></ul></div><ul style="margin: 0.3em 0px 0px 1.6em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" csvg="Csvg" width="%225%22" height="%2213%22%3E" ccircle="Ccircle" cx="%222.5%22" cy="%229.5%22" r="%222.5%22" fill="%22%2300528c%22/%3E" c="C" e="E" color="color" rgb="rgb" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" xmlns="%22http://www.w3.org/2000/svg%22" xmlns:data="data"><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain" title="Battle of Blair Mountain" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Battle of Blair Mountain</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_phase_out" class="mw-redirect" title="Coal phase out" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Coal phase out</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_coal_industry" title="Environmental impact of the coal industry" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Environmental impact of the coal industry</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_justice_and_coal_mining_in_Appalachia" title="Environmental justice and coal mining in Appalachia" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Environmental justice and coal mining in Appalachia</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Bonds" title="Julia Bonds" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Julia Bonds</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Gibson" title="Larry Gibson" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Larry Gibson</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Gunnoe" title="Maria Gunnoe" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Maria Gunnoe</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Fubilan" title="Mount Fubilan" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Mount Fubilan</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silas_House" title="Silas House" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Silas House</a></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendell_Berry" title="Wendell Berry" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Wendell Berry</a></li></ul></div>--<a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25072018/appalachia-mountaintop-removal-coal-strip-mining-satellite-maps-environmental-impacts-data">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25072018/appalachia-mountaintop-removal-coal-strip-mining-satellite-maps-environmental-impacts-data</a>Strip mining across the mountaintops of Appalachia is scarring as much as three times more land to get a ton of coal than just three decades ago, new research shows.The data and a <a href="http://skytruthmtr.appspot.com/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">series of new maps</a> that track the spread of surface mining across the region suggest that even as the industry has declined, what continues likely has an oversized impact on people and the environment.If mining companies have to do more blasting and digging for the same amount of coal, that means more dust in the air and more pollution in streams, said Appalachian Voices Programs Director Matt Wasson, who worked on the study with researchers from Duke University, West Virginia University, Google and SkyTruth.  ""This was really the first step in a larger process of digging deeper into the impacts that surface mining has," said Christian Thomas, a geospatial analyst with SkyTruth, a nonprofit that uses satellite imagery to understand human impacts on the environment. The study, <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0197758" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">published online</a> in PLOS ONE, a peer-reviewed journal, also provided what Duke researcher Andrew Pericak described as the first year-by-year mapping showing the spread of mountaintop mining across the region.  The team is making the data <a href="https://www.skytruth.org/mtr-data-files/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">publicly available</a> for other researchers, including those looking into the health and environmental effects of mining.<h3 style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.333; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Thousands of Square Miles Blasted and Chewed</h3>For decades, surface mining in the mountains of Appalachia has been among the most destructive forms of extracting coal. Mining companies blast away the tops and sides of mountains to get at underground coal seams, then shove the waste rock into valleys and streams.Between 1985 and 2015, explosives and mining equipment chewed up more than 1,100 square miles in pursuit of coal buried in the mountains in West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia. The animation below shows how quickly it spread.<div class="media media-element-container media-image_centered_medium" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 648px; margin: 0.25em auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><figure id="file-271055" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" class="file file-image file-image-png with-caption" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 100%; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em;"><figcaption class="field field-name-field-image-caption field-type-text-long field-label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit; padding: 2em; line-height: 1.6; border-right: 1px solid rgb(231, 231, 231); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(231, 231, 231); border-left: 1px solid rgb(231, 231, 231); border-image: initial; border-top: none;"><div class="field-items" style="box-sizing: inherit;">This 1985 satellite image shows mountaintop mining across a section of Kentucky, West Virginia and Virginia. The animation below shows how mining spread across that area over the following 30 years.</div></figcaption></figure></div><div class="media media-element-container media-image_centered_medium" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 648px; margin: 0.25em auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><figure id="file-271058" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" class="file file-image file-image-gif with-caption" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 100%; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em;">
<figcaption class="field field-name-field-image-caption field-type-text-long field-label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit; padding: 2em; line-height: 1.6; border-right: 1px solid rgb(231, 231, 231); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(231, 231, 231); border-left: 1px solid rgb(231, 231, 231); border-image: initial; border-top: none;"><div class="field-items" style="box-sizing: inherit;">Satellite images from 1985 to 2015 show how mountaintop removal mining spread across this 12,000-square-mile area of Kentucky, West Virginia and Virginia. Credit: Christian Thomas/SkyTruth</div></figcaption></figure></div>Combining their work with a <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.5b04532" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">previous analysis</a> covering the mid-1970s through 1984, the researchers determined that more than 2,300 square miles—about 7 percent of the area studied—had been cleared in connection with surface mining. That's roughly three times the size of Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Geologists have predicted that as coal companies mine the thickest and shallowest layers of coal, what's left will produce more waste rock, making surface mining more expensive, the authors wrote.  They identified 1998 as a point of inflection. Before then, it took about 10 square meters to produce a metric ton of coal. By 2015, it was up to about 30 square meters."It may simply be becoming harder for mining company to extract the coal," Pericak said.<h3 style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.333; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Concerns About Human Health and Climate</h3>Coal production across the United States slid in recent years as aging coal-fired plants were shut down and replaced by new ones burning cheaper natural gas and as state and federal policies promoted cleaner power sources.The Trump administration, vowing to revive the coal industry, has <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/16022017/coal-mining-environment-stream-rule-donald-trump-mussels-species" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">repealed</a> an Obama-era rule that sought to protect streams from damage due to mining, and it has been considering ways to <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/09072018/coal-power-plant-pollution-summer-heat-wave-emergency-order-virginia-dominion-trump-perry" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">increase coal burning</a>, but there has been <a href="https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/weekly/tables/weekly_production.php" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">little change</a> in production in Appalachia.Coal burning is a major source of heat-trapping carbon dioxide, a primary driver of climate change, and <a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/045701" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">cutting down</a> Appalachian forests for mountaintop mining releases more stored carbon to the atmosphere.Researchers also have been <a href="https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/pubhealth/hat/noms/mtr_mining/index.html" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">studying the impact</a> of mountaintop removal operations on the health of people living nearby.Last August, the Trump administration, <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/21082017/mountaintop-mining-coal-health-study-scrapped-trump" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">halted</a> a health study on the impacts of mountaintop mining that was already underway by the National Academy of Sciences. A Department of Interior Inspector General's review found in June that the study had been canceled for no clear reason.The study has not resumed, though, and the committee was disbanded earlier this year, Jennifer Walsh, spokeswoman for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, told InsideClimate News on Tuesday."The National Academies still believe this is an important study of the potential health risks for people living near surface coal mine sites in Central Appalachia," she said.
=<div class="headline-container" style="margin-top: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h1 class="headline h1" style="margin: 10px; padding: 0px; position: relative; line-height: 31px;">One Year Into the Trump Administration, Where Do We Stand?</h1></div><div id="utm_campaign" style="margin-top: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body js-update-url" data-elid="2526927488" data-authors="The Revelator" data-headline="One Year Into the Trump Administration, Where Do We Stand?" style="margin: 10px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body-description">By John R. PlattWhat a long, strange year it's been.Saturday, Jan. 20 marks the one-year anniversary of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Trump administration</a> officially taking office after a long and arduous election. It's a year that has seen seemingly unending <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-science-advisers-2526885024.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">attacks on science and the environment</a>, along with a rise in hateful rhetoric and racially motivated policies. But it's almost been met by the continuing growth of the efforts to resist what the Trump administration has to offer.So where do we stand, one year in?Well, for one thing, we can say that the year has given the administration's actions a visible shape. "These are not isolated incidents at this point," said <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/bio/jacob-carter.html#.WlUOsDdG1PY" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Jacob Carter</a>, research scientist for the Center for Science and Democracy at the <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Union of Concerned Scientists</a>, who has been tracking the administration's <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/jacob-carter/one-year-of-attacks-on-science-by-trump-administration" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">attacks against science</a>—at least 65 since the president took office. "They're happening so often now that there is definitely a pattern starting to emerge. The administration really wants to undermine the role of science and science-based decision making. They're getting the expertise out of the way to further a political agenda."Carter said these attempts to remove science from government decision-making—ranging from ending a study of the health effects of mountaintop-removal mining to eliminating the words "<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">climate change</a>" from all EPA grants—"have real consequences on peoples' lives. It's about our health and safety. If we don't listen to the best available science, then our lives are at risk."But pushing science and scientists aside doesn't mean they go away forever. "Under this administration we know the scientific evidence isn't going to be able to speak for itself, so scientists really have to step up and speak for it," Carter said. And scientists have been doing that in record numbers, starting with <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/march-for-science-truth-to-power-2375041158.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">last year's March for Science</a> and continuing on multiple fronts ever since. "They're stepping up in an unprecedented number and saying science has got to be used in policy-making decisions." That's not slowing down; Carter recalls how he attended two big scientific conferences last year and "I had tons of scientists coming up and asking me how they can advocate, what they could do to make sure that science is being used and remains in a proper place."That increased level of activism is not unique to scientists, as people from many walks of live have definitely become more politically engaged in the past year. "Trump's election was a wakeup call in a way," said <a href="https://www.fairfield.edu/lassochannel/academic/profile/index.lasso?id=2228" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Gayle Alberda</a>, an assistant professor of politics at Connecticut's Fairfield University, who studies elections, political participation and civic engagement. "Nation-wide, we've seen this huge influx of people wanting to know not only how to run for office, but how to get politically engaged."</div></div><div>=</div><div>weirdly iconic role that coal mining played in the last election, and the weirdly iconic role it has played in the administration's rhetoric since then, continues to amaze and astound. In a time in which the reliance on fossil fuels and the subsequent emissions of CO2 have endangered the future of the planet, a successful presidential candidate ran on bringing back a dying industry that, even in its salad days, killed and maimed people with distressing regularities, an industry in which the labor strife was the most serious armed conflict between Americans since Appomattox, and an industry that crippled the economy of several states. This president* ran on the most pro-coal platform of any presidential candidate since Theodore Roosevelt stepped in to mediate the coal strikes in 1905. It was as though we were living through some sort of presidential re-enactors convention.Of course, in the real world, the coal industry continues to be dangerously unhealthy and environmentally ruinous. So, naturally, having handed environmental policy over to people like EPA director Scott Pruitt, an extraction industry sublet, the way to solve these perennial problems with coal is not to study them any more. The <a class="body-link" data-tracking-id="recirc-text-link" href="http://blogs.wvgazettemail.com/coaltattoo/2017/08/21/trump-osm-issues-cease-all-work-order-on-study-of-mountaintop-removal-minings-health-effects/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease-in-out;">Charleston Gazette-Mail</a> seems somewhat stunned by this development.<blockquote class="body-blockquote" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-left: 47.5938px; margin-right: 0px; clear: both; line-height: 1.3; border-left: 0.375rem solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 1.25rem; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In an August 18 letter, the U.S. Department of the Interior's Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement informed the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that it should cease all work on a study of the potential health risks for people living near surface coal mine sites in Central Appalachia. The letter states that the Department has begun an agency-wide review of its grants and cooperative agreements in excess of $100,000, largely as a result of the Department's changing budget situation.</blockquote>Mountaintop removal is probably the worst possible form of coal mining. It is a tantrum of a process that has been known to unleash untold poisons into the water tables in surrounding areas. A month ago, <a class="body-link" data-tracking-id="recirc-text-link" href="http://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/20170711/research-on-mountaintop-removal-health-effects-adequate-panel-told" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease-in-out;">a researcher talked to the National Academy of Sciences</a> and told that panel that enough studies have been conducted to conclude that mountaintop removal mining threatens the health and safety of citizens living in and around the coalfields.<blockquote class="body-blockquote" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-left: 47.5938px; margin-right: 0px; clear: both; line-height: 1.3; border-left: 0.375rem solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 1.25rem; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">"We know enough," researcher Michael Hendryx told the panel during a meeting in Washington. "If all we do is call for more research, we're asking people to be research subjects without their consent." While at WVU, Hendryx became a target for coal industry criticism when he published dozens of peer-reviewed papers that found coalfield residents living near mountaintop removal operations faced increased risks of <a class="body-link" href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3Awww.wvgazettemail.com_News_201107271037&d=DwMFaQ&c=B73tqXN8Ec0ocRmZHMCntw&r=nfEsr3_7G8mMzciVotUPcNyvGH3WftYYyF7Ffipyk5c&m=5_RrAlgYV3SynIC_HJiBtOpxAUq_nom3WHeKSyRCgbk&s=Vx9os3viKmOp29i56lqOWGvj_SffhrG4AY0_eBwVPFk&e=" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease-in-out;">cancer</a>, <a class="body-link" href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3Ablogs.wvgazettemail.com_coaltattoo_2011_06_30_birth-2Ddefects-2Dstudy-2Dmore-2Dinconvenient-2Dfacts-2Dabout-2Dthe-2Dimpact-2Dof-2Dmountaintop-2Dremoval-2Dcoal-2Dmining&d=DwMFaQ&c=B73tqXN8Ec0ocRmZHMCntw&r=nfEsr3_7G8mMzciVotUPcNyvGH3WftYYyF7Ffipyk5c&m=5_RrAlgYV3SynIC_HJiBtOpxAUq_nom3WHeKSyRCgbk&s=9i40Bq6Y8Kz6JOTI17hOAYZ4mdz6QIKARZBesWaa3XE&e=" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease-in-out;">birth defects</a> and <a class="body-link" href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3Ablogs.wvgazettemail.com_coaltattoo_2009_06_20_weighing-2Dcoals-2Dcosts-2Dand-2Dbenefits&d=DwMFaQ&c=B73tqXN8Ec0ocRmZHMCntw&r=nfEsr3_7G8mMzciVotUPcNyvGH3WftYYyF7Ffipyk5c&m=5_RrAlgYV3SynIC_HJiBtOpxAUq_nom3WHeKSyRCgbk&s=TyJ1KLx-tNht_5Ro43YberMMCfPizTN5ItZ6jOIuRBo&e=" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease-in-out;">premature death</a>, among other health problems. The National Academy of Sciences, with funding from the U.S. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, is conducting a two-year study of the issue, an exercise that in many ways amounts to a review of scientific papers that Hendryx either authored or inspired with his work at WVU. Hendryx, who is not on the academy panel, now is an assistant professor of public health at the University of Indiana Bloomington.The project <a class="body-link" href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3Awww.documentcloud.org_documents_3004318-2DOSMRE-2DNews-2DRelease-2DNAS-2DStudy-2DFINAL.html&d=DwMFaQ&c=B73tqXN8Ec0ocRmZHMCntw&r=nfEsr3_7G8mMzciVotUPcNyvGH3WftYYyF7Ffipyk5c&m=5_RrAlgYV3SynIC_HJiBtOpxAUq_nom3WHeKSyRCgbk&s=rOKuqiIcJuDC5OqWWf2CobVRU-vp6-R6xiUpmrSX0n8&e=" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" border-box="border-box" text-decoration-line="text-decoration-line" none="none" transition="transition" color="color" s="s" ease-in-out="ease-in-out">was announced in August 2016</a> and funding was in place before the Donald Trump administration — which has promised to roll back regulations on the coal industry — took office. State Public Health Commissioner Dr. Rahul Gupta and former state Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Randy Huffman had asked the U.S. Interior Department for help on the issue, and Interior's OSM provided $1 million in funding for the academy review. West Virginia political and governmental leaders <a class="body-link" href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3Ablogs.wvgazettemail.com_coaltattoo_2011_09_14_west-2Dvirginias-2Danti-2Dscience-2Dgubernatorial-2Dcandidates-23more-2D19021&d=DwMFaQ&c=B73tqXN8Ec0ocRmZHMCntw&r=nfEsr3_7G8mMzciVotUPcNyvGH3WftYYyF7Ffipyk5c&m=5_RrAlgYV3SynIC_HJiBtOpxAUq_nom3WHeKSyRCgbk&s=3yZxKUF3uBbHZbCGgSw6GC0Mmk0wzbQuEOSvfq-paL4&e=" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" border-box="border-box" text-decoration-line="text-decoration-line" none="none" transition="transition" color="color" s="s" ease-in-out="ease-in-out">have mostly either ignored the growing body of science on mountaintop removal's health effects</a> or tried to belittle the work. Coal industry officials have, likewise, attacked the studies, <a class="body-link" href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.wvgazettemail.com_News_201304060061&d=DwMFaQ&c=B73tqXN8Ec0ocRmZHMCntw&r=nfEsr3_7G8mMzciVotUPcNyvGH3WftYYyF7Ffipyk5c&m=5_RrAlgYV3SynIC_HJiBtOpxAUq_nom3WHeKSyRCgbk&s=wRWzheEIfhDUxRv6QMlA5V2Jt1PxLVfwFsS7eEP8rPo&e=" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" border-box="border-box" text-decoration-line="text-decoration-line" none="none" transition="transition" color="color" s="s" ease-in-out="ease-in-out">funding a large effort to discredit the work</a>.</blockquote>But, if you don't study something, it doesn't really exist. The damage already done to this country and its institutions is going to take decades to fix.</div><div>=</div>overburden and other docs
http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/08/overburden-mountaintop-removal...As featured in Overburden—a chilling mining term that refers to the overlying rock and soil displaced, like besieged residents and miners, to reach underground <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/coal-mining-pollution/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">coal</a> resources—these two former adversaries will stand together when Blankenship finally goes on<a href="http://wvmetronews.com/2015/06/13/blankenship-trial-moved-to-charleston-with-oct-1-start/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;"> trial on Oct. 1</a> in Charleston, West Virginia, for <a href="http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/11/blankenship-blacklung.html" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">charges of conspiracy</a> to violate mandatory federal mine safety and health standards relating to the Upper Big Branch Mine disaster, which took 29 lives.To be sure, Lorelei and Betty will not only stand together in solidarity for mine safety and economic diversification.“There’s a desperate need for healing in the community,” Lorelei says, in one of the most poignant moments in the film, as she packs up her belongings to move away.Healing between families, communities, and the plundered mountains in central Appalachia—and in so many other strip-mined communities in southern Illinois, Wyoming and Montana, and on Northern Cheyenne, Crow, Navajo and other indigenous lands.Embedded for years in West Virginia, Overburden director and University of North Carolina professor Chad Stevens is not only one of the most talented filmmakers of his generation, but one of its best storytellers, who has done the tedious and indefatigable work behind the scenes to gain the trust of bitterly divided and traumatized communities, and allow his characters to speak for themselves and recount the process of such healing unfolding today. Stevens brilliantly balances the beauty of families and the mountains, amid the tension of its conflicts and demise; his footage of a bear cub, aimlessly wandering to the edge of a massive strip mine, in search of its mother, is singular in its power.There are a lot of important film documentaries on <a href="http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/4/mountaintop-removal-mining-a-crime-against-appalachians-health.html" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">mountaintop removal mining</a>—a strip mining process that has literally detonated untold millions of tons of explosives to blow up the tops of more than 500 mountains and shovel up the coal with machines over the past half century. In the tradition of the Oscar-winning film documentary Harlan County, OverburdenStevens effectively transcends the “war on coal” political banter by capturing the human stories behind the daily operations of one of our nation’s most misunderstood, complicated and devastating sources of energy.<figure id="attachment_367729" aria-labelledby="figcaption_attachment_367729" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 3px; line-height: 25.2px; max-width: 760px; background-color: rgb(238, 238, 238);">
<figcaption id="figcaption_attachment_367729" class="wp-caption-text" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.1875rem 0.4375rem; line-height: 18.2px;">Photo credit: Chad Stevens, courtesy of Overburden film</figcaption></figure>The portrait of Lorelei dispels many of the stereotypes of so-called “tree huggers” working to hold the coal industry and its sycophantic politicians accountable to various water and mining regulations. The widow of a miner who died from black lung disease, with a son-in-law in the mines, Lorelei joins a young community organizer, Rory McIlmoil, in a Coal River Mountain campaign for wind energy in an effort to draw attention for more sustainable economic development in the region. When a mining company launches its strip mining operations on Coal River Mountain, Lorelei travels to Washington as a representative of the affected residents, appealing to the Obama administration’s “power to intervene.”Taking the viewer on a rare glimpse into the pro-coal circles, Betty is a matter-of-fact narrator who declares “coal is life here,” and proudly posts a “Friends of Coal” sign. When the violation-ridden Upper Big Branch mine explodes in 2010, taking her brother’s life in the process, Betty comes to the realization that “Massey Energy murdered my brother.”Joining efforts with Lorelei in an effort to revoke Massey’s corporate charter, Betty sums up the reality of both miners and all communities affected by reckless mining: “If we don’t stand up and fight, who’s going to?”Years in the making, Overburden is ultimately an extraordinary story of transformation; of two brave women who recognize their fates no longer need to be divided by outside forces that have controlled the region for over a century through fear, deprivation and outright violence, and take action for a more viable future.With <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/11/14/blankenship-indicted-disaster-coal-mine/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Blankenship’s historic indictment</a>—the first coal baron to be brought to trial for conspiracy charges in decades—Overburden should be required viewing for President Obama, Congress and anyone who has ever depended on coal-fired electricity.=<a href="http://www.alternet.org/environment/mountaintop-removal-mining-pushing-species-extinction">http://www.alternet.org/environment/mountaintop-removal-mining-pushing-species-extinction</a>

Of interest because effective against tall odds, divestment strategy?  Banks are being peeled off? each DEFECTOR win increases pressure on holdouts? THEY ARE EXPOSED AND NO LONGER HAVE BUFFER COVER

Why are they winning when other green efforts stalled or losing ground?

alliance between poor (wht?) ppl/workers and greens?  Worst of worst: coal cooking the planet, coal vulnerable b/c BO and EPA GHG regs, fracking makes coal less economically viable.  Perfect storm is systemic?

=7/15Last month, Bank of America published its <a href="http://about.bankofamerica.com/assets/pdf/Bank-of-America-2014-Corporate-Social-Responsibility-Report.pdf" style="">2014 Corporate Social Responsibility Report</a> [3], which addressed the bank’s financing policies and practices in detail. This post looks back on the bank’s release of its updated <a href="http://about.bankofamerica.com/assets/pdf/COAL_POLICY.pdf" style="">coal polic</a> [4]<a href="http://about.bankofamerica.com/assets/pdf/COAL_POLICY.pdf" style="">y</a> [4] in May, and looks at the strengths and weaknesses of the policy update and what it means for the banking sector’s financing of coal more broadly.Bank of America’s new coal policy is both groundbreaking and imperfect. It acknowledges that the bank has a responsibility not only to finance the transition to low-carbon energy but also to cut financing for high-carbon energy sources. The policy goes well beyond comparable policies at the bank’s U.S. peers by committing to a broad cutback to BofA’s lending for coal mining both in the U.S. and internationally. However, this commitment lacks public-facing detail in terms of targets and deadlines, and fails to address the bank’s continued exposure to coal-fired power production. In spite of these flaws, Bank of America’s updated coal policy represents a clear step away from financing coal and a bold challenge to the bank’s peers in the months leading up to the Paris climate conference.Strengths<ul><li style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Statement of responsibility for addressing the climate impacts of BofA’s financing – Bank of America’s updated coal policy states that the bank “has a responsibility to help mitigate climate change by leveraging our scale and resources to accelerate the transition from a high-carbon to a low-carbon society, and from high-carbon to low-carbon sources of energy.” This symbolic statement of responsibility is commendable, as it acknowledges that the bank considers addressing climate change to be an obligation and not just an optional initiative.</li><li style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Commitment to reduce financing for coal mining companies worldwide – The new policy commits the bank to “continue to reduce our credit exposure to coal extraction companies” and specifies that this commitment is global in scope. Rainforest Action Network (RAN) will be monitoring Bank of America’s involvement with transactions with coal mining companies to verify that it is following through on this commitment.</li><li>Specific commitment to cut financing for producers of mountaintop removal coal – In addition to making a global commitment to cut exposure to coal mining, the policy specifically states that the bank will be cutting its exposure to companies that engage in mountaintop removal coal mining. RAN will also be tracking the bank’s follow-through on reducing its exposure to coal companies with mountaintop removal mining operations.</li><li style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Additional environmental and human rights criteria for legacy coal mining transactions – The policy includes additional human rights, regulatory compliance, and environmental due diligence criteria to guide the bank’s assessment of any future transactions with its legacy coal portfolio.  </li></ul>Concerns<ul style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li>Lack of transparent deadlines and ambiguity about transaction types covered by the commitment – The policy does not include a clear timeline or deadlines for how the bank will proceed with its transition away from financing coal mining. Furthermore, the policy refers to the bank’s “credit exposure” and does not publicly specify how this commitment will apply to other corporate banking transactions other than loans, such as bond or equity issuance. However, RAN expects that BofA’s bond and equity underwriting exposure to coal producers will decline in tandem with its lending exposure to these companies, and we will be monitoring these transactions going forward.</li><li>Continued support for coal-fired power generation – Although BofA’s policy is bold on coal mining, it does not address coal-fired power generation financing. The policy’s discussion of coal-fired power focuses on monitoring and reporting on emissions from the bank’s electric power financing portfolio, which falls well short of the urgent need to phase out not only coal mining but coal power generation as well. Moreover, the policy includes a worrying endorsement of carbon capture and storage technology, which, if widely-adopted, would further entrench coal-based power production.</li><li>Need for a comprehensive approach to human rights and environmental due diligence – The bank’s disclosure of human rights, governance, and environmental due diligence commitments for its legacy coal finance portfolio is welcome. However, these issues are relevant not just to coal mining companies but to companies in other sectors as well. Therefore, Bank of America should disclose details of its human rights and environmental transaction screening processes for corporate clients in all high-risk sectors.</li></ul>The Bottom LineWith the window for avoiding the worst climate change emissions scenarios rapidly closing, 2015 will be a critical year for the climate. As the Paris climate summit approaches, the banking sector must act decisively to stop financing the production and burning of a fuel that is incompatible with a livable planet. Bank of America’s new coal policy is a major step in this direction. And with Crédit Agricole, Europe’s third largest bank <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/20/credit-agricole-coal-idUSL5N0YB4NO20150520" style="">adopting a similar policy</a> [5] later this spring, pressure is building on the rest of the industry to cut ties to coal. This summer and fall, RAN and over 75 other organizations are calling on global banks to meet and surpass Bank of America’s policy by <a href="http://dotheparispledge.org/" style="">committing to the Paris Pledge</a> [6] and ending financing for coal mining and coal-fired power production. The challenge to other U.S. banks is clear: It’s past time to stop financing coal. 
=<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/05/mountaintop-removal-coal-mining-ends-march-16/">http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/05/mountaintop-removal-coal-mining-ends-march-16/</a>links to :In a breathtaking but largely overlooked ruling this week, a federal judge <a href="http://www.snl.com/InteractiveX/Article.aspx?cdid=A-28951264-11565" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">agreed</a> that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may disregard studies on the <a href="http://acheact.org/a-c-h-e-science/more-science/" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">health impacts of mountaintop removal mining </a>in its permitting process, only two weeks after Goldman Prize Award-winning activist <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/mother-gunnoe-mountaintop_b_188687.html" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Maria Gunnoe</a> wrote an impassioned plea to President Obama to renew withdrawn funding for US Geological Survey research on strip mining operations and redouble <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/31/west-virginia-coal-chemical-spill-impact" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">federal action </a>to address the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/the-appalachians-mining_b_1561093.html" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">decades-old</a>humanitarian disaster.(Gunnoe's full letter is below.)The prophetic call for immediate federal action by Gunnoe, a community organizer for the West Virginia-based<a href="http://www.ohvec.org/" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"> Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition</a> and a long-time witness to the tragedy of mountaintop removal, has never been so timely. "Appalachian citizens are the casualties of a silent "war on people" who live where coal is extracted," Gunnoe wrote the president. "Citizens of all ages are dying for the coal industry's bottom line." Gunnoe concluded:<blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 15px 0px; padding: 15px; direction: ltr; border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); line-height: 21px; vertical-align: baseline; quotes: none; font-stretch: normal;">We all must recognize and resolve these mountaintop-removal-caused health problems and end the onslaught of pollution on people. Ending mountaintop removal could be as simple as passing HR 526: the <a href="http://acheact.org/the-legislation" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Appalachian Community Health Emergency Act</a>, or possibly even an Executive Order. The ACHE Act will place a moratorium on all new mountaintop removal permits. This bill, when passed, will immediately improve the lives and health of the people who live with these impacts daily.<div class="ql" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; direction: ltr; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="qr" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; direction: ltr; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></div></blockquote>Two years ago, in fact, the <a href="http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/07/20/9947/study-finds-toxins-mountaintop-coal-mining-sites" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">USGS published</a> preliminary findings on "unusually high" toxic compounds in the soil and water near strip mining operations. That USGS research team is no longer funded."Our state politicians display a willful ignorance of some <a href="http://ohvec.org/issues/mountaintop_removal/articles/health/" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">24 peer-reviewed scientific reports</a> about mountaintop removal's human health effects," Gunnoe wrote. "Studies show a correlation between living near a mountaintop removal site and significantly increased rates of cancer, birth defects and premature deaths. We believe they'd have a much harder time ignoring studies put out by the USGS."Besieged residents in strip mining areas of <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/death-by-a-thousand-cuts_b_5333006.html" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Illinois, including Rocky Branch</a>, and Kentucky, where a similar ruling over <a href="http://www.kentucky.com/2014/02/25/3107261_mining-permitters-say-protecting.html?rh=1" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">ignored human health risks, have long called for federal enforcement and action of flawed mining regulations.  </a> Last night in Charleston, West Virginia, the premiere screening of a new feature film,<a href="http://wvpublic.org/post/film-moving-mountains-premieres-thursday-night-charleston" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">"Moving Mountains,</a>" based on the award-winning book by journalist Penny Loeb, was a reminder of the decades-long struggle by citizens for civil rights and health protection in coal mining communities in the courts and political corridors. Here's a trailer of the film, which stars actress Theresa Russell:"Moving Mountains," tragically enough, dates back to 1994. In fact, August 3rd marked the 37th anniversary of the flawed Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, which granted federal sanctioning for mountaintop removal, which President<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/dear-mr-president-declare_b_202321.html" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jimmy Carter called</a> a "disappointing effort" and a "watered down bill.""Very little has changed," Gunnoe said, referring to the film's true life heroine, Patricia Bragg, a coal miner's wife who defends her community from water contamination. "There are only more Patricia Braggs now.""Twenty years later we in Appalachia are still reaping the bitter harvest of destroyed lives, health, community," said actor and singer T. Paige Dalporto, who appears in the film, "and irreparable environmental degradation to the obscene profit of a few outside billionaires who call the shots in our corrupt, cornered, and coralled governmental bureaucracy and we are at their mercy of which they have none."Even while central<a href="http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/6/obama-war-on-coalmidtermsappalachiasenatepolitics.html" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"> Appalachia's coal industry falters </a>to exploding markets in the<a href="http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/3/coal-mining-frackingrenewableenergyillinoisquinn.html" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Illinois Basin</a> and western coalfields, permits for <a href="http://www.charlestondailymail.com/article/20140820/DM01/140829890" target="hplink" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">new mountaintop removal operations</a> continue to be filed."Judge Copenhaver confirmed what we already know: there is no law in the United States that says a permitting agency must consider Mountaintop Removal's toxic effects on people's health," said Bob Kincaid, with the Appalachian Community Health Emergency Act Movement. "At present, as a matter of law, people in Appalachia simply do not matter at all. If we had the A.C.H.E. Act, these ill-considered rulings wouldn't happen. They couldn't happen. The A.C.H.E. Act's moratorium on new permits would stop them."Gunnoe's letter to President Obama is below:wikiJohn Thomas Copenhaver Jr. (born September 29, 1925) is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge" title="United States federal judge" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">United States federal judge</a> born in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston,West_Virginia" title="Charleston, West Virginia" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Charleston, West Virginia</a>. He received an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_of_Arts" title="Bachelor of Arts" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">A.B.</a> from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_University" title="West Virginia University" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">West Virginia University</a> in 1947 and an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LL.B." title="LL.B." class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">LL.B.</a> from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_University_College_of_Law" title="West Virginia University College of Law" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">West Virginia University College of Law</a> in 1950. He was in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army" title="United States Army" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">United States Army</a> from 1944 to 1946, and became a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_clerk" title="Law clerk" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">law clerk</a> to the Hon. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Moore(judge)" title="Ben Moore (judge)" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Ben Moore</a> of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_West_Virginia" title="U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia" class="mw-redirect" style="background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia</a> from 1950 to 1951. He was in private practice in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston,West_Virginia" title="Charleston, West Virginia" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Charleston, West Virginia</a> from 1951 to 1958, and a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_referee" title="Special referee" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">referee</a> in<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankruptcy_in_the_United_States" title="Bankruptcy in the United States" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">bankruptcy</a>, Southern District of West Virginia from 1958 to 1973.He was both an adjunct professor at the West Virginia University College of Law and a faculty member of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Judicial_Center" title="Federal Judicial Center" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Federal Judicial Center</a> from 1970 to 1976, and a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bankruptcy_court" title="United States bankruptcy court" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">U.S. Bankruptcy Judge</a> at the Southern District of West Virginia from 1973 to 1976.Copenhaver was nominated by President <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Ford" title="Gerald Ford" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Gerald Ford</a> on August 26, 1976 to be a federal judge on the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_West_Virginia" title="United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia</a>, a seat vacated by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_K.Hall" title="Kenneth K. Hall" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Kenneth K. Hall</a>. He was confirmed by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate" title="United States Senate" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">United States Senate</a> on September 1, 1976, and received his commission two days later.<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 1.3; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Thomas_Copenhaver_Jr.#Sources" class="mw-headline-anchor" aria-hidden="true" title="Link to this section" style="text-decoration: none; margin-left: -20px; width: 20px; opacity: 0; position: absolute; -webkit-user-select: none; margin-right: 0px; text-align: center; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">§</a>Sources[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Thomas_Copenhaver_Jr.&action=edit&section=1&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Sources" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">edit</a>]</h2><ul style="line-height: 22.4px; margin: 0.3em 0px 0px 1.6em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" c="C" fxml="Fxml" version="version" d="D" encoding="encoding" utf-8="UTF-8" f="F" e="E" a="A" csvg="Csvg" http="http" fwww.w3.org="Fwww.w3.org" f2000="F2000" fsvg="Fsvg" width="width" height="height" ccircle="Ccircle" cx="cx" cy="cy" r="r" fill="fill" xmlns="xmlns" xmlns:data="data"><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/nGetInfo?jid=508&cid=999&ctype=na&instate=na" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent), url(data:image/svg+xml,%3C%3Fxml%20version%3D%221.0%22%20encoding%3D%22UTF-8%22%3F%3E%3Csvg%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20width%3D%2210%22%20height%3D%2210%22%3E%3Cg%20transform%3D%22translate%28-826.429%20-698.791%29%22%3E%3Crect%20width%3D%225.982%22%20height%3D%225.982%22%20x%3D%22826.929%22%20y%3D%22702.309%22%20fill%3D%22%23fff%22%20stroke%3D%22%2306c%22%2F%3E%3Cg%3E%3Cpath%20d%3D%22M831.194%20698.791h5.234v5.391l-1.571%201.545-1.31-1.31-2.725%202.725-2.689-2.689%202.808-2.808-1.311-1.311z%22%20fill%3D%22%2306f%22%2F%3E%3Cpath%20d%3D%22M835.424%20699.795l.022%204.885-1.817-1.817-2.881%202.881-1.228-1.228%202.881-2.881-1.851-1.851z%22%20fill%3D%22%23fff%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fsvg%3E); background-attachment: initial, initial; background-size: initial, initial; background-origin: initial, initial; background-clip: initial, initial; background-position: 100% 50%, 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat, repeat;">John Thomas Copenhaver Jr.</a> at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biographical_Directory_of_Federal_Judges" title="Biographical Directory of Federal Judges" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Biographical Directory of Federal Judges</a>, a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain" title="Public domain" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">public domain</a> publication of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Judicial_Center" title="Federal Judicial Center" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Federal Judicial Center</a>.</li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://politicalgraveyard.com/bio/coots-corbly.html#0EW0YQCL8" style="text-decoration: none; padding-right: 13px; background-image: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent), url(data:image/svg+xml,%3C%3Fxml%20version%3D%221.0%22%20encoding%3D%22UTF-8%22%3F%3E%3Csvg%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20width%3D%2210%22%20height%3D%2210%22%3E%3Cg%20transform%3D%22translate%28-826.429%20-698.791%29%22%3E%3Crect%20width%3D%225.982%22%20height%3D%225.982%22%20x%3D%22826.929%22%20y%3D%22702.309%22%20fill%3D%22%23fff%22%20stroke%3D%22%2306c%22%2F%3E%3Cg%3E%3Cpath%20d%3D%22M831.194%20698.791h5.234v5.391l-1.571%201.545-1.31-1.31-2.725%202.725-2.689-2.689%202.808-2.808-1.311-1.311z%22%20fill%3D%22%2306f%22%2F%3E%3Cpath%20d%3D%22M835.424%20699.795l.022%204.885-1.817-1.817-2.881%202.881-1.228-1.228%202.881-2.881-1.851-1.851z%22%20fill%3D%22%23fff%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fsvg%3E); background-attachment: initial, initial; background-size: initial, initial; background-origin: initial, initial; background-clip: initial, initial; background-position: 100% 50%, 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat, repeat;">Political Graveyard</a></li></ul><div class="date" style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 48.8125px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Wednesday, August 20, 2014</div><h1 style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 14px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Judge rules corps can ignore mining health studies</h1><div id="story-byline" style="text-align: left; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-transform: lowercase;">by <a href="http://www.wvgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=staff&template=staffProfilePages&staffID=g026" class="bold" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; outline: 0px; cursor: pointer;">Ken Ward Jr.</a>, Staff writer</div><div id="articleParagraph" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-align: center;"><p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">A federal judge in Charleston ruled this week that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers does not have to consider scientific studies linking mountaintop removal to public health problems when the agency approves new Clean Water Act permits for mining operations.<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">U.S. District Judge John T. Copenhaver Jr. on Monday turned down an effort by the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition and other groups to force the corps to consider potential adverse human health effects as part of the review of applications for “dredge-and-fill” permits from strip-mining operators.<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">The case concerned a permit application from Raven Crest Contracting for its proposed Boone North No. 5 Surface Mine, a 725-acre site in Boone County, near the communities of Peytona and Racine.<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Citizen groups had urged the corps to look closely at four specific studies that examined that increased risks of adverse health effects experienced by residents who live near mountaintop removal mining operations.<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Those studies were among more than two dozen peer-reviewed reports that found increased risks of cancer, birth defects, and premature death among residents living near large-scale surface coal mining in Central Appalachia. Industry officials have dismissed the findings, and elected officials and regulators have for the most part ignored them.<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">In a 57-page ruling, Copenhaver concluded that the corps was “not unreasonable” in excluding the studies from its permit review because the articles “do not contemplate that the health effects were caused by the type” of water discharges authorized by the corps’ permit.<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Five months ago, the 6th U.S. Court of Appeals issued a similar decision concerning a surface mine permit in Kentucky.<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Citizen groups are pushing for federal legislation that would require the health effects of mountaintop removal to be considered before permits can be issued.<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Reach Ken Ward Jr. at kward@wvgazette.com, 304-348-1702 or follow @kenwardjr on Twitter.</div>- See more at: http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20140820/GZ01/140829945#sthash.l0xAAi0E.dpufBowing to pressure from Quaker environmentalists, PNC Bank <a href="https://www.pnc.com/content/dam/pnc-com/pdf/aboutpnc/PNC_2015_CRR.pdf" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">announced</a> yesterday that it will be restricting financing of <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/mountaintop-removal-mining-2/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">mountaintop removal coal mining</a> in Appalachia. The shift outlined in its 2015 Corporate Responsibility Report means PNC Bank will effectively cease its investment in this controversial practice.In 2012, PNC Bank financed Alpha Natural Resources, Arch Coal, CONSOL Energy and Patriot Coal, which together were responsible for <a href="http://issuu.com/rainforestactionnetwork/docs/extremeinvestmentsprint_pages_5-1" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">nearly half</a> (44.97 percent) of Appalachian mountaintop removal production. PNC’s total investment was $687.5 million for that year.The grassroots group leading the charge for PNC’s new policy, Earth Quaker Action Team, <a href="http://www.eqat.org/blog/major-victory-bank-appalachia-matters" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">hails the change as a major shift</a> by the seventh largest U.S. bank. “When we initiated our campaign in 2010, PNC attempted to placate us with a hollow policy. It’s good to see that PNC Bank is now taking meaningful steps,” says Matthew Armstead, staff coordinator for EQAT. “Since this shift happened because of external pressure, it should be a wake-up call for everyone that the power of change lies with regular citizen activists.”According to EQAT’s analysis, PNC’s changes in investment will sever ties with the two largest companies (Alpha and Arch). Given Patriot Coal’s bankruptcy and CONSOL Energy’s imminent shifting out of mountaintop removal, PNC Bank will be left without any major investments in mountaintop removal.Mountaintop removal has long been criticized for its negative environmental and health impacts. This process of getting coal from a mountain involves blowing up the top of the mountain and dumping the remains into rivers and valleys. The contaminants from the dynamite hang in the air and the sludge and residue from this process <a href="http://ilovemountains.org/the-human-cost/study-summaries" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">poisons water</a>. Scientists note the impact of burning dirty coal is speeding up global climate change.Released yesterday, <a href="https://www.pnc.com/content/dam/pnc-com/pdf/aboutpnc/PNC_2015_CRR.pdf" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">PNC’s 2015 Corporate Responsibility Report</a> began their new policy by admitting they were “driven by environmental and health concerns.”Rainforest Action Network (RAN), a watchdog expert on the energy sector, issued a <a href="http://www.ran.org/pnc_bank_policy_on_mountaintop_removal_a_positive_step" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">statement</a>:“We see today’s news as indicative of a broader trend within the financial sector. Banks no longer want to be associated with a dangerous, abhorrent practice like mountaintop removal; there is an emerging financial industry consensus that these practices are unacceptable. Concretely, this means mountaintop removal companies will have a harder time securing financing to operate and expand in the future.”PNC follows in the footsteps of other banks pressured to adopt policies cutting ties with firms specializing in mountaintop removal: JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, RBS, BNP Paribas and UBS.Dustin White, an 11th-generation native Appalachian with Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, lauded the tiny Quaker environmentalist organization for making this change. He said, “PNC’s new policy is a step in the right direction, and we applaud our friends at EQAT for their success in moving this big bank to do the right thing. For over 150 years, Big Coal has endangered our health, our heritage, and our homes.”For members of Earth Quaker Action Team this is a major victory from a long campaign. “In our early encounters with PNC, they didn’t take us or this issue seriously. We showed them evidence, delivered them Appalachian water poisoned by mountaintop removal, and brought them face-to-face with residents hurt by this practice,” says George Lakey, a retired teacher who was arrested twice during the campaign. “We had to take direct action for them to see the light.”

<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/20/mountaintop-removal-coal-cancer/">http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/20/mountaintop-removal-coal-cancer/</a>

We know what a mess <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/mountaintop-removal-mining-2/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">mountaintop removal</a> makes when the tops of mountains are literally blown off to access the <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/coal-mining-pollution/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">coal</a> inside them. Forests are stripped and debris is dumped into streams and valleys, leaving behind a ravaged landscape. It’s partly responsible for the loss of jobs in the coal industry since it requires only a handful of workers to operate the huge machines involved. Now we’re learning that the process, which has been touted by advocates as cleaner and safer than below-ground coal mining, is the direct cause of a lung cancer epidemic in the Appalachian communities—primarily in West Virginia, Kentucky and southwestern Virginia—where mountaintop removal coal mining is taking place....

==

In a breathtaking but largely overlooked ruling this week, a federal judge <a href="http://www.snl.com/InteractiveX/Article.aspx?cdid=A-28951264-11565" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">agreed</a> that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may disregard studies on the <a href="http://acheact.org/a-c-h-e-science/more-science/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; outline: 0px; cursor: pointer; line-height: 25.2px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">health impacts of mountaintop removal mining </a>in its permitting process, only two weeks after Goldman Prize Award-winning activist <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/mother-gunnoe-mountaintop_b_188687.html" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Maria Gunnoe</a> wrote an impassioned plea to President Obama to renew withdrawn funding for U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) research on strip mining operations and redouble <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/31/west-virginia-coal-chemical-spill-impact" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">federal action </a>to address the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/the-appalachians-mining_b_1561093.html" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">decades-old </a>humanitarian disaster.A new peer-reviewed <a href="http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es504263u" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">study</a> by researchers from West Virginia University’s Mary Babb Cancer Center found that the coal-dust particulates it blows into the atmosphere has fueled an epidemic of lung cancer.“Epidemiological studies suggest that living near mountaintop coal mining activities is one of the contributing factors for high lung cancer incidence,” the study states unequivocally in its introduction. “This study shows that dust collected from mountaintop-removal communities promotes lung cancer,” the University of Indiana’s Dr. Michael Hendryx, who published e<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/08/22/moving-mountains-mountaintop-removal/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">arlier studies showing health problems</a> linked to mountaintop removal, <a href="http://www.dailyindependent.com/community/article_50fc3946-5809-11e4-9ae2-53c2ae06d58c.html" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">told</a> the Ashland, Kentucky Daily Independent. “Previous studies have shown that people who live in these communities have higher lung cancer rates, not due just to smoking. But with this study we now have solid evidence that dust collected from residential areas near mountaintop-removal sites causes cancerous changes to human lung cells.”As Dr. Hendryx suggests, the study, Appalachian Mountaintop Mining Particulate Matter Induces Neoplastic Transformation of Human Bronchial Epithelial Cells and Promotes Tumor Formation, moved beyond simply the evidence that lung cancer rates (as well as rates for birth defects and Parkinson’s disease) are greatly elevated in mountaintop removal communities (MTR), studying the cancer-causing potential of the specific particulates in the dust created by such mining.The study provides more ammunition to those fighting the impacts of MTR on their communities. In August, for instance, a federal judge <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/08/22/moving-mountains-mountaintop-removal/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">overruled</a> complaints by environmental groups about the issuing of a MTR permit in West Virginia, saying the evidence they presented of human health impacts was not compelling. The study advises implementing programs to limit exposure to the coal dust particulates.“The coal industry and its allies in Congress have always been eager to dismiss claims that air and water pollution caused by mountaintop removal mining have any link to the high rates of lung cancer, cardiovascular disease and birth defects, or the decrease in life expectancy that counties with heavy mining have experienced over the past two decades,” Thom Kay of Appalachian Voices <a href="http://appvoices.org/2014/10/17/mountaintop-removal-promotes-lung-cancer/%20" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">posted</a> on the environmental group’s blog. “Will this study get them to finally change their tune? It’s almost certain it won’t. It will be up to those of us who care about the health of Appalachian communities to raise our voices and simply drown them out.”YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/09/03/burwell-mountaintop-removal-mining/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Dear Sec. Burwell: Come Home to See Firsthand Appalachia’s Health Crisis and Help Us Halt Mountaintop Removal Mining</a><a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/02/move-beyond-dirty-coal/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">It’s Time to Move Beyond Dirty Coal</a><a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/08/22/moving-mountains-mountaintop-removal/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Gunnoe Appeals to President … Judge Dismisses Health Studies on Mountaintop Removal</a>

==

new book; <a href="http://climatehopebook.com/read-the-book/">http://climatehopebook.com/read-the-book/</a>

nace

ORIGINS:

Griles took aim at his critics as he prepared to leave, saying that those who "came after me with a political agenda opposed this president at the very beginning. ... In 22 years of service, I have assured that the environment is healthier, the air is clearer, the water is safer and the land is being reclaimed. At the same time, there is a tremendous need for energy in this county." <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45180-2004Dec7.html">[23]</a>

Griles' superior, Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton, wrote in response to his resignation, "Yours is the letter I hoped would never come." David Hirsch of the environmental group Friends of the Earth said of Griles' plans to take a private sector job, "That's the whole problem: He never left private life. He spent four years working for his former clients at the Department of Interior. ... He's the Energizer Bunny of conflict of interest." <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45180-2004Dec7.html">[24]</a>

According to <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2003/09/ma_494_01.html">'Mother Jones'</a>:

So how did a process mandated by a federal judge "to minimize, to the maximum extent practicable, the adverse environmental effects" from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Mountaintop_removal" title="Mountaintop removal">mountaintop removal</a> become a vehicle for industry?

Two words: Steven Griles. Never heard of him? You're not supposed to. Steven Griles is one of industry's moles within the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Bush_administration" title="Bush administration">Bush administration</a>. Before coming to work as deputy secretary of the Interior, Griles was one of the most powerful lobbyists in Washington, with a long list of energy-industry clients, including the National Mining Association and several of the country's largest coal companies.

On August 1, 2001, Griles signed a "statement of disqualification," promising to stay clear of issues involving his former clients. Despite that promise, according to his own appointment calendar (obtained by environmental groups through the Freedom of Information Act), Griles met repeatedly with coal companies while the administration worked on the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop-removal&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Mountaintop-removal (page does not exist)">mountaintop-removal</a> issue.

Griles has denied discussing the "fill rule" in any of those meetings. But on August 4, 2001 -- three days after signing his recusal letter -- he gave a speech beforethe West Virginia Coal Association, reassuring members that "we will fix the federal rules very soon on water and spoil placement."

Two months later, Griles sent a letter to the EPA and other agencies drafting the EIS, complaining that they were not doing enough to safeguard the future of mountaintop removal and instructing them to "focus on centralizing and streamlining coal mine permitting."  sw

</div>

==

===

<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/11/10/129239/pnc-mtr/" style="font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none;">PNC Bank Will No Longer Fund Mountain Top Removal</a>

<p class="timestamp" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; text-transform: uppercase;">BY BRAD JOHNSON <span class="posted-on" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">NOVEMBER 10, 2010

</div>

PNC Bank, the top funder of mountaintop removal (MTR) coal mining, has announced that it will end its support for the ecologically devastating practice. “This move makes PNC <a href="http://understory.ran.org/2010/11/02/another-big-bank-turns-away-from-mountaintop-removal/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">bank number seven</a> to issue a position on MTR,” the Rainforest Action Network’s Amanda Starbuck writes, “following in the footsteps of Bank of America, Citi, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Credit Suisse.” PNC’s decision leaves UBS and GE Capital the only major banks that support mountaintop removal. After the Bush administration <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/us/23coal.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">rewrote rules</a> to encourage the blowing up of mountains for their coal, the Appalachians were rapidly reshaped by rapacious coal companies. This year, the Obama administration once again<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/default/2010/03/27/88916/mountaintop-damage/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">began enforcing laws</a> against the total destruction of public waters and land, after scientists revealed the <a href="http://getenergysmartnow.com/2010/01/08/science-blows-the-top-off-mountaintop-removal-mining/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">full extent</a> of the immoral practice. Now, PNC Bank will <a href="https://www.pnc.com/webapp/unsec/Requester?resource=/wps/wcm/connect/0336ca0043c8b165986f994737af402a/2010_1025_v4_PNCCR_rev.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=0336ca0043c8b165986f994737af402a" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">neither fund MTR projects</a> nor make loans to companies like Massey Energy that specialize in MTR:

MTR is the subject of increasing regulatory and legislative scrutiny, with a focus on the permitting of MTR mines. While this extraction method is permitted,PNC will not provide funding to individual MTR projects, nor will PNC provide credit to coal producers whose primary extraction method is MTR. PNC will continue to monitor this industry while various regulatory issues are addressed through legislation and public policy.

</blockquote>

Before this decision, PNC <a href="http://ran.org/sites/default/files/MTR_reportcard.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">provided financing</a> for six of the biggest MTR coal mining companies — Massey, Arch Coal, Patriot Coal, Alpha, International Coal Group, and CONSOL — who were responsible for nearly half of all mountaintop removal mining in 2009.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/11/10/129239/pnc-mtr/

===

A talk by Richard Grossman (1943 - 2011) of the Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy (POCLAD) http://www.poclad.org/ on challenging corporate law and lore, given February 10, 2005.

Part I of this talk...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HowKoNmODNY

Q&A...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zqw1UIGUv4k

corp make the rules to make the rules, so regulation approach ltd.  progressives saw corp state rising out of feudal slave state?  ppl's party 1892 let's make sure we actually haVE A REPUBLIC, but lost. corp lawyers worked w/ progressive leaders. then we ask the corps to do a little less damage (eg surface mining act hist used to sue epa to stop mtntop; SOCM got help to write a law ~ strip mining; bill sign boycotted by socm; 90% of mtntop permits granted; the law is going what it was DESIGNED to do, really regulate activists and empower corps!

eg big mobilization ! gulf war 2 but a small # of ppl cd override; why is progress so slow?  why so long to undo labor = criminal conspiracy?  problem is NOT corp resp etc.  not breaking law b/c law can deal w/ that.  not law but LORE; law and lore say employees have no rights; most of the harms are legal eg have PERMIT to dump toxins.

Mass law ~ tobacco billbd next to school scotus 9-0 ; 1k laws have been ruled unconst.

===

In June 2010, concerned citizens rallied in downtown Lexington Kentucky to express their anger at <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=PNC_Bank" title="PNC Bank" class="mw-redirect">PNC Bank</a> for financing mountaintop removal coal mining. Local activists were joined by members of the group Mountain Justice and residents from mountaintop communities, who spoke out about the direct impacts on their community, health and environment. Since January 2008, PNC has become the number one U.S. financier of mountaintop removal coal mining, providing more than $500 million in loans and bonds to six companies practicing mountaintop removal: Massey Energy, Patriot Coal, Alpha Natural Resources, International Coal Group, Arch Coal and Consol Energy. The six companies are collectively responsible for almost half of all mountaintop removal coal mining in Appalachia.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patriot_Coal#cite_note-29" title="">[30]</a> in November 2010 PNC announced that it would no longer fund projects associated with mountaintop removal coal mining. PNC’s decision left <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=UBS&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="UBS (page does not exist)">UBS</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=GE_Capital&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="GE Capital (page does not exist)">GE Capital</a> as the only major banks that support mountaintop removal.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patriot_Coal#cite_note-30" title="">[31]</a>

===

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal</a>

Mountaintop removal mining (MTR) is a form of surface mining increasingly being used to replace underground mining to extract coal from the Appalachian Mountain regions of eastern Kentucky, southwest West Virgina, southwest Virginia and eastern Tennessee<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-0" title="">[1]</a>. The process involves using explosives to remove up to 1,000 vertical feet of rock to reach the coal seams. The resulting debris is often scraped into the adjacent valleys in what is called a valley fill. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ensnews-1" title="">[2]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-epaPeis-2" title="">[3]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-epa-3" title="">[4]</a>

Because of the physically destructive nature of the practice, MTR is controversial and has received national and international media attention prompted by a groundswell of grassroots activism and resistance by local residents, environmentalists, social justice activists and others<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-4" title="">[5]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-5" title="">[6]</a>. Controversy over the practice stems from the extreme topological, ecological and hydrological changes that the mining site and surrounding areas undergo, as well as from the storage of the toxic waste material generated from the mining and processing of the coal<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-6" title="">[7]</a>; proponents of MTR point to its efficiency, its ability to provide jobs, and the resulting increase of flat land in a region where there is otherwise little available.

<h2>Contents</h2>

[<a href="javascript:toggleToc()" class="internal" id="togglelink">hide</a>]</div>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#History">1 History</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Occurrence">2 Occurrence</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Process">3 Process</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Production">4 Production</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Appalachian_coal_production_declines">4.1 Appalachian coal production declines</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Exports">4.2 Exports</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Economics">5 Economics</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Report_claims_coal.27s_costs_in_premature_deaths_outweigh_economic_benefits">5.1 Report claims coal's costs in premature deaths outweigh economic benefits</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Public_opinion">6 Public opinion</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#2011_polls">6.1 2011 polls</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#2008_Poll_shows_Amerians_oppose_mountaintop_removal">6.2 2008 Poll shows Amerians oppose mountaintop removal</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Banks_move_to_restrict_MTR_financing">8 Banks move to restrict MTR financing</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Bank_of_America_announces_phase_out_of_MTR_financing">8.1 Bank of America announces phase out of MTR financing</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#PNC_ends_MTR_funding">8.2 PNC ends MTR funding</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#MTR_policies_of_other_banks">8.3 MTR policies of other banks</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#2011_RAN.2FSierra_Club_report">8.4 2011 RAN/Sierra Club report</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Non-violent_direct_action_against_mountaintop_removal">9 Non-violent direct action against mountaintop removal</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Aug.15.2C_2005:Earth_First.21.2FMountain_Justice_Summer_blockade_of_Campbell_County_mountaintop_removal_site">9.1 Aug. 15, 2005: Earth First!/Mountain Justice Summer blockade of Campbell County mountaintop removal site</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#February_3.2C_2009:_Coal_River_Mountain_activists_arrested">9.2 February 3, 2009: Coal River Mountain activists arrested</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#February_16.2C_2009:_Two_arrested_for_halting_blasting_at_mountaintop_removal_site.2C_Raleigh_County.2C_WV">9.3 February 16, 2009: Two arrested for halting blasting at mountaintop removal site, Raleigh County, WV</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#February_17.2C_2009:_Hundreds_rally_for_end_to_mountaintop_removal.2C_Frankfort.2C_KY">9.4 February 17, 2009: Hundreds rally for end to mountaintop removal, Frankfort, KY</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#March_5.2C_2009:_Activists_protest_mountaintop_removal.2C_Pettus.2C_WV">9.5 March 5, 2009: Activists protest mountaintop removal, Pettus, WV</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#April_16.2C_2009:_Activists_arrested_at_Massey_Energy_mine_in_West_Virginia">9.6 April 16, 2009: Activists arrested at Massey Energy mine in West Virginia</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#May_23.2C_2009:_Police_remove_11_activists_from_mountaintop_removal_protests_in_West_Virginia">9.7 May 23, 2009: Police remove 11 activists from mountaintop removal protests in West Virginia</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#June_18.2C_2009:_Activists__scale_20-story_dragline_at_MTR_site_in_Twilight.2C_WV">9.8 June 18, 2009: Activists scale 20-story dragline at MTR site in Twilight, WV</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#June_23.2C_2009:_Dozens_arrested_protesting_at_Massey_Energy_site_in_Coal_River_Valley.2C_WV">9.9 June 23, 2009: Dozens arrested protesting at Massey Energy site in Coal River Valley, WV</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#August_11.2C_2009:_Activists_lock_down_Department_of_Environmental_Protection_in_Charleston.2C_WV">9.10 August 11, 2009: Activists lock down Department of Environmental Protection in Charleston, WV</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#August_25-31.2C_2009:_Activists_occupy_trees_to_stop_blasting_in_Coal_River_Valley.2C_WV">9.11 August 25-31, 2009: Activists occupy trees to stop blasting in Coal River Valley, WV</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#October_23.2C_2009:_Activists_block_coal_trucks_in_West_Virginia">9.12 October 23, 2009: Activists block coal trucks in West Virginia</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#October_30.2C_2009:_Activists_protest_mountaintop_removal_at_EPA_offices_throughout_the_U.S.">9.13 October 30, 2009: Activists protest mountaintop removal at EPA offices throughout the U.S.</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#November_21.2C_2009:Protestors_stop_blasting_on_Coal_River_Mountain:Pettus.2C_WV">9.14 November 21, 2009: Protestors stop blasting on Coal River Mountain: Pettus, WV</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#December_7.2C_2009:_300_activists_protest_mountaintop_removal_in_Charleston.2C_WV">9.15 December 7, 2009: 300 activists protest mountaintop removal in Charleston, WV</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#January_21.2C_2010:_Tree-Sitters_Shut_Down_Infamous_Mountaintop_Removal_Operation_in_West_Virginia">9.16 January 21, 2010: Tree-Sitters Shut Down Infamous Mountaintop Removal Operation in West Virginia</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#March_2010:_EPA_Headquarters_Protest">9.17 March 2010: EPA Headquarters Protest</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#April_2.2C_2010:_JPMorgan_Chase_Protest_in_Chicago">9.18 April 2, 2010: JPMorgan Chase Protest in Chicago</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#May_17.2C_2010:_Climate_Ground_Zero_Activists_Blockade_Massey_Energy_Headquarters">9.19 May 17, 2010: Climate Ground Zero Activists Blockade Massey Energy Headquarters</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#September_14.2C_2010:_Rainforest_Action_Network_Dumps_1.2C000_Pounds_of_Dirt_on_EPA_Sidewalk">9.20 September 14, 2010: Rainforest Action Network Dumps 1,000 Pounds of Dirt on EPA Sidewalk</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#September_27.2C_2010:_More_than_100_arrested_in_Washington_DC_for_coal_protest">9.21 September 27, 2010: More than 100 arrested in Washington DC for coal protest</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#February_11.2C_2011:_Wendell_Berry_Joins_Retired_Coal_Miners_and_Residents_in_Kentucky_Rising_Capitol_Sit-in">9.22 February 11, 2011: Wendell Berry Joins Retired Coal Miners and Residents in Kentucky Rising Capitol Sit-in</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#March_2011:_Activists_target_Portland.2C_Oregon_area_Bank_of_America_ATMs">9.23 March 2011: Activists target Portland, Oregon area Bank of America ATMs</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#April_2011:_Rising_Tide_North_America_stages_bank_protest_in_Portland.2C_Oregon">9.24 April 2011: Rising Tide North America stages bank protest in Portland, Oregon</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#August_2011:_Tree-Sit_on_Coal_River_Mountain">9.25 August 2011: Tree-Sit on Coal River Mountain</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Escalating_Legal_Action_Against_Mountaintop_Removal_Activists">10 Escalating Legal Action Against Mountaintop Removal Activists</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Legislation_in_the_United_States">11 Legislation in the United States</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Bush.27s_Midnight_Regulations">11.1 Bush's Midnight Regulations</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Federal_appeals_court_in_Richmond.2C_VA_reverses_limits_on_mountaintop_removal">11.2 Federal appeals court in Richmond, VA reverses limits on mountaintop removal</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Court_finds_Army_Corps_of_Engineers_violated_Clean_Water_Act_in_MTR_permitting_case">11.3 Court finds Army Corps of Engineers violated Clean Water Act in MTR permitting case</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Memo_detailing_West_Virginia_Coal_Association.27s_action_items">11.4 Memo detailing West Virginia Coal Association's action items</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Appalachia_Restoration_Act_introduced_in_U.S._Senate">11.5 Appalachia Restoration Act introduced in U.S. Senate</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#State_Legislative_Action">11.6 State Legislative Action</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Anti-coal_Activists_Appeal_to_West_Virginia_Supreme_Court">11.7 Anti-coal Activists Appeal to West Virginia Supreme Court</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Obama_administration_EPA_actions_on_mountaintop_removal">12 Obama administration EPA actions on mountaintop removal</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#March_2009:_Obama_EPA_begins_to_crack_down_on_mountaintop_removal">12.1 March 2009: Obama EPA begins to crack down on mountaintop removal</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#April_2009:_EPA_challenges_three_MTR_permits">12.2 April 2009: EPA challenges three MTR permits</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#May_2009:_Army_Corps_of_Engineers_suspends_MTR_permit_for_A.26G_Coal">12.3 May 2009: Army Corps of Engineers suspends MTR permit for A&G Coal</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#June_2009:_Obama_administration_announces_plans_to_toughen_standards_for_MTR_permits">12.4 June 2009: Obama administration announces plans to toughen standards for MTR permits</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#August_2009:_Court_rejects_attempt_to_turn_back_Bush.27s_midnight_regulations_on_MTR">12.5 August 2009: Court rejects attempt to turn back Bush's midnight regulations on MTR</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#September_2009:_Obama_administration_seeks_to_block_West_Virginia_MTR_permit">12.6 September 2009: Obama administration seeks to block West Virginia MTR permit</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#September_2009:_EPA_holds_79_MTR_permits_for_review">12.7 September 2009: EPA holds 79 MTR permits for review</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#October_2009:_EPA_to_revoke_permit_for_West_Virginia_surface_mine">12.8 October 2009: EPA to revoke permit for West Virginia surface mine</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#March_2010:_EPA_approves_MTR_permit">12.9 March 2010: EPA approves MTR permit</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#March_27.2C_2010:_EPA_blocks_Arch_Coal_Mine">12.10 March 27, 2010: EPA blocks Arch Coal Mine</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#April_1.2C_2010:_EPA_States_MTR_Valley_Fills_Might_End">12.11 April 1, 2010: EPA States MTR Valley Fills Might End</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#June_17.2C_2010:U.S.Army_Corps_of_Engineers_suspends_expedited_process_for_surface_mining_permits">12.12 June 17, 2010: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers suspends expedited process for surface mining permits</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#June_29.2C_2010:_EPA.E2.80.99s_first_decision_under_new_MTR_guidelines_is_to_approve_coal_permit">12.13 June 29, 2010: EPA’s first decision under new MTR guidelines is to approve coal permit</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#July_2010:_Coal_industry_sues_EPA.2C_Army_Corps">12.14 July 2010: Coal industry sues EPA, Army Corps</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Sep.2010:Independent_Science_Advisory_Board_Supports_EPA_Science_on_MTR_Impacts">12.15 Sep. 2010: Independent Science Advisory Board Supports EPA Science on MTR Impacts</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#October_2010:_West_Virginia_sues_EPA_over_MTR_permits">12.16 October 2010: West Virginia sues EPA over MTR permits</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#January_2011:_Office_of_Surface_Mining_Reclamation_and_Enforcement_document_states_that_new_MTR_rules_could_cost_7.2C000_coal_jobs">12.17 January 2011: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement document states that new MTR rules could cost 7,000 coal jobs</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#October_2011:_Judge_rules_EPA_overstepped_MTR_permit_authority">12.18 October 2011: Judge rules EPA overstepped MTR permit authority</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#MTR_Lobby">13 MTR Lobby</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Criticism">14 Criticism</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Sludge_ponds">14.1 Sludge ponds</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Biodiversity">14.2 Biodiversity</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Failed_Coal_Mine_Reclamation">14.3 Failed Coal Mine Reclamation</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Increased_poverty_and_health_problems_for_MTR_communities">14.4 Increased poverty and health problems for MTR communities</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Increased_cancer_rates">14.5 Increased cancer rates</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Increased_birth_defects">14.6 Increased birth defects</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Mining_law_firms_blames_birth_defects_on_residents">14.6.1 Mining law firms blames birth defects on residents</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Science_study:_MTR_permits_should_not_be_granted">14.7 Science study: MTR permits should not be granted</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Resources">15 Resources</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#References">15.1 References</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#Related_SourceWatch_articles">15.2 Related SourceWatch articles</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#External_links">15.3 External links</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

</ul>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<h2>History</h2>

Sparked by the oil crises of the 1970s, increased demand for coal in the United States created incentives for a more economical form of coal mining than the traditional underground mining methods that required hundreds of workers, triggering the first widespread use of MTR. The prevalence of the mining method expanded further in the 1990s to retrieve relatively low-sulfur coal, a cleaner burning form, which became desirable as a result of amendments to the U.S. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clean_Air_Act" title="Clean Air Act">Clean Air Act</a> that tightened emissions limits on high-sulfur coal processing.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-burns-7" title="">[8]</a> With an increasing call for energy independence in the U.S., as well as a growing call for Coal-To-Liquids and "clean coal technologies", MTR has continued to expand into the 2000s.

<h2>Occurrence</h2>

MTR in the United States is most often associated with the extraction of coal in the Appalachian Mountains, where the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=EPA" title="EPA" class="mw-redirect">EPA</a> estimates that 2,200 square miles (5,700 km²) of Appalachian forests will be cleared for MTR sites by the year 2012.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-usatoday-8" title="">[9]</a> It occurs most commonly in West Virginia and Eastern Kentucky, the top two coal producing states in Appalachia, with each state using approximately 1000 metric tons of explosives per day for the purposes of surface mining.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-9" title="">[10]</a> The technique is also being used increasingly in central Tennessee and southwest Virginia.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-10" title="">[11]</a> At current rates, MTR in the U.S. will mine over 1.4 million acres by 2010,<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ilovemountains-faq-11" title="">[12]</a>, an amount of land area that exceeds that of the state of Delaware.

<h2>Process</h2>

Because no existing vegetation survives MTR, the targeted land is clear-cut and either sold for lumber or burned. Miners then use explosives to blast away the overburden, the rock and subsoil that lies above a coal seam, to expose the coal. The overburden is pushed into a nearby valley or hollow, creating a pile below called valley fill. A dragline excavator removes the coal, which is then transported to a processing plant and washed. Millions of gallons of waste from coal processing, called sludge or slurry, are often stored nearby in open pools held back by earthen dams. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-burns-7" title="">[8]</a>

Because coal usually exists in multiple geologically stratified seams, miners can often repeat the blasting process to mine over a dozen seams on a single mountain, increasing the mine depth each time. This can result in vertical descension of hundreds of extra feet into the earth.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-burns-7" title="">[8]</a>

Once coal removal is complete, mining operators routinely hydro-seed the stripped site with a quick growing, non-native and invasive legume called lespedeza.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-12" title="">[13]</a>

A <a href="http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/hobet.php?src=eoa-ann" class="external text" title="http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/hobet.php?src=eoa-ann" rel="nofollow">series of NASA satellite photos</a> over 26 years - from 1984 to 2010 - shows the cumulative effects of MTR on the Appalachian Mountains in southern West Virginia over time.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-13" title="">[14]</a>

<h2>Production</h2>

<h3>Appalachian coal production declines</h3>

The U.S. Department of Energy projects that by 2015, the amount of coal mined in Appalachia will be just half of what it was in 2008: production is expected to drop to 112 million tons by 2015, compared to 234 million tons mined in 2008. The Energy Information Administration said in a 2011 outlook statement that the region's coal is "extensively mined" and its higher-cost coal will slowly be "supplanted by lower cost coal from other supply regions."

"The seams of coal that are left in this area are harder and harder to mine, and they're thinner and thinner and thinner," said Leonard Fleming, a retired Kentucky miner and union leader in Letcher County who worked in the industry for 32 years. The thinner seams make it less cost-effective for a coal operator to send miners underground, leading to increased use of MTR. Yet overall production is still declining. In 2010, Arch Coal told investors that the region's coal "is in secular decline – faced with depleting reserves and significant regulatory hurdles."

While coal companies and supporters point to the Obama Administration and EPA regulations for the decline, hiring in eastern Kentucky and southern West Virginia doubled at surface mines over the last decade, yet overall production fell by 25 percent there in all mines under and above ground, suggesting there is less coal available. Production dropped in Central Appalachia's underground and surface mines to 196 million tons in 2009 from 261 million in 2000 – a 25 percent decline.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-14" title="">[15]</a>

<h3>Exports</h3>

The 2012 Congressional report, <a href="http://democrats.naturalresources.house.gov/sites/democrats.naturalresources.house.gov/files/documents/Our_Pain_Their_Gain1.pdf" class="external text" title="http://democrats.naturalresources.house.gov/sites/democrats.naturalresources.house.gov/files/documents/Our_Pain_Their_Gain1.pdf" rel="nofollow">“Our Pain, Their Gain,”</a> analyzed U.S. coal mine data and found that overall coal exports have nearly doubled since 2009 to 107 million tons in 2011, accounting for almost 12 percent of U.S. production. Three out of every four tons that are exported come from the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Appalachian" title="Appalachian" class="mw-redirect">Appalachian</a> region, many of them mountaintop removal mines. Some of the top findings of the report included:

<ul>

<li>The number of mountaintop removal, steep slope, and surface mines exporting coal from West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Virginia increased from 73 mines in 2008 to 97 in 2011.</li>

<li>Coal exports from the mines in these four states have grown by 91 percent since 2009 to 13.2 million tons in 2011.</li>

<li>25 of the mines exported more than half of their production in 2011. Five mines are shipping 100 percent of their coal abroad.</li>

<li>Overall, the 97 mines exported 27 percent of their production in 2011, from 13 percent exported in 2008.</li>

</ul>

<h2>Economics</h2>

Just over half of the electricity generated in the United States is produced by coal-fired power plants. MTR accounted for less than 5% of U.S. coal production as of 2001.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ilovemountains-faq-11" title="">[12]</a> In some regions, however, the percentage is higher, for example MTR provided 30% of the coal mined in West Virginia in 2006.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-britton-15" title="">[16]</a>

Historically in the U.S. the prevalent method of coal acquisition was underground mining, a process that is very labor-intensive. Through the use of explosives and large machinery, MTR mining can extract more than two and a half times as much coal per worker per hour than in traditional underground mines <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-16" title="">[17]</a>, thus greatly reducing the number of workers needed. The industry lost approximately 10,000 jobs from 1990 to 1997, as MTR and other more mechanized mining methods became more widely used.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-17" title="">[18]</a> In addition, because MTR sites employ fewer miners per amount extracted, labor unions have less representation, and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=United_Mine_Workers_of_America&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="United Mine Workers of America (page does not exist)">United Mine Workers of America</a> have charged that anti-union practices are often associated with MTR. They have also called for additional legal measures to protect communities from the degradation and destruction that results from nearby blasting.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-18" title="">[19]</a> The coal industry asserts that surface mining techniques such as mountaintop removal are safer for miners than sending miners underground.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-19" title="">[20]</a>

Proponents argue that in certain geologic areas, MTR and similar forms of surface mining allow easier access to coal than traditional underground mining, and that it is the most cost-effective method of extracting coal. However, the counties that host MTR are often the poorest in Appalachia. For example, in McDowell County, West Virginia, which produces the most coal in the state, over 37% of residents live below the poverty line.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-20" title="">[21]</a> In Kentucky, counties with coal mining have economies no better than adjoining counties where no mining occurs.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-21" title="">[22]</a>

<h3>Report claims coal's costs in premature deaths outweigh economic benefits</h3>

A study co-authored by a West Virginia University professor reports that coal mining in Appalachia costs five times more in premature deaths than the industry provides in jobs, taxes, and other economic benefits. According to the study, the coal industry creates about $8 billion per year in economic benefits for the Appalachian region, but even using conservative estimates, the cost of premature deaths attributable to coal mining is valued at approximately $42 billion. Michael Hendryx, along with co-author Melissa Ahern of Washington State University, recommends that politicians seek other means for improving the economy and quality of life of Appalachia, in such areas as renewable energy, sustainable timber, small-scale agriculture, and ecosystem restoration.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-gaz-22" title="">[23]</a>

The authors acknowledge that their study is not a complete cost-benefit analysis of the coal industry. Such a study, they suggest, would need to include reduced employment due to illness, reduced poverty values associated with coal mining, increased expenditures for public programs like Medicaid and food stamps, and the costs of natural resource destruction.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-gaz-22" title="">[23]</a>

<h2>Public opinion</h2>

<h3>2011 polls</h3>

A 2011 national poll by CNN and another poll of Appalachian states by Lake Research Partners & Bellwether Research found that most Americans disapprove of mountaintop removal (MTR) mining. The CNN poll of over 1,000 U.S. residents found that 57% say they oppose MTR mining. After criticism of the poll by the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=West_Virginia_Coal_Association" title="West Virginia Coal Association">West Virginia Coal Association</a>, which suggested the disapproval was due to opposition from non-coal mining states, Earthjustice, Appalachian Mountain Advocates, and the Sierra Club funded the second sample poll of the opinions of 1,315 registered voters in Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, and Tennessee. That <a href="http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/LRP-Bellwether-Memo-on-MTR-Survey-Findings.pdf" class="external text" title="http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/LRP-Bellwether-Memo-on-MTR-Survey-Findings.pdf" rel="nofollow">survey</a> found that 76% of those polled support fully enforcing and even increasing protections in the Clean Water Act related to MTR mining. Sixty percent said Clean Water safeguards are either good for the economy or have no impact (40 percent and 20 percent, respectively), as compared with 25 percent who think they are bad for the economy. Asked about MTR outside the context of the Clean Water Act, 38% said they oppose the practice while 24% said they support it, and 38% of voters were unsure. When voters were provided with a brief description of the practice (“coal companies in [STATE] mine coal from mountains through a process called mountaintop removal mining where the top of a mountain is removed to extract the coal and waste is disposed in nearby valleys and streams”), opposition increased to 57%, similar to the CNN poll.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-23" title="">[24]</a>

<h3>2008 Poll shows Amerians oppose mountaintop removal</h3>

<div class="thumbcaption">Stop Mountaintop Removal</div>

</div>

The results of nationwide poll on mountaintop removal conducted in October 2008 showed that Americans oppose mountaintop removal coal mining by a wide margin. Researchers questioned 1,000 likely voters nationwide. Half the participants were asked if they supported or opposed mountaintop removal, without any additional information on the subject. 39 percent opposed mountaintop removal, versus 15 percent who supported it. 46 percent were undecided. The other half of partipants were given a short definition of mountaintop removal; of these voters, 61 percent opposed mountaintop removal, versus 16 percent who supported it. 23 percent were undecided. Other findings included:<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-24" title="">[25]</a>

<ul>

<li>Opposition to mountaintop removal was highest in the Northeast, where 79 percent of people polled were against it. In the South, which included the biggest eastern coal states of Kentucky and West Virginia, opposition was 59 percent.</li>

<li>By a margin of more than 2 to 1, voters polled disagreed that environmental protections are bad for jobs and business. 47 percent believed environmental protections are good for the economy, versus 20 percent who believed such protections are bad for the economy.</li>

<li>Two-thirds of Americans are against the repeal of the stream buffer zone rule, which bans mining activities within 100 feet of streams.</li>

</ul>

In September 2010, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Nike" title="Nike">Nike</a> began running an ad with a background of a massive strip-mine or mountaintop removal operation to display their Pro Combat football uniforms. Nike's campaign was marketed as a "tribute to the hardworking people of the Mountain State, as well as the fallen miners in the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Upper_Big_Branch_Mine_Disaster" title="Upper Big Branch Mine Disaster">Upper Big Branch Mine Disaster</a> in April." But instead of featuring underground miners, such as those who died at the Upper Big Branch disaster, Nike's ad featured an open strip mine with a dramatic voice over: "It's just the way things are done in West Virginia." After people objected to the ad as unrelated to the disaster and a glorification of mountaintop removal, NIKE agreed to modify it.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-jb-25" title="">[26]</a>

<h2>Banks move to restrict MTR financing</h2>

<h3>Bank of America announces phase out of MTR financing</h3>

In December 2008, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bank_of_America" title="Bank of America" class="mw-redirect">Bank of America</a> announced that it would "phase out financing of companies whose predominant method of extracting coal is through mountain top removal. While we acknowledge that surface mining is economically efficient and creates jobs, it can be conducted in a way that minimizes environmental impacts in certain geographies."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-26" title="">[27]</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rainforest_Action_Network" title="Rainforest Action Network">Rainforest Action Network</a>, which has pressed Bank of America to halt financing of mountaintop removal mining and coal-fired power plants, lauded the decision as a "giant leap forward...We hope that <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Citigroup" title="Citigroup">Citi</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=JP_Morgan_Chase" title="JP Morgan Chase" class="mw-redirect">JP Morgan Chase</a>, and other banks follow Bank of America's lead."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-27" title="">[28]</a>

<h3>PNC ends MTR funding</h3>

In the summer of 2010 <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=PNC_Financial_Services_Group,_Inc." title="PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.">PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.</a> published a <a href="https://www.pnc.com/webapp/unsec/Requester?resource=/wps/wcm/connect/0336ca0043c8b165986f994737af402a/2010_1025_v4_PNCCR_rev.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=0336ca0043c8b165986f994737af402a" class="external text" title="https://www.pnc.com/webapp/unsec/Requester?resource=/wps/wcm/connect/0336ca0043c8b165986f994737af402a/2010_1025_v4_PNCCR_rev.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=0336ca0043c8b165986f994737af402a" rel="nofollow">2010 Corporate Responsibility Report</a> saying PNC would be moving away from funding MTR. The report read: "MTR is the subject of increasing regulatory and legislative scrutiny, with a focus on the permitting of MTR mines. While this extraction method is permitted, PNC will not provide funding to individual MTR projects, nor will PNC provide credit to coal producers whose primary extraction method is MTR. PNC will continue to monitor this industry while various regulatory issues are addressed through legislation and public policy" (p. 4).

Then in November 2010 PNC announced that it would no longer fund projects associated with mountaintop removal coal mining. “This move makes PNC bank number seven to issue a position on MTR,” the Rainforest Action Network’s Amanda Starbuck wrote of the decision, “following in the footsteps of Bank of America, Citi, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Credit Suisse.”

PNC’s decision leaves UBS and GE Capital the only major banks that support mountaintop removal.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-28" title="">[29]</a>

<h3>MTR policies of other banks</h3>

The following banks have policies restricting financing for MTR:

<ul>

<li><a href="http://environment.bankofamerica.com/assets/pdf/COAL_POLICY.pdf" class="external text" title="http://environment.bankofamerica.com/assets/pdf/COAL_POLICY.pdf" rel="nofollow">Bank of America policy statement</a></li>

<li><a href="http://citizenship.citigroup.com/citi/citizen/finance/environment/mrcm.htm" class="external text" title="http://citizenship.citigroup.com/citi/citizen/finance/environment/mrcm.htm" rel="nofollow">Citi policy statement</a></li>

<li><a href="http://ran.org/content/correspondence-banks-relating-rans-mtr-report-card" class="external text" title="http://ran.org/content/correspondence-banks-relating-rans-mtr-report-card" rel="nofollow">Credit Suisse policy statement</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.msdw.org/global/Environmental_Policy.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.msdw.org/global/Environmental_Policy.pdf" rel="nofollow">Morgan Stanley policy statement</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.jpmorganchase.com/corporate/Corporate-Responsibility/document/cr_full_report_05-14_01_noblurb.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.jpmorganchase.com/corporate/Corporate-Responsibility/document/cr_full_report_05-14_01_noblurb.pdf" rel="nofollow">JPMorgan Chase policy statement</a></li>

<li><a href="https://www.wellsfargo.com/downloads/pdf/about/csr/reports/environmental_lending_practices.pdf" class="external text" title="https://www.wellsfargo.com/downloads/pdf/about/csr/reports/environmental_lending_practices.pdf" rel="nofollow">Wells Fargo policy statement</a></li>

</ul>

<h3>2011 RAN/Sierra Club report</h3>

A 2011 report by Rainforest Action Network and the Sierra Club, <a href="http://ran.org/sites/default/files/mtr_reportcard_2011.pdf" class="external text" title="http://ran.org/sites/default/files/mtr_reportcard_2011.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Policy and Practice: 2011 Report Card on Banks and Mountaintop Removal"</a> listed <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=PNC" title="PNC" class="mw-redirect">PNC</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Citigroup" title="Citigroup">Citigroup</a>, and UBS as the top three financiers of mountaintop removal coal mining. The report card reviewed the financing practices of Bank of America, Citi, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, GE Capital, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, PNC, UBS and Wells Fargo. These ten banks have provided more than $2.5 billion (in 16 loans and bond underwriting deals) to mountaintop removal companies since January 2010, according to the report. Deutsche Bank and GE Capital received an F for not examining the issue or responding to the report.

Of the worst-performing banks, the report wrote that:

<ul>

<li>Citi-despite announcing a public policy on MTR extraction in 2009, the bank has since doubled its exposure to the sector.</li>

<li>UBS-immediately after announcing a policy stating that it "needs to be satisfied that the client is committed to reduce over time its exposure to this form of mining," the bank acted as an advisor on the Massey-Alpha merger, which created the largest single mountain top removal company in the country, responsible for 25% of coal production from MTR mines.</li>

<li>PNC-although adopting a decision to no longer fund MTR operations, PNC previously had large exposure to MTR companies, and the report is waiting to see the effects of the new policy decision.</li>

</ul>

Five banks have issued new policies on mountaintop removal since a 2010 report card: Chase, Wells Fargo, PNC, UBS, and Credit Suisse. Credit Suisse had the best record for the latest report card: "The bank has no exposure to coal-mining companies that practice mountaintop removal extraction."

<h2>Non-violent direct action against mountaintop removal</h2>

<h3>Aug. 15, 2005: Earth First!/Mountain Justice Summer blockade of Campbell County mountaintop removal site</h3>

On August 15, 2005, <a href="http://www.earthfirst.org/" class="external text" title="http://www.earthfirst.org/" rel="nofollow">Earth First!</a> and <a href="http://www.mountainjusticesummer.org/" class="external text" title="http://www.mountainjusticesummer.org/" rel="nofollow">Mountain Justice Summer</a> activists blockaded a road leading to National Coal's mountaintop removal coal mine in Campbell County, Tennessee. Activists stopped a car on the road, removed its tires, locked themselves to the vehicle, and erected a tripod with a person perched on top of it. National Coal workers arrived and threatened the protestors; one tried to ram the tripod with his car. Eleven people were arrested; the police treated the arrested activists very roughly, endangering their safety.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-29" title="">[30]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-30" title="">[31]</a>

<h3>February 3, 2009: Coal River Mountain activists arrested</h3>

Five Coal River Mountain activists were arrested and charged with trespassing after locking themselves to a bulldozer and a backhoe at a <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a> mountaintop removal site. The activists planted a banner for the Coal River Wind Project in protest of the impending 6,600 acre mountaintop removal strip mine. Later in the day, eight more activists were arrested during a demonstration against Massey's preparations to blast the mountain. Environmentalists contend that the mountain is better developed for a wind energy project, and that the blasting could destabilize the world's largest toxic coal slurry impoundment.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-31" title="">[32]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-32" title="">[33]</a>

<h3>February 16, 2009: Two arrested for halting blasting at mountaintop removal site, Raleigh County, WV</h3>

On Monday, February 16 2009, two protesters were arrested for interfering with mountaintop removal blasting on the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a>-owned Edwhite site near the Shumate sludge dam in Raleigh County, WV. The Shumate sludge dam holds back 2.8 billion gallons of toxic sludge, the waste by-product of chemically cleaning coal, and sits directly above the Marsh Fork elementary school. <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Marsh+Fork+Elementary&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=50.37814,135&ie=UTF8&ll=37.888267,-81.531944&spn=0.087924,0.162735&t=h&z=13&iwloc=A" class="external text" title="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Marsh+Fork+Elementary&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=50.37814,135&ie=UTF8&ll=37.888267,-81.531944&spn=0.087924,0.162735&t=h&z=13&iwloc=A" rel="nofollow">aerial map</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-33" title="">[34]</a>

<h3>February 17, 2009: Hundreds rally for end to mountaintop removal, Frankfort, KY</h3>

Hundreds of activists from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ILoveMountains.org" title="ILoveMountains.org">ILoveMountains</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kentuckians_for_the_Commonwealth" title="Kentuckians for the Commonwealth">Kentuckians for the Commonwealth</a>, as well as actress Ashley Judd, gathered outside the state capitol building to protest mountaintop removal mining and rally for proposed legislation that been stuck for several years in the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee. The bill, known as the Stream Saver Bill, is sponsored by Rep. Don Pasley, D-Winchester, and would prohibit mining operations from dumping refuse into adjacent streams. Coal interests in the legislature have thus far managed to keep the bill from getting a vote on the floor.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-34" title="">[35]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-35" title="">[36]</a>

<h3>March 5, 2009: Activists protest mountaintop removal, Pettus, WV</h3>

Five activists protested at a Massey Energy <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Edwight_Surface_Mine" title="Edwight Surface Mine">Edwight</a> mountaintop removal site on Cherry Pond Mountain, unfurling a banner that read "Stop the blasting, Save the kids." The protesters were calling attention to the blasting taking place near a dam that holds 2.8 billion gallons of sludge and lies just a few hundred yards above the Marsh Fork Elementary School. All five were arrested.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-36" title="">[37]</a>

<h3>April 16, 2009: Activists arrested at Massey Energy mine in West Virginia</h3>

Five people were arrested when activists from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Climate_Ground_Zero" title="Climate Ground Zero">Climate Ground Zero</a> unfurled a 40-foot-tall banner that read, "EPA stop MTR" at <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy's</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Edwight_Surface_Mine" title="Edwight Surface Mine">Edwight</a> mountaintop removal mine. Massey recently starting blasting at the mine directly above the town of Naoma. Activists are concerned because the blasting is near a slurry dam, which poses a risk to the local Marsh Fork Elementary School.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-37" title="">[38]</a>

<h3>May 23, 2009: Police remove 11 activists from mountaintop removal protests in West Virginia</h3>

State police removed eleven activists from two civil disobedience actions in West Virginia. In one action, six people locked themselves to mining equipment at a Patriot Coal mine on Kayford Mountain. Another group raised a 20-by-60-foot banner at <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy's</a> Brushy Fork coal slurry impoundment near Pettus. The protesters are part of a coalition that includes <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountain_Justice" title="Mountain Justice">Mountain Justice</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Climate_Ground_Zero" title="Climate Ground Zero">Climate Ground Zero</a>, and concerned citizens.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-38" title="">[39]</a> Two of the eleven activists arrested were released from custody by May 25. Mike Roselle, the director of Climate Ground Zero, said the group was raising money to pay bail for the others.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-39" title="">[40]</a>

<h3>June 18, 2009: Activists scale 20-story dragline at MTR site in Twilight, WV</h3>

Four protesters visited the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a> Twilight mountaintop removal site in Boone County, WV, and climbed a 20-story strip mining machine called a dragline. The activists unfurled a 15 foot by 150 foot banner that read, "Just Stop Mountaintop Removal." The action launched a week of protests at West Virginia MTR sites, leading up to a special action on June 23 in the Coal River Valley area. The June 23rd action will include local coalfield residents, NASA climate scientist <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_E._Hansen" title="James E. Hansen">James Hansen</a>, actress Daryl Hannah, former US Representative Ken Hechler, and many others.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-40" title="">[41]</a>

<h3>June 23, 2009: Dozens arrested protesting at Massey Energy site in Coal River Valley, WV</h3>

94-year-old former US Representative Ken Hechler, NASA climate scientist James Hansen, RAN director Michael Brune, actress Daryl Hannah, Goldman Prize Award winner Judy Bonds, and many other coal activists and local residents were arrested the Coal River action. The protesters crossed onto <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a> property to protest mountaintop removal and the destruction of mountains above the Coal River Valley community. Massey supporters were on scene and often behaved aggressively, shouting and ripping power cords out to silence the PA system. One Massey supporter assaulted Judy Bonds and attempted to assault another, and was arrested and charged with battery. The action launched a yearlong national campaign to end mountaintop removal mining.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-41" title="">[42]</a>

<h3>August 11, 2009: Activists lock down Department of Environmental Protection in Charleston, WV</h3>

Four protesters locked themselves to the entrance at the West Virginia DEP, displaying signs that read, "Closed Due to Incompetence" and "Department of Encouraging Pollution." The activists demanded that the EPA and Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation, and Enforcement take over of the agency's programs. They also called for Secretary Randy Huffman's resignation.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-42" title="">[43]</a>

<h3>August 25-31, 2009: Activists occupy trees to stop blasting in Coal River Valley, WV</h3>

Protesters from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Climate_Ground_Zero" title="Climate Ground Zero">Climate Ground Zero</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountain_Justice" title="Mountain Justice">Mountain Justice</a> occupied treetops at the edge of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy’s</a> Edwight mountaintop removal site in Raleigh County, West Virginia. The activists unrolled banners reading "Stop Mountain Top Removal" and "DEP – Don’t Expect Protection." They were less than 30 feet from the mine and less than 300 feet from the blasting activity, which was forced to stop because of their close proximity.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-43" title="">[44]</a> The protest lasted six days, when the last activist finally descended and was arrested. A spokesman for Climate Ground Zero said sleep deprivation had been endangering the treesitters.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-44" title="">[45]</a>

<h3>October 23, 2009: Activists block coal trucks in West Virginia</h3>

Eight activists blocked a road at a Kanawha County, WV surface mine to protest mountaintop removal. The mine is owned by Ed Coal Co. The protesters were arrested and charged with trespassing, consipiracy, and obstructing an officer.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-45" title="">[46]</a>

<h3>October 30, 2009: Activists protest mountaintop removal at EPA offices throughout the U.S.</h3>

<div class="thumbcaption">Activists protest at EPA on October 30.</div>

</div>

Activists from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountain_Justice" title="Mountain Justice">Mountain Justice</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rainforest_Action_Network" title="Rainforest Action Network">Rainforest Action Network</a>, and other groups protested outside EPA's D.C. headquarters and outside other EPA offices throughout the country.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-46" title="">[47]</a> More than 50 people staged a sit-in and rally at EPA headquarters. More than two dozen events took place on the same day, including actions in Atlanta, Boston, Dallas, Kansas City, and San Francisco. The activists are calling for immediate action to stop mountaintop removal coal mining, particularly targeting the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a> blasting site at West Virginia's Coal River Mountain.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-47" title="">[48]</a>

<h3>November 21, 2009: Protestors stop blasting on Coal River Mountain: Pettus, WV</h3>

Two activists locked themselves to a drill rig and two others unfurled a banner reading "Save Coal River Mountain" to protest Massey's blasting at the Bee Tree mountaintop removal site. Residents are concerned because the blasts are 200 feet from the Brushy Fork Impoundment, which is permitted to hold nine billion gallons of coal sludge. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a> itself estimates that 998 people would die if the dam breaks. The activists said they plan to remain locked down until they are arrested.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-48" title="">[49]</a>

<h3>December 7, 2009: 300 activists protest mountaintop removal in Charleston, WV</h3>

300 activists rallied outside the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection to demand a halt to the blasting at Coal River Mountain. Environmental attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr. spoke the protest, calling mountaintop removal a crime and saying that the environmental and health impacts of burning coal make it neither a cheap nor clean source of energy. About 200 coal miners and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a> representatives attended the rally to jeer and try to drown out the speakers.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-49" title="">[50]</a>

<h3>January 21, 2010: Tree-Sitters Shut Down Infamous Mountaintop Removal Operation in West Virginia</h3>

Three non-violent climate change activists associated with <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Climate_Ground_Zero" title="Climate Ground Zero">Climate Ground Zero</a>, perched themselves on 60-foot high platforms to protest the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bee_Strip_Mine&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Bee Strip Mine (page does not exist)">Bee Strip Mine</a> on Coal River Mountain. Reports indicate that the protesters halted the day's operations. The activists were David Aaron Smith, Amber Nitchman and Eric Blevins. According to Climate Ground Zero reports, the three scaled trees by the access road to <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a>'s infamous mountaintop removal operation near the company's Brushy Fork Impoundment, such as <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Brushy_Eagle_Mine" title="Brushy Eagle Mine">Brushy Eagle Mine</a>.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-50" title="">[51]</a>

<h3>March 2010: EPA Headquarters Protest</h3>

In late March 2010, environmental activists, some associated with the group <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rainforest_Action_Network" title="Rainforest Action Network">Rainforest Action Network</a>, camped out in front of Washington DC's headquarters for 32 hours in an attempt to send a message to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to end <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountain_top_removal" title="Mountain top removal" class="mw-redirect">mountain top removal</a>. Purple tents were erected and protesters perched on tripods. As reported by the blog It’s Getting Hot in Here, which explained the action:

<dl>

<dd>

<dl>

<dd>Almost every person who passed through our ‘Purple Mountain’s Majesty’ and underneath the banner “EPA: Pledge to End Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining in 2010” has been incredibly encouraging of our action. EPA employees, tourists and DC residents all demonstrated their support on the issue.</dd>

</dl>

</dd>

</dl>

<dl>

<dd>

<dl>

<dd>In addition to the many comments from EPA employees that “we are doing a great job” and “please keep doing what you’re doing,” Lisa Jackson personally tweeted her response. Administrator Jackson said in her tweet: “People are here today expressing views on MTM, a critical issue to our country. They’re concerned abt human health & water quality & so am I."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-51" title="">[52]</a></dd>

</dl>

</dd>

</dl>

</div>

</div>

Author <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jeff_Biggers&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Jeff Biggers (page does not exist)">Jeff Biggers</a> notes that while Lisa Jackson recognizes the protests, she nonetheless used the acronym "MTM" which is the industry phrase for mountain top mining instead of the activists term, MTR, which is short for <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountain_top_removal" title="Mountain top removal" class="mw-redirect">mountain top removal</a>. Biggers also notes that an EPA spokeswoman yesterday said the protest was “based on a fundamental misunderstanding of EPA’s role” and explained that the EPA does not regulate the mining industry, but is only “responsible for ensuring that projects comply with the Clean Water Act.”

“Except,” notes Biggers, “it’s the mining industry that isn’t complying with the Clean Water Act.”<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-52" title="">[53]</a>

<h3>April 2, 2010: JPMorgan Chase Protest in Chicago</h3>

On Friday April 2, 2010 activists associated with the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rainforest_Action_Network" title="Rainforest Action Network">Rainforest Action Network</a> (RAN) in Chicago staged a "die-in" at a <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=JPMorgan_Chase" title="JPMorgan Chase">JPMorgan Chase</a> bank in downtown to protest the bank's investment in mountaintop removal (MTR) projects. Between thirty and forty people took part in the protest but none were arrested. It was RAN's first such direct action campaign to pressure the company to abandon its MTR investments.

"JPMorgan Chase is on the run in this campaign and they are looking for a way to end this campaign," said RAN activist Adam Gaya. "[They are seeing that] people are willing to go beyond making a phone call and sending a email [and are] canceling their account and taking direct action."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-53" title="">[54]</a>

<h3>May 17, 2010: <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Climate_Ground_Zero" title="Climate Ground Zero">Climate Ground Zero</a> Activists Blockade <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a> Headquarters</h3>

On the morning of May 17, 2010 two activists associated with Climate Ground Zero erected a tripod tent on the driveway of Massey Energy's regional headquarters in Boone county, West Virginia. The two activists, EmmaKate Martin and Benjamin Bryant, locked themselves to the base of one of the poles. Both were arrested and charged with misdemeanor offenses of trespassing, conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor, obstructing an officer and littering. Their bails were set for $100,000 each by West Virgina Magistrate Snodgrass.

The banner they hung from the tripod read ��Massey, Profits Before People & Mountains, Fight Back!” The bail was the largest ever set against any activists conducting non-violent actions against mountaintop removal in West Virginia.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-54" title="">[55]</a>

<h3>September 14, 2010: <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rainforest_Action_Network" title="Rainforest Action Network">Rainforest Action Network</a> Dumps 1,000 Pounds of Dirt on EPA Sidewalk</h3>

In September 2010 the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rainforest_Action_Network" title="Rainforest Action Network">Rainforest Action Network</a> dumped 1,000 pounds of Appalachia dirt on the sidewalk of EPA headquarters in Washington DC in protest of the mine. RAN's message: "EPA: Don't Let King Coal Dump On Appalachia." No arrests were reported.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-55" title="">[56]</a>

<h3>September 27, 2010: More than 100 arrested in Washington DC for coal protest</h3>

At a protest in front of the White House in opposition to mountaintop removal, over 100 people were arrested. In all, it was stated that 2,000 people took part in protests around the city. Hundreds of people marched down Pennsylvania Avenue to Lafayette Park, which faces the White House, according to protesters and media accounts. The march included at least one stop, at U.S. EPA headquarters, protesters said. It was reported that James Hansen, who heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, was among those arrested.

The crowd of mostly youthful ralliers carried signs like "Blowing Up Mountains for Coal Poisons People" and "Mountain ecosystems won't grow back." Some carried small white crosses adorned with messages such as "water pollution" and "corporate greed."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-56" title="">[57]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-57" title="">[58]</a>

<div class="thumbcaption">Wendell Berry Speaks with Jeff Biggers about Sit-in</div>

</div>

<h3>February 11, 2011: Wendell Berry Joins Retired Coal Miners and Residents in Kentucky Rising Capitol Sit-in</h3>

On Friday, February 11, 2011, poet and activist <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Wendell_Berry" title="Wendell Berry">Wendell Berry</a> joined a group of affected coalfield residents, retired coal miners and bestselling authors have launched a sit-in in the office of Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear to oppose the practice of mountaintop removal.

“I feel good about our conversation with governor because he made our difference very plain and clean cut. He thinks that all we have on our side are our own personal opinions, and that he evidently has on his side established governmental policy," Wendell Berry was quoted as saying after meeting with Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear. "And he thinks that surface mining can be done without harm to the land or streams or the people. It’s very plain to me that nobody on our side thinks that it is true because they’ve seen the results with their eyes or experienced the results in their own families and homes. I would say moreover that the idea here that two sides can legitimately disagree is simply wrong. I don��t think there can be a legitimate disagreement about the destruction of ecosystems and watersheds.”

Protesters left the Governor's office on the morning of Monday, February 14, 2011. A total of 14 people participated in the weekend long sit-in.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-58" title="">[59]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-59" title="">[60]</a>

Protester and Morehead State University Professor John Hennen stated that when the group of activists spoke with Gov. Beshear the two sides did not come to an agreement, but the governor said he'd visit coal fields and residents in Eastern Kentucky, an area affected by mountaintop removal.

“He heard some of our concerns and consented to come and visit some of the coal fields and meet with coal residents in eastern Kentucky whose lives and properties have been directly damaged,” said Prof. Hennen.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-60" title="">[61]</a>

<h3>March 2011: Activists target Portland, Oregon area Bank of America ATMs</h3>

Bank of America ATMs in Downtown Portland on March 1, 2011 were targeted by climate change activists in the area. Notices were placed on the ATMs which informed customers that the ATMs were ��temporarily closed until in invests responsibly in renewable energy.” <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bank_of_America" title="Bank of America" class="mw-redirect">Bank of America</a> was targeted for its financial support and investments in the practice of mountaintop removal.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-61" title="">[62]</a>

<h3>April 2011: <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rising_Tide_North_America" title="Rising Tide North America">Rising Tide North America</a> stages bank protest in Portland, Oregon</h3>

On Sunday, April 2, 2011, activists affiliated with Portland's Rising Tide chapter targeted major banks in the Portland metro areas as a call to them to divest from the fossil fuel infrastructure, including coal. The banks included <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Wells_Fargo" title="Wells Fargo">Wells Fargo</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bank_of_America" title="Bank of America" class="mw-redirect">Bank of America</a> for this investments in practices such as mountaintop removal. Some participants staged a "die-in" on sidewalks while others used mud to stick "dirty money" to bank walls and windows, letting customers know the banks were "closed for climate crimes". No arrests were reported.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-62" title="">[63]</a>

<h3>August 2011: Tree-Sit on Coal River Mountain</h3>

<div class="thumbcaption">Treesit on Coal River Mountain.</div>

</div>

On July 20, 2011, protesters associated with the RAMPS Campaign halted blasting on a portion of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alpha_Natural_Resources" title="Alpha Natural Resources" style=" background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Alpha Natural Resources</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bee_Tree_Mine" title="Bee Tree Mine">Bee Tree Mine</a> mountaintop removal mine by ascending two trees and hanging banners that read “Stop Strip Mining” and “For <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Judy_Bonds" title="Judy Bonds">Judy Bonds</a>” in honor of the strip mining activist. The activists demand that Alpha Natural Resources stop strip mining on Coal River Mountain and that the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection prohibit future strip mining in the Coal River Watershed. As of January 2011, Marfork Coal Company, a subsidiary of Alpha, has destroyed about 75 acres of Coal River Mountain on the Bee Tree permit, the only active mountaintop removal permit on the mountain. Lisa Henderson, Judy Bonds’ daughter and Coal River Valley resident, said she saw the action as a continuation of her mother’s work.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-63" title="">[64]</a>

On July 27, 2011 it was reported that that two tree-sit activists, Junior Walk and Eli Schewel, were arrested by state police on the first day of the tree-sit protest and charged with trespassing at the Bee Tree surface mine site.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-64" title="">[65]</a> It was reported on August 3, 2011 that Becks Kolins, who had been occupying a tree in protest, descended the tree voluntarily and was arrested a day earlier by the West Virginia State Police. Kolins, along with Catherine-Ann MacDougal, had been sitting in a tree eighty feet above the ground since July 20th to protest the strip mining of Coal River Mountain. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-65" title="">[66]</a>

Catherine-Ann MacDougal remained in her tree remained in her tree until August 19, 2011 at which point she descended. “The reality of limited resources now necessitates my descent but this is not the last they will see of us. I plan to remain here and fight for this mountain for years to come,” said MacDougal.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-66" title="">[67]</a>

<h2>Escalating Legal Action Against Mountaintop Removal Activists</h2>

Anti-coal protesters in West Virginia have been facing escalated legal struggles as a result of their non-violent actions against mountaintop removal. Protests in 2008 were often met with arrests for trespassing, where the individuals involved in the actions were ticketed and released. Since that time, bails have increased as well as charges. Protesters have been denied the right to a bail bondsman in some cases. Critics note that this has been done in an attempt to keep the activists in jail longer.

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a>, which has been the target of many of the most recent protests in West Virginia, has filed multiple civil lawsuits against these activists arrested on their property.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-CounterPunch-67" title="">[68]</a>

<dl>

<dd>

<dl>

<dd>Lawsuits demanding injunctions and so-far unspecified money for “damages” have been filed against dozens of these protesters: one suit in Raleigh County against participants in several protests there early in 2009, one suit in Boone County against participants in an action there, and a separate Raleigh County suit against participants in a tree-sit [plastic rope terrorist?]action last summer. Protesters not actually named in any of these suits have been found in contempt of a court’s injunction for “acting in concert” with one of a suit’s named parties; that ruling is currently being appealed. In addition, Massey recently filed suit in federal court against participants in the January tree-sit protest at Massey's <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Marfork_Complex" title="Marfork Complex">Marfork Complex</a>, requesting at least the minimum of $75,000 in damages that would make such a case eligible for federal court.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-CounterPunch-67" title="">[68]</a></dd>

</dl>

</dd>

</dl>

<h2>Legislation in the United States</h2>

<div class="thumbcaption">Mountaintop removal pt. 1 of 2</div>

</div>

Mountaintop removal pt. 2 of 2

</div>

In the United States, MTR is allowed by section 515(c)(1) of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Surface_Mining_Control_and_Reclamation_Act" title="Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act">Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act</a> (SMCRA). Although some surface coal mining sites must be reclaimed to the land's pre-mining contour and use, regulatory agencies issue waivers using a loophole in SMCRA that allows MTR.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-68" title="">[69]</a> In such cases, SMCRA dictates that reclamation must create "a level plateau or a gently rolling contour with no highwalls remaining."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-69" title="">[70]</a>

On three occasions, federal judges in West Virginia and Kentucky have issued major rulings that would force the industry into compliance with federal law and effect their ability to mine coal using MTR. In each case the rulings from the lower courts have been overturned on appeal in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-70" title="">[71]</a>

On March 23, 2007, U.S District Judge Robert C. Chambers ruled that the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Army_Corps_of_Engineers" title="Army Corps of Engineers" class="mw-redirect">Army Corps of Engineers</a> had illegally issued four valley fill permits to Massey Energy Company by not "thoughtfully considering" the mountaintop removal mining's potential impacts, citing "alarming cumulative stream loss" and "dramatic environmental consequences". The 4 permits issued by the Corps would have permanently buried over 12 miles of streams and strip about 3,800 acres of hills and hollows.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-71" title="">[72]</a> The ruling is currently on appeal, scheduled to begin oral arguments on September 23, 2008. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-72" title="">[73]</a>

In May 2001, the Bush administration quickly enacted new regulations that defined "fill material" to include mining waste. The Clean Water Act had not explicitly defined industrial mining waste as "fill material" which left the coal industry vulnerable to citizens legally challenging the practice of MTR under the Clean Water Act.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-73" title="">[74]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-usatoday-8" title="">[9]</a>

On May 4, 2007, the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clean_Water_Protection_Act" title="Clean Water Protection Act">Clean Water Protection Act</a> (H.R. 2169) was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives and is currently co-sponsored by 141 representatives. H.R. 2169 reestablishes the original intent of the Clean Water Act by stating that the term 'fill material' means any pollutant which replaces portions of the waters of the United States with dry land or which changes the bottom elevation of a water body for any purpose and the term does not include any pollutant discharged into the water primarily to dispose of waste<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-74" title="">[75]</a>. If passed, the bill would prevent mountaintop mining operations from using adjacent valleys and streams to dispose of the MTR mining waste overburden.

A federal judge has also ruled that using settling ponds to remove mining waste from streams violates the Clean Water Act. He also declared that the Army Corps of Engineers has no authority to issue permits allowing discharge of pollutants into such in-stream settling ponds, which are often built just below valley fills.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-75" title="">[76]</a>

Additionally, a September 2007 survey conducted by the Civil Society Institute found that 65% of Americans oppose the Bush Administration's proposal "to ease environmental regulations to permit wider use of 'mountaintop removal' coal mining in the U.S." The study also found that 74% of Americans are opposed to the expansion of MTR coal mining in general, and that 90% of Americans agree that more mining should be permitted only after the United States government has assessed its impacts on safety and the environment.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-enn-76" title="">[77]</a>

In January 2008, the environmental advocacy group Center for Biological Diversity petitioned the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=United_States_Fish_and_Wildlife_Service&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="United States Fish and Wildlife Service (page does not exist)">United States Fish and Wildlife Service</a> to end a policy that waives detailed federal Endangered Species Act reviews for new mining permits. The current policy states that MTR can never damage endangered species or their habitat as long as mining operators comply with federal surface mining law, despite the complexities of species and ecosystems. Since 1996, this policy has exempted many strip mines from being subject to permit-specific reviews of impact on individual endangered species.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-wvgaz-77" title="">[78]</a>

In June 2008, U.S. Senators Lamar Alexander and Energy and Natural Resources Chair Sen. Jeff Bingaman sent a <a href="http://gristmill.grist.org/images/user/6337/Ltr_to_GAOMTR_06.20.08.pdf" class="external text" title="http://gristmill.grist.org/images/user/6337/Ltr_to_GAOMTR_06.20.08.pdf" rel="nofollow">letter</a> to the Government Accountability Office requesting review of the Office of Surface Mining's (OSM) proposed revision to Stream Buffer Zone rules and the general impacts of MTR, citing fears that the practice was detrimental to both the landscape and citizens.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-78" title="">[79]</a>

On October 17, 2008, the Office of Surface Mining released its final Environmental Impact Statement on the modification to the Stream Buffer Zone rule. The new rule, expected to be finalized in November, will allow coal companies to legally dump massive waste piles called "valley fills" directly into streams, permanently burying them. More than 2000 miles of Appalachian streams have been buried or degraded by waste from mountaintop removal mining.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-79" title="">[80]</a>

<h3>Bush's Midnight Regulations</h3>

<div class="thumbcaption">Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s statements on Bush's midnight rulings</div>

</div>

In December 2008, the Bush Administration was pushing through last-minute "midnight regulations," which will be difficult for the Obama team to reverse. Included in the new laws are a rule that will make it easier for coal companies to dump debris mountaintop removal mining into valleys and streams. Another midnight regulation will allow coal-fired power plants to increase their emissions without installing new anti-pollution equipment, while another will allow power companies to build coal plants closer to national parks. The <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Environmental_Defense_Fund" title="Environmental Defense Fund">Environmental Defense Fund</a> described the moves as a "fire sale of epic size for coal."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-uk-80" title="">[81]</a>

A loophole in US law allows the President to put last-minute regulations into the Code of Federal Regulations, giving them the same force as law. Reversing Bush's midnight rules could take months or even years. The Obama Administration will have open a period of public comment on each regulation, and corporations may go to court to prevent changes.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-uk-80" title="">[81]</a>

<h3>Federal appeals court in Richmond, VA reverses limits on mountaintop removal</h3>

On February 13, 2009, a federal appeals court overturned a lower court ruling that limited mountaintop removal coal mining. Delivering a win for the coal industry, a panel of the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to reverse U.S. District Judge Robert Chambers' decision in March 2007 that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had violated the Clean Water Act by issuing permits to four mountaintop removal operations. The 2007 ruling mandated full consideration of the environmental effects of mountaintop removal and slowed the issuing of new permits.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ens-81" title="">[82]</a>

The case was first filed by the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ohio_Valley_Environmental_Coalition" title="Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition">Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_River_Mountain_Watch" title="Coal River Mountain Watch">Coal River Mountain Watch</a>, and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=West_Virginia_Highlands_Conservancy&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="West Virginia Highlands Conservancy (page does not exist)">West Virginia Highlands Conservancy</a> against Aracoma Coal Company (a subsidiary of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a>) and four other companies, as well as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Environmental groups responded that the appeals court decision will lead to the destruction of 90 more mountain peaks.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ens-81" title="">[82]</a>

<h3>Court finds Army Corps of Engineers violated Clean Water Act in MTR permitting case</h3>

On November 24, 2009, U.S. District Judge Chuck Chambers ruled that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers violated federal environmental laws by issuing permits for two mountaintop removal coal mines in West Virginia without allowing sufficient public involvement. Chambers found that the Corps violated the Clean Water Act and National Environmental Policy Act when it issued permits for <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=CONSOL_Energy" title="CONSOL Energy">CONSOL Energy's</a> Ike Fork mines and Penn Virginia's Nellis mine. Chambers ordered the Corps to rectify the problem with the permits, while also allowing "limited" mining to continue at the sites for 60 days. The case may have implications for other surface mines already permitted and in operation. According to Oliver Bernstein of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sierra_Club" title="Sierra Club">Sierra Club</a>, "Most of the pending permits in West Virginia may need to go back through the public process."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-82" title="">[83]</a>

<h3>Memo detailing West Virginia Coal Association's action items</h3>

On March 27, 2009, a memo from Chris Hamilton, Vice President of the West Virginia Coal Association, to the members of the Mountaintop Mining Coalition, became public. The memo detailed efforts underway to counteract EPA's apparent movements against mountaintop removal mining permits. "Action items" included:<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-83" title="">[84]</a>

<ul>

<li>arranging an urgent meeting with the Council on Environmental Quality and EPA.</li>

<li>a multi-state congressional briefing on May 5-7 in Washington, DC, with mine visits in Kentucky, Virginia and West Virginia scheduled on May 20-21.</li>

<li>a media campaign, including a Powerpoint presentation, white paper, blog, brochure, website, and video promoting mountaintop removal mining.</li>

<li>support for Governor Manchin's SB 375, which, among other things, makes it easier for the coal industry to get around tough reclamation requirements for mountaintop removal sites.</li>

<li>support for SB 461, which grants a three-plus-year extension to the coal industry to meet water quality limits for toxic selenium discharges into waters supporting aquatic life.</li>

</ul>

The entire memo is available <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/03/27/intercepted-wva-coals-master-plan/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/03/27/intercepted-wva-coals-master-plan/" rel="nofollow">here.</a>

<h3>Appalachia Restoration Act introduced in U.S. Senate</h3>

On March 25, 2009, U.S. Senators Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN) introduced Bill 696, also termed the Appalachia Restoration Act. The legislation would amend the Clean Water Act to ban the dumping of mining waste into streams, which in turn would effectively end the use of mountaintop mining. "My goal is to put a stop to one of the most destructive mining practices that has already destroyed some of America’s most beautiful and ecologically significant regions," said Senator Cardin, who is Chairman of the Water and Wildlife Subcommittee of the Committee on Environment and Public Works.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-84" title="">[85]</a>

<h3>State Legislative Action</h3>

Kentucky - In 2005 Kentucky became the first state in the nation to propose a bill that would end the dumping of coal mining waste into headwater streams and valleys, a procedure used in mountaintop removal mining to dispose of the large amount of rock and materials removed to expose seams of coal.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-85" title="">[86]</a> The bill, known as the Stream Saver Bill, has been introduced in the House and assigned to the Natural Resources and Environment committee three times but has not been allowed a hearing by the chairman of the committee, Rep Jim Gooch.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-86" title="">[87]</a>

North Carolina - On May 27 2008 North Carolina State Representative Pricey Harrison introduced House Bill H2709 into the North Carolina General Assembly. The bill seeks to outlaw the use of coal extracted from mountaintop removal mines from being burned in North Carolina coal fired power plants.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-87" title="">[88]</a>

Tennessee - In January 2008, State Senator Raymond Finney introduced a bill (<a href="http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SB3822.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SB3822.pdf" rel="nofollow">SB3822</a>/<a href="http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/HB3348.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/HB3348.pdf" rel="nofollow">HB3348</a>), called the Tennessee Scenic Vistas Protection Act, that would effectively end the practice of mountaintop removal coal mining in the state of Tennessee.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-88" title="">[89]</a>

A major provision in the legislation would ban all surface coal operations or the resulting waste within 100 feet of any stream or river unless the operation was to improve the quality of the a stream previously destroyed by mining. This would end the current practice of dumping the mining waste directly into the streams and valleys.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-89" title="">[90]</a> The bill also banned all surface mining above 2000 feet in elevation.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-90" title="">[91]</a>

In April 2008, as a final act before recessing for the year, the House Environment Subcommittee voted against allowing the bill to move forward by a vote of 3-5.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-91" title="">[92]</a>

West Virginia - On February 6, 2008, West Virginia State Senator Jon Hunter introduced a bill that would end the the practice of valley fills. In a press release Senator Hunter said, "I introduced Senate Bill 588 because I fervently believe that God did not intend for us to destroy the mountains, the streams, the forests and His people in order to mine coal."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-92" title="">[93]</a>

The bill is currently stalled in the Senate Energy and Mining Committee.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-93" title="">[94]</a>

<h3>Anti-coal Activists Appeal to West Virginia Supreme Court</h3>

On March 2, 2010 environmentalists seeking to end the practice of mountaintop removal took their efforts to the state's Supreme Court in an attempt to overturn what they called "overly broad and unconstitutional" restraining orders that were designed to keep protesters away from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a> operations. Attorneys Thomas Rist and Roger Forman filed an appeal and asked the court to "overturn contempt convictions resulting from the violation of those restraining orders." Massey Energy has 30 days to respond to the matter, at which point the West Virginia Supreme Court will decide on whether or not to hear the matter.

Protests against mountaintop removal have escalated as a result of non-violent direct actions taken by <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Climate_Ground_Zero" title="Climate Ground Zero">Climate Ground Zero</a>, which have resulted in over 100 arrests since February 2009. Lawyers for the activists believe that the law violates freedom of speech. Similar to the state law, federal U.S. District Judge Irene Berger barred protesters from trespassing on Massey Energy property.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-94" title="">[95]</a>

<h2>Obama administration EPA actions on mountaintop removal</h2>

<h4>March 2009: Obama EPA begins to crack down on mountaintop removal</h4>

On March 23, 2009, the Obama administration began making moves to block or stall mountaintop removal mining permits. The EPA issued letters meant to halt or slow two mining permits proposed by the federal Army Corps of Engineers in West Virginia and Kentucky. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson made an official announcement on March 24, saying, "The two letters reflect EPA's considerable concern regarding the environmental impacts these projects would have on fragile habitats and streams. I have directed the agency to review other mining permits requests. EPA will use the best science and follow the letter of the law in ensuring we are protecting our environment."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-95" title="">[96]</a>

The decision to delay and review the two permits calls into question more than 100 pending valley fill permits in the Appalachian region.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-96" title="">[97]</a> In response to widespread industry dissent warning EPA not to block mining permits, as well as praise from environmentalists for the decision to deny permits, the organization issued the following clarification of its intentions:<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-97" title="">[98]</a>

The Environmental Protection Agency is not halting, holding or placing a moratorium on any of the mining permit applications. Plain and simple. EPA has issued comments on two pending permit applications to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers expressing serious concerns about the need to reduce the potential harmful impacts on water quality. EPA will take a close look at other permits that have been held back because of the 4th Circuit litigation. We fully anticipate that the bulk of these pending permit applications will not raise environmental concerns. In cases where a permit does raise environmental concerns, we will work expeditiously with the Army Corps of Engineers to determine how these concerns can be addressed. EPA’s submission of comments to the Corps on draft permits is a well-established procedure under the Clean Water Act to assure that environmental considerations are addressed in the permitting process.

</blockquote>

<h4>April 2009: EPA challenges three MTR permits</h4>

In April 2009, EPA issued objections to three more mountaintop removal mining permits pending issue from the Army Corps of Engineers. The specific mines are <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy's</a> Republic No. 1 Surface Mine in Kanawha County, West Virginia; Frasure Creek Mining’s <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Spring_Fork_Surface_Mine" title="Spring Fork Surface Mine">Spring Fork Surface Mine</a> in Mingo County, West Virginia; and A&G Coal Corp.’s Ison Rock Ridge Surface Mine in Wise County, Virginia. According to the EPA letters, the three mining operations would bury about eight miles of streams.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-98" title="">[99]</a>

<h4>May 2009: Army Corps of Engineers suspends MTR permit for A&G Coal</h4>

On May 7, 2009, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers suspended its approval of A&G Coal Corp.��s Ison Rock Ridge Surface Mine in Wise County, Virginia. The decision follows on the heels of a lawsuit filed by the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sierra_Club" title="Sierra Club" style=" background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Sierra Club</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Southern_Appalachian_Mountain_Stewards&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Southern Appalachian Mountain Stewards (page does not exist)">Southern Appalachian Mountain Stewards</a> to block the permit. The Corps stated that the suspension provides officials "an opportunity to fully evaluate concerns" raised by EPA in April 2009.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-99" title="">[100]</a>

<h4>June 2009: Obama administration announces plans to toughen standards for MTR permits</h4>

On June 11, 2009, the Obama administration announced plans to toughen standards for mountaintop removal mining, rather than banning the practice entirely. Officials from EPA, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Interior Department, and the White House Council on Environmental Quality said they would order a more rigorous environmental and legal review of pending and future permit applications for MTR projects. The announcement did not clarify whether the new standards would result in more or fewer mining permits being approved, leaving both environmental and coal industry groups uncertain about whether to support the new policies.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-100" title="">[101]</a>

<h4>August 2009: Court rejects attempt to turn back Bush's midnight regulations on MTR</h4>

On August 12, 2009, U.S. District Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr. denied an effort by Obama's Interior Department to overturn a last-minute rule change by the Bush administration. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar had filed a motion to toss out a Bush regulation that made it easier for coal mining companies to dump debris into valley streams. Salazar's motion was opposed by the National Mining Assocation. In his decision, Judge Kennedy said that Salazar erred in trying to "repeal a rule without public notice and comment, without judicial consideration of the merits."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-101" title="">[102]</a> A spokesperson for the Interior said the department is examining the court's decision and is "determined to improve mining practices."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-102" title="">[103]</a>

<h4>September 2009: Obama administration seeks to block West Virginia MTR permit</h4>

On September 3, 2009, the EPA issued a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers calling out problems with a permit issued for a strip-mining project in Logan County, West Virginia, the largest such permit ever issued in the state. EPA found that the mine would violate the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clean_Water_Act" title="Clean Water Act">Clean Water Act</a>, having the "potential to degrade downstream water quality, and to cause or contribute to potential excursions of West Virginia’s narrative water quality standards." EPA has asked the Corps of Engineers to suspend, revoke, or modify the permit. In response, the Corps is seeking a 30-day stay in legal proceedings over the permit, so that its experts can re-examine the project.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-103" title="">[104]</a> The full EPA letter is available <a href="http://wvgazette.com/static/coal%20tattoo/sprucesept2009letter.pdf" class="external text" title="http://wvgazette.com/static/coal%20tattoo/sprucesept2009letter.pdf" rel="nofollow">here</a>.

<h4>September 2009: EPA holds 79 MTR permits for review</h4>

The EPA identified 79 mountaintop removal permits issued by the Army Corps of Engineers in Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, and West Virginia that it said would likely affect water quality. The agency put the permits on hold to allow for further study to ensure the projects will not violate the Clean Water Act. Mary Anne Hitt of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sierra_Club" title="Sierra Club">Sierra Club</a> described the move as "a sea change in enforcement" over the Bush administration, during which the EPA did not oppose a single permit.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-104" title="">[105]</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-105" title="">[106]</a>

<h4>October 2009: EPA to revoke permit for West Virginia surface mine</h4>

On October 16, 2009, the EPA announced that it planned to use its authority to revoke the permit for Mingo Logan Coal's Spruce No. 1 mine, which is owned by <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arch_Coal" title="Arch Coal">Arch Coal</a>. The agency said it was acting on its authority for the first time since the Clean Water Act was enacted in 1972. The project at issue would be the largest authorized mountaintop removal operation in Appalachia. In a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers, EPA Regional Administrator William Early said the action "reflects the magnitude and scale of anticipated direct, indirect, and cumulative adverse environmental impacts associated with this mountaintop removal mining operation."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-106" title="">[107]</a>

<h4>March 2010: EPA approves MTR permit</h4>

On March 2, 2010 the EPA announced that it had granted a Clean Water Act permit for the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hobet_45_Mine" title="Hobet 45 Mine">Hobet 45 Mine</a> in Lincoln County, West Virginia after Hobet Mining LLC, a company owned by <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patriot_Coal" title="Patriot Coal">Patriot Coal</a>, had agreed to additional "significant protections" against environmental impacts. The permit now must be approved by the Army Corps of Engineers.

Additionally, the EPA said it extended the agency's talks with Mingo Logan Mining Co., owned by <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arch_Coal" title="Arch Coal">Arch Coal</a>, in regard to environmental and water quality concerns about its Spruce No. 1 mine in Logan County, West Virginia. Opponents of the permits, citing groundwater pollution from mountaintop removal projects stated that, “Enforceable minimum waste management requirements for dry disposal of coal ash in landfills should include siting restrictions, liners, groundwater monitoring, leachate collection, and financial assurance, closure requirements, post-closure care, and corrective action.”<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-107" title="">[108]</a>

<h4>March 27, 2010: EPA blocks Arch Coal Mine</h4>

On March 26, 2010, it was announced that the EPA was to veto <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arch_Coal" title="Arch Coal">Arch Coal</a>'s Spruce No. 1 mine. The project would be the largest mountaintop removal venture in the entire Appalachia region. As of March 28, 2010 the company said it would defend the mining proposal. The public comment period is open for 90 days. The mine was opposed due to its likely environmental impact.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-108" title="">[109]</a>

<h4>April 1, 2010: EPA States MTR Valley Fills Might End</h4>

At the beginning of April 2010, the EPA's Lisa Jackson laid out new mountaintop removal guidelines, which may put the brakes on the practice in Appalachia and elsewhere, where valleys are filled with mining debris. Jackson stated that valley fills likely violate <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clean_Water_Act" title="Clean Water Act">Clean Water Act</a> requirements in most cases.

"You are talking about either no or very few valley fills that are going to be able to meet standards like this," said Jackson. "What the science is telling us is that it would be untrue to say you can have any more than minimal valley fill and not see irreversible damage to stream health."

Jackson said bluntly that the new guidelines were not meant to end coal mining, but the gradual tightening of regulations would change mining practices for the betterment of water quality.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-109" title="">[110]</a>

<h4>June 17, 2010: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers suspends expedited process for surface mining permits</h4>

On June 17, 2010, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers suspended an expedited process for obtaining surface mining permits across much of the nation's eastern coalfields. According to the Corps, new surface coal mines in West Virginia, eastern Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Virginia will no longer be able to use the expedited process to obtain permits to bury streams with excess waste. Instead, surface mines in those states will need individual Clean Water Act permits, which typically involve greater scrutiny and public input. The decision does not affect other major coal producing areas in the Midwest and Wyoming. The corps decided to suspend the process in the six states because information gathered in recent years shows mountaintop mining can harm aquatic life, according to Corps official Meg Gaffney-Smith. The expedited process had been used heavily in the region, where surface mines produce roughly 12 percent of the nation's coal. About 80 percent of the 1,500 permits issued through the process since 1997 had been for mines in the Appalachian region of the six states.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-110" title="">[111]</a>

<h4>June 29, 2010: EPA’s first decision under new MTR guidelines is to approve coal permit</h4>

In late June 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency gave the Army Corps of Engineers a green light for the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pine_Creek_Mine" title="Pine Creek Mine">Pine Creek Mine</a> permit, a mountaintop removal (MTR) mining site located in Logan County, W.Va. The permit was the first decision the EPA has issued under its new mountaintop mining guidelines.

Environmentalists argued that the new MTR guidelines were understood to provide greater protection for headwater streams by curbing the practice of dumping waste in neighboring valleys to create what is known as valley fills. However, the Pine Creek permit is the first test of these guidelines, and green lighted three new valley fills (each over 40 acres large).

The <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Biological_Diversity" title="Center for Biological Diversity">Center for Biological Diversity</a> contended:

<dl>

<dd>

<dl>

<dd>Pollution from mountaintop removal mining has been found to cause deformities and reproductive failure in downstream wildlife and has been associated with cancer clusters in human communities exposed to high levels of coal-mining activity. Human health impacts result from contact with polluted water and from exposure to airborne toxins and dust. Mountaintop removal also causes widespread damage of private property. Earlier this month a state of emergency was declared in southern West Virginia after flooding ravaged the area; a recent study has found that mountaintop removal and valley fill operations lead to increased risk of flooding.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-111" title="">[112]</a></dd>

</dl>

</dd>

</dl>

Author <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jeff_Biggers&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Jeff Biggers (page does not exist)">Jeff Biggers</a> also chimed in on the permit, questioning the Obama administration's position on MTR:

<dl>

<dd>

<dl>

<dd>I’m not sure if the EPA is addled, or downright shameless, but on the heels of meeting with besieged Appalachian coalfield residents and less than three months since its ballyhooed new guidance rules to halt reckless mountaintop removal operations, President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has once again gone back on its word and green-lighted a dangerous mountaintop removal permit in a hair-brained pander to Big Coal that will knowingly destroy miles of critical headwater streams.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-112" title="">[113]</a></dd>

</dl>

</dd>

</dl>

The Pine Creek permit now needs to be approved by the Army Corps of Engineers.

<h4>July 2010: Coal industry sues EPA, Army Corps</h4>

On July 20, 2010, coal industry lawyers for the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Mining_Association" title="National Mining Association">National Mining Association</a> sued the U.S. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Environmental_Protection_Agency" title="Environmental Protection Agency" class="mw-redirect">Environmental Protection Agency</a> and the Army Corps of Engineers to try to slow down efforts to regulate mountaintop removal mining, filing suit in federal court in Washington, D.C. over the EPA's more detailed review of mining permit applications for valley fills, and a new set of recommended water quality guidelines for surface coal mining in Appalachia. In the 42-page complaint, the association alleges EPA's permit reviews were an effort to "rob" other agencies of their regulatory role and charges that EPA Administrator <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Lisa_Jackson" title="Lisa Jackson">Lisa Jackson</a> ignored requirements for public involvement when she issued the new water pollution guidelines. The mining association also alleges this process "adds significant additional time to the corps regulatory review" and is "dramatically altering timelines" for companies to receive new mining permits.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-kwj-113" title="">[114]</a>

EPA made its guidance review effective on an interim basis, and is conducting an eight-month public comment period and subjecting the MTR scientific reports the guidance is based upon to peer review. In its suit, the mining association said the guidance constitutes a rulemaking that should have gone through a public comment before it was put into effect. The suit asks for a court order to block the more detailed EPA permit reviews and the agency's conductivity guidance.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-kwj-113" title="">[114]</a>

<h4>Sep. 2010: Independent Science Advisory Board Supports EPA Science on MTR Impacts</h4>

On September 28, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency��s (EPA) independent Science Advisory Board (SAB) released their first draft review of EPA’s research into the water quality impacts of valley fills associated with mountaintop mining. In their draft review, the SAB supported EPA’s scientific research and agreed with EPA’s conclusion that valley fills are associated with increased levels of conductivity (a measure of water pollution for mining practices) in downstream waters, and that these increased levels of conductivity threaten stream life in surface waters.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ji-114" title="">[115]</a>

The SAB reviewed EPA’s draft report ��A Field-Based Aquatic Life Benchmark for Conductivity in Central Appalachian Streams,�� which uses field data to derive an aquatic life benchmark for conductivity. The benchmark is intended to protect 95 percent of aquatic species in streams in the Appalachian region influenced by mountaintop mining and valley fills. Based on that science, EPA released guidance in April designed to minimize irreversible water quality impacts caused by mountaintop mining. Following the completion of the external peer review and review of public comments, the report will be revised and published as a final report.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ji-114" title="">[115]</a>

A growing body of scientific literature, including previous and new studies performed by EPA, show significant damage to local streams that are polluted with the mining runoff from mountaintop removal. To protect water quality, EPA has identified a range of conductivity (a measure of the level of salt in the water) of 300 to 500 microSiemens per centimeter that is generally consistent with protecting life in Appalachian streams. The maximum benchmark conductivity of 500 microSiemens per centimeter is a measure of salinity that is roughly five times above normal levels.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ji-114" title="">[115]</a>

EPA’s Assistant Administrator for Water Pete Silva said: “This independent review affirms that EPA is relying on sound analysis and letting science and only science guide our actions to protect human health and the environment. We will continue to follow the science and solicit input from all stakeholders as we safeguard water quality and protect the American people.”<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ji-114" title="">[115]</a>

<h4>October 2010: West Virginia sues EPA over MTR permits</h4>

In October 2010 it was announced that West Virginia was set to sue the EPA over delayed mountaintop removal coal mine permits. “In 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency began interfering with the surface coal mine permitting process in West Virginia,” said Gov. Joe Manchin in a statement. “Through a series of questionable and unlawful actions, the U.S. EPA has implemented policies and procedures that have delayed the permitting process and halted the issuance of new mine permits.”

Gov. Manchin alleged that no specific law or government regulation has kept the permits from passing, only a political policy agenda specifically coming from the executive branch of government. The governor argued that certain federal government entities including the EPA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Department of the Interior delayed the issuance of 23 pending coal mining permits in West Virginia with only 2 being approved since 2009.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-115" title="">[116]</a>

<h4>January 2011: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement document states that new MTR rules could cost 7,000 coal jobs</h4>

In January 2011 it was reported that the Obama administration's own experts estimated their proposal for protecting streams from coal mining would eliminate thousands of jobs and slash production across much of the country. The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement document stated the agency's preferred rules would impose standards for water quality and restrictions on mining methods that would affect the quality or quantity of streams near coal mine operations. The rules are supposed to replace Bush-era regulations that set up buffer zones around streams and were aimed chiefly at mountaintop removal mining in Appalachia.

The proposal, which was part of a draft environmental impact statement, would affect coal mines from Louisiana to Alaska.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-116" title="">[117]</a>

<h4>October 2011: Judge rules EPA overstepped MTR permit authority</h4>

On October 6, 2011, U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton <a href="http://wvgazette.com/static/coal%20tattoo/mtr_ruling_epa.pdf" class="external text" title="http://wvgazette.com/static/coal%20tattoo/mtr_ruling_epa.pdf" rel="nofollow">ruled</a> that the federal Environmental Protection Agency overstepped its authority when it began a more intense review of individual Clean Water Act permits normally handled by the Army Corps of Engineers. Still to be decided in the case is the challenge to EPA’s new water quality guidelines for coal mining operations in Appalachia. Arguments on that portion of the case have been delayed until June 2012.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-117" title="">[118]</a>

<h2>MTR Lobby</h2>

On February 16, 2010 it was announced that the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=West_Virginia_Coal_Association" title="West Virginia Coal Association">West Virginia Coal Association</a> spoke to a House committee that the ongoing "enhanced review" of 20 <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountain_top_removal" title="Mountain top removal" class="mw-redirect">mountain top removal</a> permits threatens plans to open or expand mines that "could extract 19 million tons of coal a year." The EPA was no represented at the special committee meeting.

Association President Bill Raney told the committee that the affected sites together hold 132 million tons of coal reserves.

"About 1,300 employees could be subject to some kind of action if these permits are not issued," Raney told the House Committee on Coal Mining Permits. "It's hanging up employment, it's hanging up production, it's hanging up revenues coming to the state of West Virginia. We can't get answers from the federal government."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-118" title="">[119]</a>

<h2>Criticism</h2>

<div class="thumbcaption">Health effects of mountaintop removal</div>

</div>

Critics contend that MTR is a destructive and unsustainable practice that benefits a small number of corporations at the expense of local communities and the environment. Opponents to the practice have also criticized MTR for the damage done to the environment by massive transport trucks, loss of potable drinking water<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-119" title="">[120]</a>, increased risk of flooding <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-120" title="">[121]</a> , health effects of breathing coal and blasting dust and drinking water tainted by coal slurry <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-121" title="">[122]</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-122" title="">[123]</a> , and the environmental damage done by the burning of coal for power<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-123" title="">[124]</a>.

Advocates of MTR argue that if the areas are reclaimed as mandated by law, the area provides flat land suitable for many uses in a region where flat land is at a premium. They also maintain that the new growth on reclaimed mountaintop-mined areas is better suited to support populations of game animals.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-124" title="">[125]</a>

Blasting at MTR sites also expels coal dust and fly-rock into the air, which can disturb or settle onto private property nearby. This dust contains sulfur compounds, which corrodes structures and is a health hazard. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-125" title="">[126]</a>

In 2007, a feature documentary titled "Mountain Top Removal" was completed by Haw River Films. The film features <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountain_Justice_Summer" title="Mountain Justice Summer" class="mw-redirect">Mountain Justice Summer</a> activists, coal field residents, and coal industry officials. Included in the film are US President George W. Bush and West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin, among others. The acclaimed film received the Reel Current Award at the 2008 Nashville Film Festival, which was awarded by former vice-president Al Gore.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-126" title="">[127]</a>

A book titled Coal River by Michael Shnayerson, released in January 2008, accuses the industry of circumventing public hearings by dividing large MTR projects into smaller sections. Under the practice, mining officials can utilize a legal loophole and obtain permits (Nationwide Permit 21) that undergo a more relaxed review than those required for large projects.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-ens08-127" title="">[128]</a> Since Nationwide Permit 21 is intended for small projects that "cause minimal adverse environmental effects," citizens typically only discover the large-scale mining after mountaintop removal has already begun. The Clean Water Act prohibits this practice, but the Army Corps of Engineers has continued to allow it.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-sdut-128" title="">[129]</a> The Corps has said that its allowance of the procedure "strengthens protections for mining related permits."

<h3>Sludge ponds</h3>

As with other methods of coal mining, processing of the coal mined generates waste slurry (or coal sludge), which is usually stored in large sludge ponds impounded by an on-site dam. Many coal slurry impoundments in West Virginia exceed 500 million gallons in volume, but can be larger than 7 billion gallons.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-129" title="">[130]</a> Such impoundments can be hundreds of feet high and sometimes have close proximity to schools or private residences.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-130" title="">[131]</a>

The most controversial sludge dam at present sits 400 yards (400 m) above Marsh Fork Elementary School. In May 2005, 16 people were arrested at Governor Manchin's office for protesting the his refusal to fund the relocation of the school. The leaking sludge pond is permitted to hold 2.8 billion gallons of coal sludge and is 21 times larger than the pond that killed 125 people in the Buffalo Creek Flood in 1972. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-131" title="">[132]</a>

Kentucky's Martin County Sludge Spill occurred in October 2000, when a coal sludge impoundment broke through into an underground mine below, propelling 306 million gallons of sludge down two tributaries of the Tug Fork River. The spill polluted hundreds of miles of waterways, contaminated the water supply for over 27,000 residents, and killed all aquatic life in Coldwater Fork and Wolf Creek.

<h3>Biodiversity</h3>

An EPA environmental impact statement finds that streams near valley fills from mountaintop removal contain high levels of minerals in the water and decreased aquatic biodiversity.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-epaPeis-2" title="">[3]</a> The statement also estimates that 724 miles (1,165 km) of Appalachian streams were buried by valley fills between 1985 to 2001.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-epaPeis-2" title="">[3]</a>

Although U.S. mountaintop removal sites by law must be reclaimed after mining is complete, reclamation has traditionally focused on stabilizing rock formations and controlling for erosion rather than on reforestation of the affected area. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-132" title="">[133]</a> Fast-growing, non-native grasses, planted to quickly provide vegetation on a site, compete with tree seedlings, and trees have difficulty establishing root systems in compacted backfill.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-epaPeis-2" title="">[3]</a> Consequently, biodiversity suffers in a region of the United States with numerous endemic species.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-133" title="">[134]</a> Erosion also increases, which can intensify flooding. In the Eastern United States, the Appalachian Regional Reforestation Initiative works to promote the use of trees in mining reclamation.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-134" title="">[135]</a>

Mountaintop removal mining practices are also a threat to endangered species. According to the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must conduct a formal review of any federally-authorized action that could potentially harm endangered or threatened species. However, coal mining projects are not subject to this review process. Mining companies instead must follow the environmental provisions of the Surface Mining Law, which requires more informal consultations with biologists to determine ways to minimize the potential impacts to species. Environmentalists argue that without a formal review process, there is no way to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act. In 2008, the Southern Environmental Law Center sued on behalf of the National Parks Conservation Association over the lack of Endangered Species Act enforcement. The complaint is currently under review by the Office of Surface Mining and Reclamation.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-135" title="">[136]</a>

<h3>Failed Coal Mine Reclamation.</h3>

Studies by <a href="http://www.ilovemountains.org/reclamation-fail/details.php#reclamation_study" class="external text" title="http://www.ilovemountains.org/reclamation-fail/details.php#reclamation_study" rel="nofollow">Appalachian Voices</a> and the <a href="http://www.ilovemountains.org/reclamation-fail/details.php#reclamation_study" class="external text" title="http://www.ilovemountains.org/reclamation-fail/details.php#reclamation_study" rel="nofollow">Natural Resources Defense Council</a> have found that, of the 410 reclaimed mountaintop removal mine sites surveyed, 366 (89.3%) had no form of verifiable post-mining development, excluding forestry and pasture. Such <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_mine_reclamation" title="Coal mine reclamation">coal mine reclamation</a> - the rehabilitation of land after coal mining operations have stopped - is a requirement of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Surface_Mining_Control_and_Reclamation_Act" title="Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act">Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act</a> (SMCRA) of 1977.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-reclamation-136" title="">[137]</a>

Instead, the reclamation projects included: industrial parks; oil and gas fields, golf courses, airports, municipal parks, a hospital, an ATV training center, and a county fairground. Commercial agriculture or farming was identified on nine sites, sometimes in conjunction with other land uses such as residential development. (The post-mining land use of 18 other sites remained uncertain.)

<h3>Increased poverty and health problems for MTR communities</h3>

<div class="thumbcaption">Coal River Wind Project www.coalriverwind.org</div>

</div>

In a 2010 report looking at the relationship between poverty, education, health, and coal in Appalachia, <a href="http://appvoices.org/images/uploads/2010/08/hendryx-essay-final.pdf" class="external text" title="http://appvoices.org/images/uploads/2010/08/hendryx-essay-final.pdf" rel="nofollow">Education and Jobs, Jobs and Education: A proposal for funding economic redevelopment in Central Appalachia</a>, author Dr. Michael Hendryx found that counties in West Virginia and Kentucky that engage in coal mining have higher poverty rates than those that do not, based on data from the 2000 US Census: 21.3% in coal mining areas, versus 14.3% in non-coal mining areas of the states, and 13.5% in the rest of the Appalachian region. The differences are statistically significant. In addition, the coal mining communities also have higher levels of unemployment, and lower levels of income and high school and college education. The author also notes that the number of jobs the coal mining industry provides for WV and KY is declining: in 1985, the number of coal mining jobs in eastern Kentucky and West Virginia was 67,757, but by 2007 the figure had declined to 34,155, due to increases in mechanization and mountaintop removal mining, which requires fewer workers.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-mh-137" title="">[138]</a>

Hendryx also ties the poverty rate to significant differences in age-adjusted death rates per 100,000 people based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data for the years 1997-2005: 1,067 in coal mining areas of WV and KY, versus 976 in non-coal mining areas of the states, and 948 in the rest of Appalachia.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-mh-137" title="">[138]</a> Of the 435 Congressional districts in the U.S., the ones with the most mountaintop removal also have the worst health: <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hal_Rogers" title="Hal Rogers" class="mw-redirect">Hal Rogers</a>’ district in KY-05 has the most mountaintop removal and the largest rate of age-related mortality deaths. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Nick_Rahall" title="Nick Rahall">Nick Rahall</a>’s district in WV-03 has the second most mountaintop removal and is the second highest rate, and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rick_Boucher" title="Rick Boucher">Rick Boucher</a>’s district in VA-09 has the third most mountaintop removal and the third highest rate.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-138" title="">[139]</a> To address these disparities, the author recommends that coal severance taxes go directly to coal mining communities for jobs and education programs.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-mh-137" title="">[138]</a>

A 2011 study in the May issue of the American Journal of Public Health by the West Virginia University School of Medicine noted disparities in health as a result of coal mining in <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Appalachian" title="Appalachian" class="mw-redirect">Appalachian</a> communities, especially concentrated in mountaintop mining areas. Those areas have the greatest reductions in health-related quality of life even when compared with counties with other forms of coal mining. The measure of health-related quality of life used in this study is a four question population-based measure developed by the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. Using the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, a telephone-based, random survey, residents in four central Appalachian states – Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia – were asked questions about how many poor mental and physical health days they experienced in the previous 30 days.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-wvu-139" title="">[140]</a>

Co-author of the study Keith Zullig, Ph.D. said: “Self-rated health and health-related quality of life were significantly reduced among residents of mountaintop mining communities in the unadjusted and adjusted models. Mountaintop mining county residents experience, on average, 18 more unhealthy days per year than do the other populations. That’s approximately 1,404 days, or almost four years, of an average American lifetime. When mountaintop mining and other coal mining counties were not separated in a previous study, there were 462 reduced health-related quality of life days across an average American life.”<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-wvu-139" title="">[140]</a>

<h3>Increased cancer rates</h3>

Among the 1.2 million American citizens living in mountaintop removal mining counties in central <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Appalachia" title="Appalachia">Appalachia</a>, an additional 60,000 cases of cancer are directly linked to mountaintop removal, according to the study, <a href="https://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/3h175p782691j628/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=knae0gv45rywwu452fnwjc45&sh=www.springerlink.com" class="external text" title="https://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/3h175p782691j628/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=knae0gv45rywwu452fnwjc45&sh=www.springerlink.com" rel="nofollow">"Self-Reported Cancer Rates in Two Rural Areas of West Virginia with and Without Mountaintop Coal Mining"</a> published in July 2011 in the Journal of Community Health: The Publication for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention. Led by West Virginia University researcher Dr. Michael Hendryx, the study was a door to door survey of 769 adults in Boone County, West Virginia in the spring of 2011, which gathered person-level health data from communities directly impacted by mountaintop mining, and compared it to communities without mining. The researchers found that the cancer rate was twice as high in a community exposed to mountaintop removal mining compared to a non-mining control community. The correlation held after controlling for age, sex, smoking, occupational exposure, and family cancer history.

<h3>Increased birth defects</h3>

In a 2011 Environmental Research journal study, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935111001484" class="external text" title="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935111001484" rel="nofollow">"The association between mountaintop mining and birth defects among live births in central Appalachia, 1996–2003"</a> investigators reported that children born in counties home to mountaintop coal mines had a 26% higher risk of suffering birth defects, compared to ones born in non-mining regions. (Nationwide, about 1 in 33 babies suffer a birth defect, the leading cause of infant deaths.)

A number of studies had found health risks associated with coal mining regions including low birth weight. Lead researcher Melissa Ahern, a health economist at Washington State University, and colleagues decided to look for health effects on infants across four states (West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia) where mountaintop removal mining occurs. Looking at the 1,889,071 births in those states from 1996 to 2003, the researchers first found birth defects were higher in six of seven categories (including heart, lung and gastrointestinal birth defects) in mountaintop mining counties compared to elsewhere. According to the study: "Rates for any anomaly were approximately 235 per 10,000 live births in the mountaintop mining area versus 144 per 10,000 live births in the non-mining area."

Since poverty has also been linked to birth defects, the researchers controlled for social factors, such as smoking, drinking, mother's education, race and other poverty-related factors, and the team found the effect was still statistically significant, leading to the 26% higher risk of birth defects in the mountaintop mining counties. According to Ahern: "Circulatory and respiratory effects really stood out." The study stated that birth defect rate seemed to increase over time and in regions with more mountaintop removal.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-140" title="">[141]</a>

The report <a href="http://www.southernstudies.org/2011/07/institute-index-appalachias-deepening-human-rights-crisis.html" class="external text" title="http://www.southernstudies.org/2011/07/institute-index-appalachias-deepening-human-rights-crisis.html" rel="nofollow">INSTITUTE INDEX: Appalachia’s deepening human rights crisis</a> by the Institute for Southern Studies laid out some of the numbers in the Environmental Research study:

<ul>

<li>Of every 100,000 babies born, number who suffer from birth defects in areas of Appalachia: 235</li>

<li>In non-mining areas: 144</li>

<li>Percent higher risk of having a baby with a birth defect for mothers who smoked during pregnancy compared to non-smoking mothers: 17</li>

<li>Percent higher risk of having a baby with a birth defect for mothers living in mountaintop removal areas compared to mothers living in non-mining areas: 42</li>

<li>Percent that a mother’s smoking increases the risk that her baby will be born with defects of the circulatory or respiratory system: 17</li>

<li>Percent that a mother��s living in a mountaintop removal mining area increases the risk of such defects: 181</li>

</ul>

<h4>Mining law firms blames birth defects on residents</h4>

After the 2011 Environmental Research journal study, the firm <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Crowell_%26_Moring" title="Crowell & Moring">Crowell & Moring</a>, which represents the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Mining_Association" title="National Mining Association">National Mining Association</a>, accused the study's authors of using cherry-picked and misleading data, and went on to write in a statement that "The study failed to account for consanquinity [sic], one of the most prominent sources of birth defects." The firm then advertised its "services" to coal companies looking to "counter unfounded claims of injury or disease" from potential lawsuits sparked by the study.

The statement, which had been on the firm's website for more than a week, was quickly removed on July 11, 2011, after Charleston Gazette blogger Ken Ward Jr. pointed out its insinuation that inbreeding, not mountaintop mining, were to blame for spikes in the rate of birth defects, which the firm also said didn't exist in the first place.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-141" title="">[142]</a>

<h3>Science study: MTR permits should not be granted</h3>

In January 2010, Science released an 11-author study, “Mountaintop Mining Consequences�� on mountaintop mining with valley fills (MTM/VF), in an analysis of “current peer-reviewed studies and of new water-quality data from WV [West Virigina] streams.”

The study revealed “serious environmental impacts that mitigation practices cannot successfully address” and concluded: "Considering environmental impacts of MTM/VF, in combination with evidence that the health of people living in surface-mining regions of the central Appalachians is compromised by mining activities, we conclude that MTM/VF permits should not be granted unless new methods can be subjected to rigorous peer review and shown to remedy these problems. Regulators should no longer ignore rigorous science."

The study cited problems with:<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_note-142" title="">[143]</a>

<ul>

<li>pervasive and long lasting impacts with no evidence that any mitigation practices successfully reverse the damage caused;</li>

<li>valley fills contain a variety of ions and trace metals unearthed during coal mining which are toxic or debilitating for many organisms, which explains why biodiversity is reduced below valley fills;</li>

<li>burial of headwater streams by valley fills causes permanent loss of ecosystems that play critical roles in ecological processes such as nutrient cycling and production of organic matter for downstream food webs;</li>

<li>in mined sites, removal of vegetation, alterations in topography, loss of topsoil, and soil compaction from use of heavy machinery reduce infiltration capacity and promote runoff by overland flow, leading to greater storm runoff and increased downstream flooding;</li>

<li>below valley fills in the central Appalachians, streams are characterized by increases in pH, electrical conductivity, and total dissolved solids due to elevated concentrations of sulfate (SO4), calcium, magnesium, and bicarbonate ions;</li>

<li>a survey of 78 MTM/VF streams found that 73 had <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Selenium" title="Selenium">selenium</a> water concentrations greater than the 2.0 µg/liter threshold for toxic bioaccumulation</li>

<li>even after mine-site reclamation, groundwater samples from domestic supply wells have higher levels of mine-derived chemical constituents than well water from unmined areas; and</li>

<li>many reclaimed areas show little or no regrowth of woody vegetation and minimal carbon (C) storage even after 15 years.</li>

</ul>

<h2>Resources</h2>

<h3>References</h3>

<li id="cite_note-0"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-0" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/mountaintop/wb/71722" class="external text" title="http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/mountaintop/wb/71722" rel="nofollow">Mountaintop removal: Moving the mountains -- strip mining by any other name</a> Roanoke Times, July 2, 2006</li>

<li id="cite_note-ensnews-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ensnews_1-0" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2003/2003-02-03-06.asp" class="external text" title="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2003/2003-02-03-06.asp" rel="nofollow">"Appeals Court Upholds Mountaintop Removal Mining"</a>, Environment News Service, Februrary 3, 2003.</li>

<li id="cite_note-epaPeis-2">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-epaPeis_2-0" title="">3.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-epaPeis_2-1" title="">3.1</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-epaPeis_2-2" title="">3.2</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-epaPeis_2-3" title="">3.3</a> <a href="http://www.epa.gov/region03/mtntop/index.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.epa.gov/region03/mtntop/index.htm" rel="nofollow">Mountaintop Mining/Valley Fills in Appalachia: Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement</a>, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-epa-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-epa_3-0" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.epa.gov/reg3esd1/nepa/mountaintop/mountaintop.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.epa.gov/reg3esd1/nepa/mountaintop/mountaintop.htm" rel="nofollow">Mountaintop Mining and Valley Fills in Appalachia (MTM/VF) - Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement</a>, U.S. EPA, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-4"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-4" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.uky.edu/CommInfoStudies/IRJCI/reports/mtopcoverage.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.uky.edu/CommInfoStudies/IRJCI/reports/mtopcoverage.htm" rel="nofollow">An analysis of news coverage of mountaintop removal mining</a>, INSTITUTE FOR RURAL JOURNALISM & COMMUNITY ISSUES, April 20, 2006</li>

<li id="cite_note-5"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-5" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.goldmanprize.org/node/84" class="external text" title="http://www.goldmanprize.org/node/84" rel="nofollow">Julia Bonds, 2003 The Goldman Environmental Prize Winner</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-6"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-6" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.sludgesafety.org/coal_sludge.html" class="external text" title="http://www.sludgesafety.org/coal_sludge.html" rel="nofollow">What is a Coal Sludge Impoundment?</a>, accessed May 4, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-burns-7">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-burns_7-0" title="">8.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-burns_7-1" title="">8.1</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-burns_7-2" title="">8.2</a> Shirley Stewart Burns, <a href="http://kitkat.wvu.edu:8080/files/4047/Stewart_Burns_Shirley_dissertation.pdf" class="external text" title="http://kitkat.wvu.edu:8080/files/4047/Stewart_Burns_Shirley_dissertation.pdf" rel="nofollow">Bringing Down the Mountains: the Impact of Mountaintop Removal Surface Coal Mining on Southern West Virginia Communities, 1970-2004</a>, Ph.D. dissertation, West Virginia University, 2005. (Pdf)</li>

<li id="cite_note-usatoday-8">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-usatoday_8-0" title="">9.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-usatoday_8-1" title="">9.1</a> <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-04-18-mines_N.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-04-18-mines_N.htm" rel="nofollow">"Mining battle marked by peaks and valleys"</a>, USA Today, April 18, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-9"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-9" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/explosives/600401.pdf" class="external text" title="http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/explosives/600401.pdf" rel="nofollow">Report on consumption of explosives, U.S. Geological Survey</a>, accessed March 2008. (Pdf)</li>

<li id="cite_note-10"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-10" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.appvoices.org/index.php?/mtr/coal_consumption/" class="external text" title="http://www.appvoices.org/index.php?/mtr/coal_consumption/" rel="nofollow">Where Coal from Mountaintop Removal Is Used</a>, Appalachian Voices, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-ilovemountains-faq-11">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ilovemountains-faq_11-0" title="">12.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ilovemountains-faq_11-1" title="">12.1</a> <a href="http://www.ilovemountains.org/resources" class="external text" title="http://www.ilovemountains.org/resources" rel="nofollow">Frequently Asked Questions about Mountaintop Removal</a>, ILoveMountains.org, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-12"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-12" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://earthisland.org/journal/index.php/eij/article/moving_mountains1/" class="external text" title="http://earthisland.org/journal/index.php/eij/article/moving_mountains1/" rel="nofollow">Moving Mountains</a> Earth Island Journal, Autumn 2007</li>

<li id="cite_note-13"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-13" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/hobet.php?src=eoa-ann" class="external text" title="http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/hobet.php?src=eoa-ann" rel="nofollow">"Mountaintop Mining, West Virginia"</a> NASA Earth Observatory, accessed April 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-14"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-14" title="">↑</a> Dylan Lovan, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/27/appalachia-coal-decline_n_983573.html" class="external text" title="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/27/appalachia-coal-decline_n_983573.html" rel="nofollow">"Appalachia Coal Decline: Industry Faces Steep Challenges"</a> AP, Sep. 27, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-britton-15"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-britton_15-0" title="">↑</a> J. O. Britton et al., West Virginia, Mining Engineering, May 2007, p.125.</li>

<li id="cite_note-16"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-16" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.nma.org/pdf/c_most_requested.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.nma.org/pdf/c_most_requested.pdf" rel="nofollow">Most Requested Statistics - U.S. Coal Industry</a>, National Mining Association, accessed March 2008. (Pdf)</li>

<li id="cite_note-17"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-17" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.wvgazette.com/static/series/mining/mcferrin0521.html" class="external text" title="http://www.wvgazette.com/static/series/mining/mcferrin0521.html" rel="nofollow">"An Odd Partnership: UMW, Coal Association arm in arm"</a>, "Charleston Gazette, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-18"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-18" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.dailymail.com/mtrletters/umwa_07-24-03.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.dailymail.com/mtrletters/umwa_07-24-03.pdf" rel="nofollow">Statement of United Mine Workers of America on Mountaintop Removal</a>, Charleston Daily Mail, July 24, 2003.</li>

<li id="cite_note-19"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-19" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/28/us/28mountains.html" class="external text" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/28/us/28mountains.html" rel="nofollow">"Taking On a Coal Mining Practice as a Matter of Faith"</a>, New York Times, October 28, 2006.</li>

<li id="cite_note-20"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-20" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.appvoices.org/index.php?/mtr/economics/" class="external text" title="http://www.appvoices.org/index.php?/mtr/economics/" rel="nofollow">What Are the Economic Consequences of Mountaintop Removal in Appalachia?</a>, Appalachian Voices, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-21"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-21" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://windpub.com/dirtymoney.htm" class="external text" title="http://windpub.com/dirtymoney.htm" rel="nofollow">Economic Impact of Mountaintop Removal on Coal Mining Communities</a>, Wind Publications, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-gaz-22">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-gaz_22-0" title="">23.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-gaz_22-1" title="">23.1</a> Ken Ward Jr, <a href="http://wvgazette.com/News/200906200170" class="external text" title="http://wvgazette.com/News/200906200170" rel="nofollow">"Coal's costs outweigh benefits, WVU study finds,"</a> Charleston Gazette, June 20, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-23"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-23" title="">↑</a> Trip van Noppen, <a href="http://www.grist.org/coal/2011-08-16-mountaintop-removal-mining-poll-unpopular-even-in-appalachia" class="external text" title="http://www.grist.org/coal/2011-08-16-mountaintop-removal-mining-poll-unpopular-even-in-appalachia" rel="nofollow">"Mountaintop-removal mining is unpopular even in coal country "</a> Grist, Aug. 16, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-24"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-24" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200810230324" class="external text" title="http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200810230324" rel="nofollow">"Americans oppose mountaintop removal, according to poll,"</a> The Charleston Gazette, October 23, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-jb-25"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-jb_25-0" title="">↑</a> Jeff Biggers, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/nike-mountaintop-removal-ad_b_702934.html" class="external text" title="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/nike-mountaintop-removal-ad_b_702934.html" rel="nofollow">"NIKE Runs Mountaintop Removal Football Ad, Disrespects Coal Miners"</a> HuffPo, September 1, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-26"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-26" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://environment.bankofamerica.com/articles/Energy/COAL_POLICY.pdf" class="external text" title="http://environment.bankofamerica.com/articles/Energy/COAL_POLICY.pdf" rel="nofollow">Bank of America Coal Policy,</a> Bank of America, accessed December 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-27"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-27" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://cms.ran.org/media_center/news_article/?uid=4785" class="external text" title="http://cms.ran.org/media_center/news_article/?uid=4785" rel="nofollow">"Bank of America Decision to Stop Funding Mountaintop Removal a Victory for Appalachia and Anti-Coal Movement,"</a> Rainforest Action Network, December 3, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-28"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-28" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2010/11/10/pnc-mtr/" class="external text" title="http://thinkprogress.org/2010/11/10/pnc-mtr/" rel="nofollow">"PNC Bank Will No Longer Fund Mountain Top Removal"</a> Brad Johnson, ThinkProgress, November 10, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-29"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-29" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=27927" class="external text" title="http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=27927" rel="nofollow">Eleven Arrested Protesting ET Coal Mine</a>, WBIR website, August 15, 2005.</li>

<li id="cite_note-30"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-30" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Action/press707.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Action/press707.htm" rel="nofollow">Tennessee Coal Road Blocked to Protest Mountaintop Removal Mining</a>, Mines & Communities website, August 15, 2005.</li>

<li id="cite_note-31"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-31" title="">��</a> <a href="http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2009/2/3/9038/46414" class="external text" title="http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2009/2/3/9038/46414" rel="nofollow">"Coal River Mountain can't wait,"</a> Grist, February 3, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-32"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-32" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.powerpastcoal.org/article.php?id=78" class="external text" title="http://www.powerpastcoal.org/article.php?id=78" rel="nofollow">"Fourteen Arrested Defending Coal River Mountain,"</a> Power Past Coal, February 3, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-33"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-33" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://climategroundzero.org/?p=533" class="external text" title="http://climategroundzero.org/?p=533" rel="nofollow">"Blasting at Clays Branch"</a> Climate Ground Zero press release, February 16, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-34"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-34" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.newsandtribune.com/statenews/kentuckystatehouse_story_048191526.html" class="external text" title="http://www.newsandtribune.com/statenews/kentuckystatehouse_story_048191526.html" rel="nofollow">"Hundreds, including Ashley Judd, rally against mountaintop removal,"</a> News and Tribune, February 17, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-35"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-35" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20090218/NEWS01/90218005" class="external text" title="http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20090218/NEWS01/90218005" rel="nofollow">"Hundreds call for end to mining damage,"</a> Courier-Journal, February 18, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-36"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-36" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.powerpastcoal.org/article.php?id=106" class="external text" title="http://www.powerpastcoal.org/article.php?id=106" rel="nofollow">"Operation Appalachian Spring: Sit-in Coal Campaign Blooms,"</a> Power Past Coal, March 5, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-37"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-37" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://climategroundzero.org/?p=891" class="external text" title="http://climategroundzero.org/?p=891" rel="nofollow">"Activists hang “EPA stop MTR” banner on Massey mine, arrested,"</a> Climate Ground Zero, April 16, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-38"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-38" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20090523102949687" class="external text" title="http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20090523102949687" rel="nofollow">"Removal Coal Mining; More Protestors Expected This Afternoon,"</a> Press Release, May 23, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-39"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-39" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/05/26/ap6463657.html" class="external text" title="http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/05/26/ap6463657.html" rel="nofollow">"Group raising money for bail for coal protesters,"</a> Associated Press, May 26, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-40"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-40" title="">↑</a> Jeff Biggers, <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/06/18-0" class="external text" title="http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/06/18-0" rel="nofollow">"Daring Dragline Protest Launches 7 Days That Will Shake Mountaintop Removal Operations,"</a> Common Dreams, June 18, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-41"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-41" title="">↑</a> Jeff Biggers, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/live-at-coal-river-daryl_b_219628.html" class="external text" title="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/live-at-coal-river-daryl_b_219628.html" rel="nofollow">"Nonviolent Goldman Prize Winner Attacked by Massey Supporter: 94-Year-Old Hechler, Hannah, Hansen Arrested at Coal River,"</a> Huffington Post, June 23, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-42"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-42" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/08/11/4-lockdown-at-wv-dept-of-environmental-noprotection/" class="external text" title="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/08/11/4-lockdown-at-wv-dept-of-environmental-noprotection/" rel="nofollow">"4 Lockdown at WV Dept. of Environmental (No)Protection,"</a> It's Getting Hot In Here, August 11, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-43"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-43" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://climategroundzero.net/2009/08/treesit-stopping-blasts-above-pettry-bottom-coal-river-valley/" class="external text" title="http://climategroundzero.net/2009/08/treesit-stopping-blasts-above-pettry-bottom-coal-river-valley/" rel="nofollow">"Treesit stopping blasts above Pettry Bottom, Coal River Valley,"</a> Climate Ground Zero, August 25, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-44"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-44" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://blog.taragana.com/n/tree-sitting-protest-of-mountaintop-removal-ends-in-wva-after-6-days-activists-arrested-155649/" class="external text" title="http://blog.taragana.com/n/tree-sitting-protest-of-mountaintop-removal-ends-in-wva-after-6-days-activists-arrested-155649/" rel="nofollow">"Tree-sitting protest of mountaintop removal ends in W.Va. after 6 days; activists arrested,"</a> Taragana blog, August 31, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-45"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-45" title="">↑</a> Ry Rivard, <a href="http://www.dailymail.com/Business/200910221214" class="external text" title="http://www.dailymail.com/Business/200910221214" rel="nofollow">"Coal truck protesters hail from all over the place,"</a> Charleston Daily Mail, October 23, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-46"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-46" title="">↑</a> Suzanne Bopp, <a href="http://www.usclimatenetwork.org/energyrebellion/end-mountaintop-removal" class="external text" title="http://www.usclimatenetwork.org/energyrebellion/end-mountaintop-removal" rel="nofollow">"Mountaintop Removal Protests at EPA Offices in D.C. and Several States,"</a> U.S. Climate Action Network, October 30, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-47"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-47" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://understory.ran.org/2009/10/30/dc-mountaintop-removal-protest-heats-up/" class="external text" title="http://understory.ran.org/2009/10/30/dc-mountaintop-removal-protest-heats-up/" rel="nofollow">"DC Mountaintop Removal Protest Heats Up,"</a> The Understory, October 30, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-48"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-48" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://climategroundzero.net/2009/11/responding-to-harmful-government-inaction-protestors-stop-blasting-on-coal-river-mountain/" class="external text" title="http://climategroundzero.net/2009/11/responding-to-harmful-government-inaction-protestors-stop-blasting-on-coal-river-mountain/" rel="nofollow">"Responding to Harmful Government Inaction, Protestors Stop Blasting on Coal River Mountain,"</a> Climate Ground Zero, November 21, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-49"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-49" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-wv-mountaintop-mining-kennedy,0,2237885.story" class="external text" title="http://www.latimes.com/business/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-wv-mountaintop-mining-kennedy,0,2237885.story" rel="nofollow">"Kennedy calls mountaintop removal mining in W.Va. a crime against people, nature,"</a> Associated Press, December 7, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-50"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-50" title="">↑</a> Jeff Biggers, <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/01/21-6" class="external text" title="http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/01/21-6" rel="nofollow">"Tree-Sitters Shut Down Infamous Mountaintop Removal Operation; TVA Cops Strike Again,"</a> Commondreams.org, January, 21 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-51"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-51" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2010/03/19/two-days-locked-down-to-the-epa-campaigning-to-end-mountaintop-removal/" class="external text" title="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2010/03/19/two-days-locked-down-to-the-epa-campaigning-to-end-mountaintop-removal/" rel="nofollow">"Two days locked-down to the EPA campaigning to end mountaintop removal"</a> Sparki, It's Getting Hot In Here, March 19, 2010</li>

<li id="cite_note-52"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-52" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.utne.com/Wild-Green/Calling-Out-Big-Coal-at-the-EPA-6938.aspx" class="external text" title="http://www.utne.com/Wild-Green/Calling-Out-Big-Coal-at-the-EPA-6938.aspx" rel="nofollow">"Calling Out Big Coal at the EPA"</a> Keith Goetzman, UTNE Reader, March 23, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-53"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-53" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.opednews.com/articles/RAN-Chicago-Takes-Action-i-by-Kevin-Gosztola-100406-394.html" class="external text" title="http://www.opednews.com/articles/RAN-Chicago-Takes-Action-i-by-Kevin-Gosztola-100406-394.html" rel="nofollow">"RAN Chicago Takes Action in Chase Tower, Calls Attention to Chase's Investment in MTR"</a> Kevin Gosztola, OpEdNews.com, April 6, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-54"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-54" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://climategroundzero.net/2010/05/magistrate-sets-100000-bail-for-non-violent-protestors/" class="external text" title="http://climategroundzero.net/2010/05/magistrate-sets-100000-bail-for-non-violent-protestors/" rel="nofollow">"Magistrate Snodgrass of Boone County sets two $100,000 bails for non-violent protesters"</a> Climate Ground Zero, accessed May 17, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-55"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-55" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/09/ran-protest-spruce.php" class="external text" title="http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/09/ran-protest-spruce.php" rel="nofollow">"RAN Protests Spruce Mine at EPA HQ"</a> Daniel Kessler, Treehugger.com, September 14, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-56"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-56" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/121153-more-than-100-arrested-at-coal-mining-protest-in-front-of-the-white-house" class="external text" title="http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/121153-more-than-100-arrested-at-coal-mining-protest-in-front-of-the-white-house" rel="nofollow">"More than 100 arrested at coal mining protest in front of the White House"</a> Darren Gole, The Hill, September 27, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-57"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-57" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gUQnOscWpjri_h91yCvIoBsDUG4gD9IGEVB82?docId=D9IGEVB82" class="external text" title="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gUQnOscWpjri_h91yCvIoBsDUG4gD9IGEVB82?docId=D9IGEVB82" rel="nofollow">"About 100 arrested in DC mountaintop mining rally"</a> Frederic Frommer, Associated Press, September 27, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-58"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-58" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2011/02/11/breaking-wendell-berry-joins-retired-coal-miners-and-residents-in-kentucky-rising-capitol-sit-in/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2011/02/11/breaking-wendell-berry-joins-retired-coal-miners-and-residents-in-kentucky-rising-capitol-sit-in/" rel="nofollow">"Wendell Berry Joins Retired Coal Miners and Residents in Kentucky Rising Capitol Sit-in"</a> Jeff Biggers, Alternet.org, February 11, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-59"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-59" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.dailyyonder.com/monday-roundup-coal-protest-continues/2011/02/14/3178" class="external text" title="http://www.dailyyonder.com/monday-roundup-coal-protest-continues/2011/02/14/3178" rel="nofollow">"Monday Roundup: Coal Protest Continues"</a> Daily Yonder, February 14, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-60"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-60" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.wfpl.org/2011/02/14/protester-says-beshear-will-visit-eastern-kentucky-coal-fields-after-sit-in/" class="external text" title="http://www.wfpl.org/2011/02/14/protester-says-beshear-will-visit-eastern-kentucky-coal-fields-after-sit-in/" rel="nofollow">"Protester Says Beshear Will Visit Eastern Kentucky Coal Fields After Sit-In"</a> Gabe Bullard, February 14, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-61"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-61" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2011/03/01/bank-of-america-and-citi-closed-for-the-climates-sake/" class="external text" title="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2011/03/01/bank-of-america-and-citi-closed-for-the-climates-sake/" rel="nofollow">"Bank of America and Citi: Closed for the Climate’s Sake"</a> nickengelfried, It's Getting Hot in Here, March 1, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-62"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-62" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2011/04/03/wells-fargo-bank-of-america-closed-for-climate-crimes/" class="external text" title="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2011/04/03/wells-fargo-bank-of-america-closed-for-climate-crimes/" rel="nofollow">"Wells Fargo, Bank of America Closed for Climate Crimes"</a> nickengelfried, It's Getting Hot in Here, April 3, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-63"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-63" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://rampscampaign.org/activists-block-mining-operations-on-coal-river-mountain/" class="external text" title="http://rampscampaign.org/activists-block-mining-operations-on-coal-river-mountain/" rel="nofollow">"Activists Block Mining Operations on Coal River Mountain"</a> Rampsmedia, July 20, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-64"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-64" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/07/27/Activists-sit-in-trees-vs-WVa-coal-firm/UPI-74251311823079/#ixzz1U5UbBhwD" class="external text" title="http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/07/27/Activists-sit-in-trees-vs-WVa-coal-firm/UPI-74251311823079/#ixzz1U5UbBhwD" rel="nofollow">"Activists sit in trees vs. W.Va. coal firm"</a> UPI.com, July 27, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-65"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-65" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.huntingtonnews.net/6975" class="external text" title="http://www.huntingtonnews.net/6975" rel="nofollow">"Tree-Sit on Coal River Mountain Continues after One Sitter Arrested"</a> July 27, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-66"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-66" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://rampscampaign.org/tree-sit-concludes-after-thirty-days-of-blocking-work-on-coal-river-mountain/" class="external text" title="http://rampscampaign.org/tree-sit-concludes-after-thirty-days-of-blocking-work-on-coal-river-mountain/" rel="nofollow">"Tree-sit Concludes After Thirty Days of Blocking Work on Coal River Mountain"</a> RAMPS, August 19, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-CounterPunch-67">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-CounterPunch_67-0" title="">68.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-CounterPunch_67-1" title="">68.1</a> <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/shapiro03022010.html" class="external text" title="http://www.counterpunch.org/shapiro03022010.html" rel="nofollow">"Escalating Sanctions Against Mountain Top Removal Activists"</a> Tricia Shapiro, CounterPunch.org March 2, 2010</li>

<li id="cite_note-68"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-68" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.epa.gov/Region3/mtntop/pdf/mtm-vf_fpeis_full-document.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.epa.gov/Region3/mtntop/pdf/mtm-vf_fpeis_full-document.pdf" rel="nofollow">Mountaintop Removal/Valley Fill</a>, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, October 2005. (Pdf)</li>

<li id="cite_note-69"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-69" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.osmre.gov/smcra.htm#515%28C%29%281%29" class="external text" title="http://www.osmre.gov/smcra.htm#515(C)(1)" rel="nofollow">Public Law 95-87 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977</a>, Office of Surface Mining, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-70"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-70" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://sundaygazettemail.com/News/200806300582" class="external text" title="http://sundaygazettemail.com/News/200806300582" rel="nofollow">"Mountaintop removal mining appeal scheduled for Sept. 23"</a>, Charleston Gazette, June 30, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-71"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-71" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.appalachian-center.org/media/2007/03_24.html" class="external text" title="http://www.appalachian-center.org/media/2007/03_24.html" rel="nofollow">"4 mining permits blocked"</a>, Charleston Gazette, March 24, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-72"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-72" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://sundaygazettemail.com/News/200806300582" class="external text" title="http://sundaygazettemail.com/News/200806300582" rel="nofollow">"Mountaintop removal mining appeal scheduled for Sept. 23"</a>, Charleston Gazette, June 30, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-73"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-73" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2003/2003-02-03-06.asp" class="external text" title="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2003/2003-02-03-06.asp" rel="nofollow">Appeals Court Upholds Mountaintop Removal Mining</a>, Environment News Service, February 3, 2003.</li>

<li id="cite_note-74"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-74" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2169" class="external text" title="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2169" rel="nofollow">H.R. 2169: Clean Water Protection Act</a> GovTrack.us website accessed 6/30/08</li>

<li id="cite_note-75"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-75" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19231612/" class="external text" title="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19231612/" rel="nofollow">"Judge rules against mountaintop mining"</a>, MSNBC News, June 14, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-enn-76"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-enn_76-0" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.enn.com/ecosystems/article/23024" class="external text" title="http://www.enn.com/ecosystems/article/23024" rel="nofollow">Survey: 65 Percent of Americans Oppose Mountaintop Removal</a>, Environmental News Network, September 13, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-wvgaz-77"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-wvgaz_77-0" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://wvgazette.com/section/News/Business/2008011512" class="external text" title="http://wvgazette.com/section/News/Business/2008011512" rel="nofollow">"Mining impact on species review sought"</a>, Charleston Gazette, January 16, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-78"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-78" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://gristmill.grist.org/images/user/6337/Ltr_to_GAOMTR_06.20.08.pdf" class="external text" title="http://gristmill.grist.org/images/user/6337/Ltr_to_GAOMTR_06.20.08.pdf" rel="nofollow">Letter to the Government Accountability Office</a>, Sen. Bingaman/Sen. Alexander, June 20, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-79"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-79" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/17/AR2008101702942.html" class="external text" title="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/17/AR2008101702942.html" rel="nofollow">Mines to Get Freer Hand to Dump Waste</a>, Washington Post, October 17, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-uk-80">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-uk_80-0" title="">81.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-uk_80-1" title="">81.1</a> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/14/george-bush-midnight-regulations" class="external text" title="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/14/george-bush-midnight-regulations" rel="nofollow">"Bush sneaks through host of laws to undermine Obama,"</a> The Guardian, December 14, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-ens-81">�� <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ens_81-0" title="">82.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ens_81-1" title="">82.1</a> <a href="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2009/2009-02-17-092.asp" class="external text" title="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2009/2009-02-17-092.asp" rel="nofollow">"Appeals Court Reverses Limits on Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining,"</a> Environmental News Service, February 17, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-82"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-82" title="">↑</a> Jim Thuber, <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ilNqXcMDBLf-ayRrvcQm9sSC04hgD9C66B9G0" class="external text" title="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ilNqXcMDBLf-ayRrvcQm9sSC04hgD9C66B9G0" rel="nofollow">"Judge sides with environmental groups in coal case,"</a> Associated Press, November 25, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-83"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-83" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/03/27/intercepted-wva-coals-master-plan/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/03/27/intercepted-wva-coals-master-plan/" rel="nofollow">"Intercepted: W.Va. coal’s master plan,"</a> Charleston Gazette, March 27, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-84"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-84" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.theallianceforappalachia.org/meet-the-appalachian-restoration-act/" class="external text" title="http://www.theallianceforappalachia.org/meet-the-appalachian-restoration-act/" rel="nofollow">"Meet the Appalachian Restoration Act!,"</a> Alliance for Appalachia, March 26, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-85"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-85" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.kftc.org/our-work/general-assembly/stream-saver-bill" class="external text" title="http://www.kftc.org/our-work/general-assembly/stream-saver-bill" rel="nofollow">The [Stream Saver Bill - House Bill 164</a>, KFTC website, accessed July 10, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-86"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-86" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.dailyindependent.com/statenews/local_story_055013533.html" class="external text" title="http://www.dailyindependent.com/statenews/local_story_055013533.html" rel="nofollow">Stream saver bill stuck in Gooch's committee - again</a>, Ashland Daily Independent, February 24, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-87"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-87" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2007/Bills/House/HTML/H2709v1.html" class="external text" title="http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2007/Bills/House/HTML/H2709v1.html" rel="nofollow">HOUSE BILL 2709 - FIRST EDITION</a>, GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA, MAY 28, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-88"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-88" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/asp/WebBillInfo/Summary.aspx?BillNumber=SB3822" class="external text" title="http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/asp/WebBillInfo/Summary.aspx?BillNumber=SB3822" rel="nofollow">Summary for Bill SB3822/HB3348</a>,Tennessee State Legislature website, accessed 7/17/2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-89"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-89" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/709/1/85/" class="external text" title="http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/709/1/85/" rel="nofollow">Administration Moves to Clear Way for Dumping, Mountaintop Mining</a>, OMB Watch, 4/29/2002</li>

<li id="cite_note-90"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-90" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SB3822.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SB3822.pdf" rel="nofollow">SB3822</a>, Tennessee General Assembly website, accessed 7/17/2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-91"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-91" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/apr/02/legislators-kill-bill-stop-mountain-top-removal-co/" class="external text" title="http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/apr/02/legislators-kill-bill-stop-mountain-top-removal-co/" rel="nofollow">Legislators kill bill to stop mountain-top removal coal mining</a>, Knoxville News Sentinel, April 2, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-92"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-92" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://media.herald-dispatch.com/blog/issues/2008/02/bill-to-ban-valley-fills-introduced.html" class="external text" title="http://media.herald-dispatch.com/blog/issues/2008/02/bill-to-ban-valley-fills-introduced.html" rel="nofollow">Bill to ban valley fills introduced</a>, Herald-Dispatch, February 7, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-93"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-93" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Status/Bills_history.cfm?input=588&year=2008&sessiontype=RS&btype=bill" class="external text" title="http://www.legis.state.wv.us/Bill_Status/Bills_history.cfm?input=588&year=2008&sessiontype=RS&btype=bill" rel="nofollow">West Virginia Legislature</a> website, accessed 8/1/2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-94"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-94" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.dailymail.com/Business/201003020637" class="external text" title="http://www.dailymail.com/Business/201003020637" rel="nofollow">"Mining protesters appeal to state Supreme Court"</a> Viki Smith, Charleston Daily Mail, March 2, 2010</li>

<li id="cite_note-95"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-95" title="">↑</a> Ken Ward Jr., <a href="http://wvgazette.com/News/200903240379" class="external text" title="http://wvgazette.com/News/200903240379" rel="nofollow">"Obama EPA starts crackdown on mountaintop removal,"</a> Charleston Gazette, March 24, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-96"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-96" title="">↑</a> Matt Wasson, <a href="http://www.alternet.org/environment/134195/coal_industry_reacts_to_epa_crackdown_on_mountaintop_removal_mining_with_lies_about_job_losses/" class="external text" title="http://www.alternet.org/environment/134195/coal_industry_reacts_to_epa_crackdown_on_mountaintop_removal_mining_with_lies_about_job_losses/" rel="nofollow">"Coal Industry Reacts to EPA Crackdown on Mountaintop Removal Mining with Lies about Job Losses,"</a> AlterNet, March 30, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-97"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-97" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/03/24/mountaintop-removal-moratorium-not/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/03/24/mountaintop-removal-moratorium-not/" rel="nofollow">"Mountaintop removal moratorium — NOT!,"</a> Charleston Gazette, March 24, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-98"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-98" title="">↑</a> Ken Ward, Jr., <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/04/08/epa-objects-to-more-mountaintop-removal-permits/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/04/08/epa-objects-to-more-mountaintop-removal-permits/" rel="nofollow">"EPA objects to more mountaintop removal permits,"</a> Charleston Gazette, April 8, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-99"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-99" title="">↑</a> Ken Ward Jr., <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/05/07/mountaintop-removal-corps-suspends-va-mining-permit/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/05/07/mountaintop-removal-corps-suspends-va-mining-permit/" rel="nofollow">"Mountaintop removal: Corps suspends Va. mining permit,"</a> Charleston Gazette, May 7, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-100"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-100" title="">��</a> John M. Broder, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/science/earth/12mining.html?r=1" class="external text" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/science/earth/12mining.html?r=1" rel="nofollow">"Departments to Toughen Standards for Mining ,"</a> New York Times, June 11, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-101"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-101" title="">↑</a> Ken Ward Jr., <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/08/12/breaking-news-court-rejects-obama-mtr-rule-change/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/08/12/breaking-news-court-rejects-obama-mtr-rule-change/" rel="nofollow">"Breaking news: Court rejects Obama MTR rule change,"</a> Charleston Gazette, August 12, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-102"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-102" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GreenBusiness/idUSTRE57B5WD20090812" class="external text" title="http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GreenBusiness/idUSTRE57B5WD20090812" rel="nofollow">"U.S. court blocks plan to curb mountaintop mining,"</a> Reuters, August 12, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-103"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-103" title="">↑</a> Ken Ward Jr., <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/09/08/obama-seeks-to-block-record-mountaintop-removal-permit/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2009/09/08/obama-seeks-to-block-record-mountaintop-removal-permit/" rel="nofollow">"Obama seeks to block record mountaintop removal permit,"</a> Charleston Gazette, September 8, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-104"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-104" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aQNSu8BmNXdY" class="external text" title="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aQNSu8BmNXdY" rel="nofollow">"EPA Reviews 79 Mountaintop Removal Coal Permits,"</a> Bloomberg, September 11, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-105"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-105" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/12/science/earth/12brfs-EPAWILLREVIE_BRF.html" class="external text" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/12/science/earth/12brfs-EPAWILLREVIE_BRF.html" rel="nofollow">"E.P.A. Will Review 79 Coal Mining Applications,"</a> Associated Press, September 11, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-106"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-106" title="">↑</a> John Raby, <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h1AvrjZnz0-UgFmcZcVRZScE-rOQD9BCGN0O0" class="external text" title="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h1AvrjZnz0-UgFmcZcVRZScE-rOQD9BCGN0O0" rel="nofollow">"EPA plans to veto surface mining permit in W.Va.,"</a> Associated Press, October 17, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-107"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-107" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.waterworld.com/index/display/article-display/0608701222/articles/industrial-waterworld/2010/issue-1/columns/epa-approves_mountaintop.html" class="external text" title="http://www.waterworld.com/index/display/article-display/0608701222/articles/industrial-waterworld/2010/issue-1/columns/epa-approves_mountaintop.html" rel="nofollow">"EPA Approves Mountaintop Removal Coal Mine"</a> Patrick Crow, WaterWorld.com, March 2, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-108"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-108" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704100604575145883546209258.html?mod=googlenews_wsj" class="external text" title="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704100604575145883546209258.html?mod=googlenews_wsj" rel="nofollow">"EPA Signals It Might Block Mountaintop Coal Permit"</a> Ian Talley, Wall Street Journal, March 26, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-109"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-109" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/apr/01/obama-administration-mining" class="external text" title="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/apr/01/obama-administration-mining" rel="nofollow">"New regulations will put an end to mountaintop mining"</a> Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian Online, April 1, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-110"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-110" title="">↑</a> Liezel Hill, <a href="http://www.miningweekly.com/article/us-suspends-appalachian-permitting-system-in-latest-blow-to-coal-miners-2010-06-17" class="external text" title="http://www.miningweekly.com/article/us-suspends-appalachian-permitting-system-in-latest-blow-to-coal-miners-2010-06-17" rel="nofollow">"US suspends Appalachian permitting system in latest blow to coal miners"</a> Mining Weekly, June 17, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-111"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-111" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2010/06/29/epas-new-guidelines-promising-strict-enforcement-of-mountaintop-removal-not-so-strict/" class="external text" title="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2010/06/29/epas-new-guidelines-promising-strict-enforcement-of-mountaintop-removal-not-so-strict/" rel="nofollow">"EPA’s New Guidelines Promising Strict Enforcement of Mountaintop Removal…. Not So Strict"</a> It's Getting Hot in Here, June 30, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-112"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-112" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/06/30/wheres-the-outrage-epa-betrays-again-coalfields-with-new-mountaintop-removal-permit/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/06/30/wheres-the-outrage-epa-betrays-again-coalfields-with-new-mountaintop-removal-permit/" rel="nofollow">"Where’s the Outrage: EPA Betrays (Again) Coalfields with New Mountaintop Removal Permit"</a> Jeff Biggers, Alternet.org, June 30, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-kwj-113">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-kwj_113-0" title="">114.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-kwj_113-1" title="">114.1</a> Ken Ward Jr., <a href="http://wvgazette.com/News/201007200779?page=1&build=cache" class="external text" title="http://wvgazette.com/News/201007200779?page=1&build=cache" rel="nofollow">"Coal industry sues EPA, Corps of Engineers over permit crackdown"</a> The Charleston Gazette, July 20, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-ji-114">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ji_114-0" title="">115.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ji_114-1" title="">115.1</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ji_114-2" title="">115.2</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ji_114-3" title="">115.3</a> <a href="http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/d37fea38dd600608852577ae006f8cb9?OpenDocument" class="external text" title="http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/d37fea38dd600608852577ae006f8cb9?OpenDocument" rel="nofollow">"Independent Science Advisory Board Draft Review Supports EPA Science on Mountaintop Mining Impacts"</a> Sep. 30, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-115"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-115" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/44034/" class="external text" title="http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/44034/" rel="nofollow">"W. Virginia Suing EPA Over Delayed Coal Mine Permits"</a> Paul Darin, The Epoch Times, October 11, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-116"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-116" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j4JC7Gs3f7cpoJMK1xc-iveOoZ7Q?docId=1b0c534404754dc7a452ff23f9b3194d" class="external text" title="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j4JC7Gs3f7cpoJMK1xc-iveOoZ7Q?docId=1b0c534404754dc7a452ff23f9b3194d" rel="nofollow">"Govt: New rules would cut thousands of coal jobs"</a> Associated Press, January 26, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-117"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-117" title="">↑</a> Ken Ward Jr., <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2011/10/06/epa-loses-first-round-in-mine-permit-crackdown-case/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2011/10/06/epa-loses-first-round-in-mine-permit-crackdown-case/" rel="nofollow">"EPA loses first round in mine permit crackdown case"</a> Coal Tattoo, October 6, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-118"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-118" title="">↑</a> Lawrence Messina, <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9DTH61O0.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9DTH61O0.htm" rel="nofollow">"W.Va. coal lobby airs EPA complaints to lawmakers"</a> Business Week February 16, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-119"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-119" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://lowbagger.org/blackwater.html" class="external text" title="http://lowbagger.org/blackwater.html" rel="nofollow">Coal Industry and State Ignore Mingo County's Black Tap Water</a>, Lowbagger.org, February 22, 2007</li>

<li id="cite_note-120"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-120" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200804160677" class="external text" title="http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200804160677" rel="nofollow">Flood lawsuits back before justices</a>, Charleston Gazette, April 17, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-121"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-121" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://wvgazette.com/News/200803250137" class="external text" title="http://wvgazette.com/News/200803250137" rel="nofollow">WVU study finds high illness, death rates in coalfields</a>, Charleston Gazette, April 17, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-122"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-122" title="">��</a> <a href="http://www.bdtonline.com/letters/local_story_078155138.html" class="external text" title="http://www.bdtonline.com/letters/local_story_078155138.html" rel="nofollow">Environment polluted by blasting process</a> Bluefield Daily Telegraph, March 18, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-123"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-123" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/2008/03/latest-duke-coal-plant-challenge.asp" class="external text" title="http://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/2008/03/latest-duke-coal-plant-challenge.asp" rel="nofollow">Latest Duke coal plant challenge targets Appalachian mountaintop removal</a>, The Institute for Southern Studies, March 19, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-124"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-124" title="">↑</a> J.S. Gardner and P. Sainato, Mountaintop mining and sustainable development in Appalachia, Mining Engineering, March 2007, p.48-55.</li>

<li id="cite_note-125"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-125" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/08/03/tzerman" class="external text" title="http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/08/03/tzerman" rel="nofollow">"Blast Rites"</a>, Grist, August 3, 2006.</li>

<li id="cite_note-126"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-126" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.mountainjustice.org/events.php?id=92" class="external text" title="http://www.mountainjustice.org/events.php?id=92" rel="nofollow">Micheal O'Connell's film, Mountain Top Removal wins Nashville film festival's Reel Current Award</a>, Mountain Justice Summer, accessed May 2, 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-ens08-127"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-ens08_127-0" title="">��</a> <a href="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2002/2002-01-15-01.asp" class="external text" title="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2002/2002-01-15-01.asp" rel="nofollow">Wetland Safeguards Eroded by New Nationwide Permits</a>, Environmental News Service, January 15, 2002.</li>

<li id="cite_note-sdut-128"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-sdut_128-0" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080203/news_1v03coal.html" class="external text" title="http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080203/news_1v03coal.html" rel="nofollow">"'Coal River' cries a river over the devastation from mining"</a>, Sign On San Diego, February 3, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-129"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-129" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://sierraclub.org/planet/200405/appalachia.asp" class="external text" title="http://sierraclub.org/planet/200405/appalachia.asp" rel="nofollow">Tearing Up Appalachia</a>, Sierra Club, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-130"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-130" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.sludgesafety.org/what_me_worry/marsh_fork/index.html" class="external text" title="http://www.sludgesafety.org/what_me_worry/marsh_fork/index.html" rel="nofollow">Marsh Fork Elementary, Massey Energy's Shumate Coal Sludge Impoundment and Goals Coal Prep Plant</a>, Sludge Safety Project, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-131"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-131" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.wvculture.org/history/buffcreek/buff1.html" class="external text" title="http://www.wvculture.org/history/buffcreek/buff1.html" rel="nofollow">Buffalo Creek</a>, West Virginia Division of Culture and History, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-132"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-132" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://arri.osmre.gov/PDFs/Pubs/FRA_No.1.pdf" class="external text" title="http://arri.osmre.gov/PDFs/Pubs/FRA_No.1.pdf" rel="nofollow">Appalachian Regional Reforestation Initiative Forest Reclamation Advisory</a>, Office of Surface Mining and Reclamation, December 2005. (Pdf)] - cached copy at <a href="http://coaldiver.org/documents/the-appalachian-regional-reforestation-initiative-2005" class="external text" title="http://coaldiver.org/documents/the-appalachian-regional-reforestation-initiative-2005" rel="nofollow">CoalDiver.org</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-133"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-133" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.fnai.org/ARROW/almanac/biology/biology_index.cfm" class="external text" title="http://www.fnai.org/ARROW/almanac/biology/biology_index.cfm" rel="nofollow">Biology: Plants, Animals, & Habitats - We live in a hot spot of biodiversity</a>, Apalachicola Region Resources on the Web (ARROW), accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-134"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-134" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://arri.osmre.gov/" class="external text" title="http://arri.osmre.gov/" rel="nofollow">Appalachian Regional Reforestation Initiative</a>, Office of Surface Mining, accessed March 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-135"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-135" title="">↑</a> Patrick Reis, <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=endangered-species-coal-appalachia-mountaintop-removal" class="external text" title="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=endangered-species-coal-appalachia-mountaintop-removal" rel="nofollow">"Are Endangered Species Being Sacrificed for Coal in Appalachia?"</a>, Scientific American, August 10, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-reclamation-136"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-reclamation_136-0" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.worldcoal.org/coal-the-environment/coal-mining-the-environment/" class="external text" title="http://www.worldcoal.org/coal-the-environment/coal-mining-the-environment/" rel="nofollow">"Coal Mining and the Environment"</a> World Coal Institute, accessed November 2009</li>

<li id="cite_note-mh-137">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-mh_137-0" title="">138.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-mh_137-1" title="">138.1</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-mh_137-2" title="">138.2</a> Michael Hendryx, <a href="http://appvoices.org/images/uploads/2010/08/hendryx-essay-final.pdf" class="external text" title="http://appvoices.org/images/uploads/2010/08/hendryx-essay-final.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Education and Jobs, Jobs and Education: A proposal for funding economic redevelopment in Central Appalachia"</a> Central Appalachian Prosperity Project, January 4, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-138"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-138" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://appvoices.org/2010/09/02/swoosh-crash/" class="external text" title="http://appvoices.org/2010/09/02/swoosh-crash/" rel="nofollow">"SWOOSH! CRASH!"</a> Appalachian Voices, September 2, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-wvu-139">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-wvu_139-0" title="">140.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-wvu_139-1" title="">140.1</a> <a href="http://wvuhealthcare.com/%28X%281%29S%28e53pdjbjvg5pjefsssdj2maz%29%29/newsreleases/news-details.aspx?ID=1766&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1" class="external text" title="http://wvuhealthcare.com/(X(1)S(e53pdjbjvg5pjefsssdj2maz))/newsreleases/news-details.aspx?ID=1766&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1" rel="nofollow">"WVU study examines health effects of mountaintop mining"</a> WVU Healthcare, May 9, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-140"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-140" title="">↑</a> Dam Vergano, <a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2011/06/study-mountaintop-mining-raises-birth-defect-risks/1" class="external text" title="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2011/06/study-mountaintop-mining-raises-birth-defect-risks/1" rel="nofollow">"Study: Mountaintop coal mining raises birth defect risks"</a> Science Fair, June 21, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-141"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-141" title="">↑</a> Gavin Aronsen, <a href="http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/07/mountaintop-removal-inbreeding-coal-mining" class="external text" title="http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/07/mountaintop-removal-inbreeding-coal-mining" rel="nofollow">"Big Coal: Inbreeding, Not Mining, to Blame for Birth Defects"</a> Mother Jones, July 12, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-142"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal#cite_ref-142" title="">↑</a> Joseph Romm, <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2010/01/07/205313/science-clean-coal-mountaintop-mining-removal/" class="external text" title="http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2010/01/07/205313/science-clean-coal-mountaintop-mining-removal/" rel="nofollow">"Science bombshell explodes myth of clean coal: Mountaintop 'mining permits are being issued despite the preponderance of scientific evidence that impacts are pervasive and irreversible and that mitigation cannot compensate for losses.'��</a> Climate Progress, Jan. 7, 2010.</li>

</ol>

</div>

<h3>Related SourceWatch articles</h3>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Appalachian_Voices" title="Appalachian Voices">Appalachian Voices</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Citizen_groups_working_on_coal_issues" title="Citizen groups working on coal issues">Citizen groups working on coal issues</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Estimating_the_amount_of_land_disturbed_by_coal_mining" title="Estimating the amount of land disturbed by coal mining" class="mw-redirect">Estimating the amount of land disturbed by coal mining</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Existing_U.S._Coal_Mines" title="Existing U.S. Coal Mines">Existing U.S. Coal Mines</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Externality" title="Externality">Externality</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Families_Organized_to_Represent_the_Coal_Economy" title="Families Organized to Represent the Coal Economy">Families Organized to Represent the Coal Economy</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ILoveMountains.org" title="ILoveMountains.org">ILoveMountains.org</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mining_industry" title="Mining industry">Mining industry</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountain_Justice_Summer" title="Mountain Justice Summer" class="mw-redirect">Mountain Justice Summer</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=700_Mountains" title="700 Mountains">700 Mountains</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ohio_Valley_Environmental_Coalition" title="Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition">Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Retrofit_vs._Phase-Out_of_Coal-Fired_Power_Plants" title="Retrofit vs. Phase-Out of Coal-Fired Power Plants">Retrofit vs. Phase-Out of Coal-Fired Power Plants</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Report_Card_on_Banks_and_Mountaintop_Removal" title="Report Card on Banks and Mountaintop Removal">Report Card on Banks and Mountaintop Removal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Natural_gas_transmission_leakage_rates" title="Natural gas transmission leakage rates">Natural gas transmission leakage rates</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=West_Virginia_and_coal" title="West Virginia and coal">West Virginia and coal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kentucky_and_coal" title="Kentucky and coal">Kentucky and coal</a></li>

</ul>

<h3>External links</h3>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=endangered-species-coal-appalachia-mountaintop-removal" class="external text" title="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=endangered-species-coal-appalachia-mountaintop-removal" rel="nofollow">"Are Endangered Species Being Sacrificed for Coal in Appalachia?"</a>, Scientific American, August 10, 2009.</li>

<li><a href="http://www.burningthefuture.com/" class="external text" title="http://www.burningthefuture.com/" rel="nofollow">Burning the Future: Coal in America</a> documentary from writer/director David Novack on the conflict between the coal industry and residents of West Virginia.</li>

<li>Erik Reece, <a href="http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/166/" class="external text" title="http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/166/" rel="nofollow">"Moving Mountains. The battle for justice comes to the coal fields of Appalachia,"</a> Orion, January/February 2006.</li>

<li>Patrick J. Kiger, "<a href="http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2006/07/unnatural_wonders.html" class="external text" title="http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2006/07/unnatural_wonders.html" rel="nofollow">Unnatural Wonders</a>", Mother Jones, July/August 2006.</li>

<li><a href="http://www.osmre.gov/mtindex.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.osmre.gov/mtindex.htm" rel="nofollow">US Government Office of Surface Mining</a> - index to government documents and records related to surface mining</li>

<li><a href="http://blueridgecountry.com/FavoriteArticles/MtTopRemoval/index.html" class="external text" title="http://blueridgecountry.com/FavoriteArticles/MtTopRemoval/index.html" rel="nofollow">Report on current efforts to combat mountaintop removal, Jan-Feb 2007</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2006/07/unnatural_wonders.html" class="external text" title="http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2006/07/unnatural_wonders.html" rel="nofollow">Mother Jones story on tourism in MTR-devastated landscapes</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.blackdiamondsmovie.com/" class="external text" title="http://www.blackdiamondsmovie.com/" rel="nofollow">Black Diamonds: Mountaintop Removal and the Fight for Coalfield Justice</a> (2006 feature-length video documentary)</li>

<li><a href="http://www.epa.gov/region3/mtntop/index.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.epa.gov/region3/mtntop/index.htm" rel="nofollow">Mountaintop Mining & Valley Fills in Appalachia: Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Final PEIS)</a></li>

<li><a href="http://windpub.com/dirtymoney.htm" class="external text" title="http://windpub.com/dirtymoney.htm" rel="nofollow">Economic Impact of Mountaintop Removal on Coal-mining Communities</a> -- an article by Kristin Johannsen</li>

<li><a href="http://www.marshall.edu/cber/" class="external text" title="http://www.marshall.edu/cber/" rel="nofollow">Marshall University's Center for Business and Economic Research</a> has conducted studies of Mountaintop Removal and Financing of Environmental Reclamation</li>

<li><a href="http://ran.org/what_we_do/global_finance/spotlight/coal_is_over/mountaintop_removal/" class="external text" title="http://ran.org/what_we_do/global_finance/spotlight/coal_is_over/mountaintop_removal/" rel="nofollow">Rainforest Action Network's No New Coal Campaign</a> - a website dedicated to demonstrating the roles played by leading U.S. banks on funding MTR coal mining and new coal power plant construction.</li>

<li><a href="http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/tending/" class="external text" title="http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/tending/" rel="nofollow">Tending the Commons: Folklife and Landscape in Southern West Virginia</a> -- an online multimedia exhibit on historical and cultural landscapes affected by mountaintop removal mining in southern West Virginia's Big Coal River Valley.</li>

<li><a href="http://www.windpub.com/books/missing.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.windpub.com/books/missing.htm" rel="nofollow">Missing Mountains: We Went to the Mountaintop But it Wasn't There</a> - 35 Kentucky writers explore mountaintop removal mining.</li>

<li><a href="http://www.hawriverfilms.com/id2.html" class="external text" title="http://www.hawriverfilms.com/id2.html" rel="nofollow">Mountain Top Removal</a> - award-winning documentary</li>

<li><a href="http://www.erikreece.com" class="external text" title="http://www.erikreece.com" rel="nofollow">Lost Mountain: Radical Strip-Mining and the Devastation of Appalachia</a> - award-winning account of strip-mining by Erik Reece</li>

<li><a href="http://www.mountainroadshow.com/" class="external text" title="http://www.mountainroadshow.com/" rel="nofollow">Mountaintop Removal Road Show</a> - Dave Cooper travels the country presenting a slide show about the impacts of mountaintop removal on coalfield residents, communities, and the environment.</li>

<li><a href="http://www.llrx.com/extras/mountaintopremoval.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.llrx.com/extras/mountaintopremoval.htm" rel="nofollow">Commentary: Mountaintop Removal Sites - "Strip Mining on Steroids"</a> Beth Wellington, published November 12, 2006 by LLRX.com. A look "into the complex history of this controversial mining operation, with background that highlights corporate and public interest positions, as well as relevant legislative history."</li>

<li>Rory McIlmoil and Evan Hansen, <a href="http://www.downstreamstrategies.com/Documents/reports_publication/DownstreamStrategies-DeclineOfCentralAppalachianCoal-FINAL-1-19-10.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.downstreamstrategies.com/Documents/reports_publication/DownstreamStrategies-DeclineOfCentralAppalachianCoal-FINAL-1-19-10.pdf" rel="nofollow">The Decline of Central Appalachian Coal and the Need for Economic Diversification,</a> Downstream Strategies, January 2010</li>

<li>Farron Cousins, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/massey-energy-not-only-mountaintop-removal-mining-villain" class="external text" title="http://www.desmogblog.com/massey-energy-not-only-mountaintop-removal-mining-villain" rel="nofollow">"Massey Energy Is Not the Only Mountaintop Removal Villain,"</a> DeSmog Blog, June 11, 2011</li>

<li><a href="http://naturalresources.house.gov/UploadedFiles/GunnoeTestimony06-01-12.pdf" class="external text" title="http://naturalresources.house.gov/UploadedFiles/GunnoeTestimony06-01-12.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Written testimony of Maria Gunnoe for 6-1-12 hearing titled "Obama Administration's Actions Against the Spruce Coal Mines: Canceled Permits, Lawsuits and Lost Jobs,"</a> Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, submitted May 30, 2012 (includes slideshow)</li>

</ul>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Wikipedia" title="Wikipedia">Wikipedia</a> also has an article on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal" class="external text" title="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal" rel="nofollow">Mountaintop removal</a>. This article may use content from the Wikipedia article under the terms of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GFDL" class="external text" title="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GFDL" rel="nofollow">GFDL</a>.

<div id="mw-normal-catlinks"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Special:Categories" title="Special:Categories">Categories</a>: <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Coal_Issues" title="Category:Coal Issues">Coal Issues</a> | <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Energy" title="Category:Energy">Energy</a> | <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Coal_mining" title="Category:Coal mining">Coal mining</a> | <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Environmental_issues_of_coal" title="Category:Environmental issues of coal">Environmental issues of coal</a> | <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Mountaintop_removal_mines" title="Category:Mountaintop removal mines">Mountaintop removal mines</a> | <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Coal_terms" title="Category:Coal terms">Coal terms</a></div>

</div>

=

<div class="entry-date">March 02, 2010

</div>

</div>

<div class="subheadlinestyle">Escalating Sanctions Against Mountain Top Removal Activists</div>

<h1 class="article-title">Mountain Injustice</h1>

<a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2010/03/02/mountain-injustice/">http://www.counterpunch.org/2010/03/02/mountain-injustice/</a>

<div class="mainauthorstyle">by TRICIA SHAPIRO</div>

"Protesters Occupy Marfork Coal Co.��s Office in Response to Mounting Violations,” said a press release from the protesters’ supporters at Climate Ground Zero on Thursday morning, Feb. 18.

A news release from Massey Energy, Marfork’s parent company, told rather a different story: “Environmental Terrorists Invade Marfork Coal Company Office…. Three criminals clad in fatigues and carrying chains invaded a company office and chained themselves to chairs in the lobby. A terrified receptionist went into shock and was transported by ambulance to a local hospital…. One of the criminals, Mike Roselle, was a founding member of Earth First!, which is considered by many to be a domestic terrorist group…. These domestic terrorists are part of an anti-coal group that wants to shut down mining in Appalachia and destroy West Virginia’s economy.”

Massey’s “news release” doesn’t specify who those “many” are who consider Mike and his colleagues to be “domestic terrorists.” But even right-wing activist Ron Arnold, who’s written an entire book on “ecoterrorism,” asserts that “Roselle may be a terrible pain in the ass, but he’s no terrorist.” Writing shortly after Mike’s first trespassing arrest on Massey property, at Marfork’s Bee Tree strip mine site a year ago, Arnold scolded those who would “dilute” the meaning of the word terrorism by applying it to nonviolent protest.

“Face it,” he wrote, “what he did was civil disobedience, not terrorism.”

The claim that “a terrified receptionist went into shock” is equally puzzling. “She was definitely startled when we came in,” says Joe Hamsher, one of the three protesters arrested that day. But soon “she calmed down. She was even laughing.”

Protests are not a new experience for Massey workers. Since February of last year, more than 130 arrests have been made at civil-disobedience actions protesting mountaintop-removal (MTR) strip mining for coal in West Virginia. Several of those actions have targeted Marfork, which has begun blasting at its Bee Tree MTR site a short distance from its enormous Brushy Fork impoundment, which holds billions of gallons of liquid coal waste up above the Coal River valley. Anti-MTR activists and local residents are concerned that blasting so close to the impoundment, which is built over abandoned underground coal mine tunnels, risks catastrophic flooding that by Massey’s own estimate could kill close to a thousand people.

The only violence or threats of violence at any of these actions have been directed at the protesters, not vice versa. For example, at a protest rally at the front gate of Massey’s Goals Coal facility last June, a Massey supporter slapped anti-MTR activist Judy Bonds hard enough that she couldn’t move her neck properly for days. Most recently, in January, workers at Marfork’s Bee Tree site blared multiple airhorns, day and night, at three protesters sitting in trees there, risking permanent damage to the protesters’ hearing. At a previous tree sit, last summer, a sitter was threatened with gang rape.

“We were definitely not much of a threat to her,” Joe Hamsher says, referring to the receptionist at the Marfork office. “I mean, we were locked down.” Joe, the first of the three to enter the building that morning, announced “this is a protest,” then immediately sat down and locked himself to a chair. (That’s why they were carrying chains.)

Meanwhile, Mike Roselle posted a sign reading “CLOSED: Stop the Blasting!” on the building’s front door. A Marfork employee tore the sign down, while the third protester, Tom Smyth, took pictures. Then Mike and Tom entered the building and sat down near Joe. Tom chained himself to his chair.

The three protesters had brought with them a “citizen’s arrest warrant” for Marfork’s president. “Since 1994,” the warrant read, “the Marfork Coal Company has committed over 100 documented permit violations…. Marfork’s continued operations in such close proximity to both Marsh Fork Elementary and the Pettus Head Start Program are not only endangering, but also assaulting the children at these locations with coal dust and other particulates floating off of the mine sites owned by Marfork Coal…. Marfork is continuing its operations on the Bee Tree Strip Mine, placing nearby communities in imminent danger. As President of the Marfork Coal Company, you are responsible for the illegal practices of Marfork. Given the absence of any intervention from West Virginia or federal law enforcement, a citizen’s warrant has been issued for your, Christopher L. Blanchard’s, arrest.”

Two hours after the protesters arrived, state police took them away to jail. (When they left, the allegedly terrified receptionist was still at work, showing no ill effects, Joe notes.) The three were charged with trespass, obstruction, and conspiracy– all misdemeanors. Bail was set for Joe and Tom at $5,000 each, for Mike at $7,500. The magistrate specified that the arrestees would have to raise the entire $17,500 in cash, rather than paying a bail bondsman a small fraction of the money, typically 10 percent. (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fEmiDngt-Q" onclick="javascript:gaq.push(['trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.youtube.com']);">Nice, artsy video from Climate Ground Zero of the occupation</a>.)

The Massey “news release” cited above quotes the company’s chairman and CEO, Don Blankenship, saying: “These criminals have been allowed to become more and more aggressive with little repercussion.”

In fact, the “repercussion” against anti-MTR protesters in West Virginia has escalated dramatically over the past year. Early on, protesters arrested for trespassing were simply ticketed and released. Now, they’re sent to jail and required to raise large sums of bail money. Even accused murdererers and child molesters are typically permitted to use the services of a bail bondsman, to reduce the amount of cash they have to muster to get out of jail before trial. But West Virginia magistrates are now typically specifying large cash-only bonds for civil-disobedience arrestees at anti-MTR protests. This has resulted in protesters being kept in jail after their arrests, but before any trial, sometimes for many days, far longer than the norm for such nonviolent offenses. (Of the three Marfork protesters, Joe was bonded out after eight days in custody. Tom and Mike remain in jail. <a href="http://climategroundzero.net/2010/02/one-of-three-released-climate-ground-zero-in-need-of-funds/" onclick="javascript:gaq.push(['trackEvent','outbound-article','http://climategroundzero.net']);">Click here to help them raise bail.</a>) When protest cases do come to trial, the fines assessed have generally been increasing as well.

In addition to these escalating sanctions in criminal court, Massey lawyers have filed multiple civil suits against protesters arrested on their property. Lawsuits demanding injunctions and so-far unspecified money for “damages” have been filed against dozens of these protesters: one suit in Raleigh County against participants in several protests there early in 2009, one suit in Boone County against participants in an action there, and a separate Raleigh County suit against participants in a tree-sit action last summer. Protesters not actually named in any of these suits have been found in contempt of a court’s injunction for “acting in concert” with one of a suit’s named parties; that ruling is currently being appealed. In addition, Massey recently filed suit in federal court against participants in the January tree-sit protest at Marfork, requesting at least the minimum of $75,000 in damages that would make such a case eligible for federal

court.

At a hearing for the federal lawsuit on Tuesday, Feb. 23, Massey attorney Sam Brock said that activists protesting against Massey “just have to live by the same rules as everybody else.” Sitting in the courtroom that day, I remembered Massey’s 2008 settlement with the federal EPA for thousands of permit violations related to the Clean Water Act: Massey agreed to pay $20 million, although given the number and nature of the violations the EPA could properly have assessed $2 billion or more–100 times as much. (Massey's own estimate of this prior to the settlement was $1.5 to $7 billion.) Furthermore, just a few weeks ago, in January, a coalition of environmental groups announcing their intent to sue Massey cited documentation that the company’s permit violations had become even more frequent since the EPA settlement.

Would an even-handed application of “the same rules” allow protesters to commit, say, 99 (or more) civil-disobedience actions with impunity before being arrested for one of them?

“While Massey’s lawyers were in court today trying to enjoin anyone anywhere from trespassing on Massey operations,” Vern Haltom, co-director of Coal River Mountain Watch, noted later that day, “Massey was spilling black water [coal waste] from their Martin County, KY, operation. And Pioneer Fuels (NOT a Massey subsidiary) was spilling black water into Clear Fork,” which empties into the Coal River near Marfork’s headquarters, upstream from the town of Whitesville’s public water intake.

“Unfortunately,” Vern says, “our regulators don’t escalate the enforcement of Massey’s repeating violations that are endangering the community with the same vigor that prosecutors and Massey attorneys are suppressing the voices of endangered people,” CRMW’s other co-director Judy Bonds, 2003 winner of the Goldman Environmental prize and a lifelong resident of Coal River valley, puts it more bluntly: “I believe the justice system in southern West Virginia is discriminatory in favor of the coal industry. I think keep screaming about it is all we can do.”

TRICIA SHAPIRO has been covering anti-MTR activism as an embedded freelance writer since 2005. Her book Mountain Justice: Homegrown Resistance to Mountaintop Removal, for the Future of Us All will be published by AK Press this fall.

</div>

nace orion

ON A CHILLY NIGHT IN FEBRUARY 2007, a criminal justice consultant named Nancy LaPlaca sat on a bare bench under the bright lights of the Denver County Jail. Four other women sat sullenly beside her, two arrested for public inebriation, a third brought in on suspicion of crack possession, the last for driving while intoxicated. In her day job, LaPlaca had seen many such rooms. But now she was on the wrong side of the bars.

LaPlaca had begun the evening at the Denver Marriott, relaxing in the hotel bar with friends after the close of a small conference that she and her group, Coloradoans for Clean Energy, had organized for activists from across the country who are opposing new coal-fired power plants. Next to her chair she had carefully placed her NO NEW COAL PLANTS sign so that it faced the wall, after a request to do so from a hotel manager. A utility industry conference was taking place in the same building, and the manager was eager to avoid offending the executives and engineers in attendance. But as LaPlaca prepared to leave, she briefly turned her sign so it was visible to the bar.

“Suddenly,” she later recalled, “there was this 250-pound policeman in my face demanding to talk with me privately. I told him that whatever he had to say, he could say in front of my friends. And that’s when he grabbed me.”

AFTER HER FIRST NIGHT IN THE POKEY on charges of trespassing and disturbing the peace, LaPlaca returned home and read the latest messages posted on the No New Coal Plants e-mail list, an Internet watering hole initiated in April 2006 by Philadelphia organizer Mike Ewall. Ewall founded the group Energy Justice in 1999 and has organized electronic mailing lists around other issues, including tire incinerators and nuclear power. Whatever the topic, the elements of each list are identical: messages from any member are forwarded to the entire group, responses may be directed either back to the group or to the original author, and archives of group messages are kept on the Energy Justice website.

Of course, to be useful to participants, a list has to achieve a critical mass, and for the first few months messages among No New Coal Plants participants were few and far between. But by midsummer 2006, Ewall had recruited several dozen members and the list had taken on a life of its own. Over the next year, it grew to include 140 people. A few, such as Matt Leonard of Rainforest Action Network in San Francisco, and Ted Glick of the U.S. Climate Emergency Council in Takoma Park, Maryland, are staff members with national environmental groups. Others, such as Drusha Mayhue in Bozeman, Montana, are volunteers with the Sierra Club or other membership-oriented groups. Most, however, are involved with small, locally based, mainly rural groups. Typical among these are Greg Howard, an attorney with the nonprofit Appalachian Citizens Law Center, a law firm in Prestonsburg, Kentucky, that represents miners suffering from black lung disease; Mano Andrews, a Hopi/Dine native affiliated with the Western Shoshone Defense Project in Nevada and the Save the Peaks Coalition in Arizona; and Leslie Glustrom, a biochemist in Boulder, Colorado, opposing Xcel Energy’s Comanche 3 coal plant. Most members of the list live in areas that have already felt the effects of coal projects and are facing more development. Elisa Young, an activist in Meigs County, Ohio, can count four coal-fired power plants within ten miles of her home and faces five more that are planned. Mary Jo Stueve grew up in Minnesota across the South Dakota border from the Big Stone I power plant; she’s now a staff member with South Dakota Clean Water Action, fighting a proposed second unit of the plant.

For the list participants, No New Coal Plants serves as research assistant, clipping service, and water cooler. Postings announce conference calls, float ideas for group projects, celebrate victories. “This is hard work, with low pay and lots of frustrations along the way,” says Alan Muller, a member who serves as the one-man staff for Green Delaware. “I can’t stress enough the encouragement factor as a main value [of the list].”

At first glance, No New Coal Plants has every appearance of a single-issue environmental group, if “group” is the right word for an entity with no office, no board of directors, no letterhead, no bank account, no organizational structure. “Swarm” might be a better term.

As fighting forces, swarms both preceded and eventually vanquished the orthogonal ranks of legionnaires that forged the Roman Empire. In a swarm, the emphasis is not on discipline, experience, and orderliness but rather on fighting spirit and individual initiative. Swarms are known for their tactical flexibility, sometimes using guerrilla-style harassment, as did the farmers who routed the British at Lexington and Concord; other times prevailing with overwhelming numbers in the manner of the Arapaho, Lakota, and Northern Cheyenne fighters who overran the U.S. Seventh Cavalry at the Little Bighorn.

The contrast between No New Coal Plants and Big Coal is obvious, but the contrast between such low-profile, leaderless entities and the large national groups typically identified with the environmental movement is equally striking. The largest of these groups, sometimes known as Big Green, include the Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense, and the National Wildlife Federation. Typically based in Washington DC or New York and sporting annual budgets in the tens of millions of dollars, these groups, not unlike the corporate and governmental entities they oppose, are hierarchical, highly organized, and reliant on trained and seasoned attorneys, scientific experts, and lobbyists. Yet the “Twigs,” as some small-scale activists have taken to calling themselves in a pointed distinction from Big Green, have lately taken more militant positions and have, in many cases, been more effective in stopping new coal-fired power plants.

IN THE SPRING OF 2007, a split between these two currents in the U.S. environmental movement broke into view over the prospect of a vast expansion in the use of coal in the United States. With the encouragement of the Bush Administration and coal subsidies in the 2005 Energy Act (variously estimated at between $4.8 billion and $9 billion), the number of coal-fired power plants either newly built or in various stages of proposal or construction had leaped from 92 in 2004 to over 150 in May 2007. Many climatologists noted the expansion with alarm. Speaking before the National Press Club in Washington DC on February 26, 2007, James Hansen, head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Sciences and one of the country’s most widely published and outspoken climate scientists, told the audience that the opportunity to avoid runaway global heating—wherein human-induced “forcings” would trigger enough amplifying feedback loops to ultimately produce “a different planet”—was rapidly fading. To address the problem, Hansen made five recommendations, the first of which was an immediate moratorium on the construction of any new coal-fired power plants until such plants are capable of capturing their carbon dioxide releases.

Coal plants are among the largest industrial facilities on the planet and collectively generate about 32 percent of America’s carbon dioxide emissions. A single 500 megawatt plant can burn its way through a 125-car trainload of coal in two days, releasing into the atmosphere nearly twice the weight of that trainload in carbon dioxide. To offset the global heating produced by that much carbon dioxide, two million SUV drivers would have to switch to Priuses. Even that comparison understates the consequences of a new power plant, since a car lasts about a decade, while a typical coal plant will continue to spew climate-torquing gasses for sixty years or more. Faced with the new coal boom, four groups—the Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense, the National Wildlife Federation, and the Clean Air Task Force—prominently advocated an approach that centered around a technical fix with the ungainly acronym IGCC/CCS, for Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle with Carbon Capture and Sequestration.

While coal gasification technology is not new (it helped power the German air force during World War II), its use for electrical generation is relatively recent. Four such plants are now operating in Europe and the United States, all built with government subsidies. Because it involves converting solid fuel into gas prior to combustion, IGCC technology is more readily suited than conventional coal plants for capturing waste products. As much as 88 percent of the coal’s carbon dioxide can be captured in an IGCC plant, along with 99 percent or more of its sulfur oxides and particulates, and 95 percent of its mercury. Once the carbon dioxide has been removed from the exhaust stream, it can be liquefied under pressure and injected into deep underground formations. Over a dozen IGCC plants are under development in the United States. Currently leading the pack is EURORA Group’s Cash Creek, Kentucky, facility, which could go online as early as 2011. But notably, none of the demonstration plants in operation, nor any of the proposed IGCC plants, actually includes carbon capture and sequestration.

The most outspoken advocate for IGCC/CCS has been David Hawkins, director of the Climate Center at the Natural Resources Defense Council. According to Hawkins, IGCC/CCS would allow the United States to continue using coal without heating the planet, since plants using the technology could store the captured carbon dioxide in geological formations thousands of feet underground. Hawkins’s support for IGCC/CCS is based on the pragmatic calculation that coal enjoys too much political support for it to be taken out of the climate equation. In April 2007, he told the Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources Committee that “we will almost certainly continue using large amounts of coal in the U.S. and globally in the coming decades.” For that reason, he concluded, “it is imperative that we act now to deploy CCD [carbon capture and disposal] systems.”

Proponents of coal gasification typically call it “clean coal,” though Hawkins and other environmentalists avoid that term. After all, using IGCC/CCS would not eliminate destructive strip-mining or mountaintop-removal practices. And critics have other objections: a big one involves how much we don’t know about sequestering carbon dioxide underground. While such pumping has been done to facilitate oil extraction by repressurizing oil fields, it has never been attempted at anything close to the scale that would be required to render the coal industry climate-friendly. According to MIT’s 2007 “Future of Coal” study, capturing and compressing just 60 percent of the carbon dioxide produced by U.S. coal-fired power plants would demand a new pipeline network big enough to move 20 million barrels of liquefied carbon dioxide each day from power plants to suitable sequestration sites (which depend on particular geology)—a volume equal to all the oil piped daily throughout the country. Sequestration sites would have to be honestly administered, closely monitored, and tightly sealed. Such demanding technical requirements led journalist Jeff Goodell to write that “the notion of coal as the solution to America’s energy problems is a technological fantasy on par with the dream of a manned mission to Mars.”

But there’s a more straightforward objection to IGCC/CSS: cost. The cost of building such plants is expected to be around 40 percent higher than conventional coal plants. And the cost of operating them would also be higher, since huge amounts of power are needed to separate and liquefy carbon dioxide, then pipe and pump it underground—in all, each plant would have to burn about 25 percent more coal to generate the same amount of electricity for market. Once those expenses are totaled up, this way of using coal may end up being more costly than solar thermal power plants or wind turbines backed up by natural gas generators that would make them as reliable as coal plants.

As it waits for IGCC/CCS to reach commercial readiness, Big Green has signaled a willingness to make deals with industry over new coal plants. The most widely reported compromise was reached in March 2007 between two large environmental groups and an investor group led by private equity firm KKR, which was in the process of buying Texas utility TXU Corp. In return for a promise by the new owners to cancel eight of eleven planned new coal plants in Texas, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense agreed to drop their opposition to the remaining three. Many grassroots environmentalists complained that the deal was nowhere near sufficient. Climate scientists were calling for a full halt on new coal, not a slowdown, they said. If this was the environmental movement’s batting average on a good day, it wasn’t good enough. A correspondent to Texas Monthly wrote: “I feel like I’m in some colonial third world outpost watching helplessly as my fate is being decided by a bunch of rich white guys with Marks-a-Lots in a map room thousands of miles away.”

But whether the TXU deal was shrewd or foolish, one thing it clearly lacked was anything that might inspire and build a mass movement against climate change. In contrast, the message of the Twigs is simple and compelling: no new coal plants.

CONTEMPTUOUS OF FIXES and half measures, those in the anti-coal swarm believe they can kill new coal plants even though they lack the resources of the larger groups. Typical among these activists is Carol Overland, an attorney based in Redwing, Minnesota. After working as a truck driver for over a decade, Overland sold her house in the early 1990s to finance a law degree from William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota. She went to work representing small towns and local groups in transmission-line permitting and other utility-related cases. As a girl, she had played “power engineering office” on a desk made from a red crate, imitating her father, a mechanical engineer who had designed power plants for Great River Energy and other utilities. Now that childhood game has turned into a career represented by floor-to-ceiling shelves constructed from two-by-fours and filled with power company feasibility studies.

Overland was one of the earliest participants on the No New Coal Plants list and remains one of the most prolific. She has a talent for exposing the financial weak spots of proposed power plants, and she has coached others on the list: “If you want to kill a power project, focus on economics.”

Overland had for over a year been probing into a proposed coal plant, Mesaba, in northern Minnesota, that most environmental groups were unwilling to challenge because it featured the new IGCC technology. Located near Bovey and owned by Excelsior Energy, Mesaba would generate 603 megawatts of electricity for the Minnesota utility Xcel Energy. To help Overland, other list participants supplied her with internal reports on coal prepared by Wall Street investment banks and with feasibility studies performed in other states. Eventually, Overland discovered that the costs of Mesaba had been quietly escalating. While the U.S. Department of Energy had originally placed the cost of the plant at $1.18 billion, that number had reached $2.2 billion, not including necessary transmission line upgrades or carbon capture, transportation, or storage.

The more information Overland received, the more she became convinced that an aggressive assault on the cost estimates for Mesaba might be the key to derailing the project. In order to build the plant, Excelsior Energy needed the state of Minnesota to approve a power purchase agreement (PPA) between Excelsior and Xcel. In a brief to the Public Utility Commission, Overland claimed that Mesaba should not receive the PPA because it did not qualify as a “least cost project” under Minnesota’s statutes; given the revised cost projections, Mesaba’s electricity wouldn’t be as cheap as expected. In April 2007, a panel of administrative law judges agreed, recommending to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission that the PPA be denied on economic grounds.

Taking a clue from Overland’s strategy, other activists began exchanging the latest cost studies on IGCC. Even before the Minnesota PUC ruled on Mesaba, coal plants were under attack from the Twigs in Colorado, Florida, Delaware, Ohio, South Dakota, North Carolina, Texas, Arizona, and Iowa.

Matt Leonard of Rainforest Action Network, who focuses on exploiting the increasing nervousness that Wall Street banks display toward large coal projects, noticed a “ratcheting” phenomenon: “Whenever activists fighting a coal project in one place are able to get regulators or banks to commit to a certain set of restrictions or conditions, the campaigns against other projects make those conditions the new baseline that must be met or beat. Successes in blocking coal plants are piggybacking from one to the next.”

In the spring of 2007, Leonard began keeping a list of derailed coal projects, and the list grew rapidly. In May, Green Delaware’s Alan Muller, a former consultant to DuPont on incinerators, reported the nixing of NRG Energy’s proposed 630-megawatt Indian River coal-fired plant. Data from Minnesota that Muller’s organization provided to the Delaware Public Service Commission had helped convince regulators that a wind farm with natural gas turbine backup made more economic sense than an IGCC coal plant. “Carol’s numbers drove the nail in the NRG coffin,” said Muller.

Next to claim success was a Florida couple, Bob and Jan Krasowski. Bob, a contractor, and Jan, a schoolteacher, had taken advantage of a regulatory provision allowing ordinary citizens to intervene directly in Florida Public Service Commission hearings on power plants. In the permitting process for the proposed Glades coal-fired power plant, located on the northwest shore of Lake Okeechobee at the edge of the Florida Everglades, mainstream environmental groups—including the Florida Wildlife Federation, the Sierra Club, and the Natural Resources Defense Council—had adopted a complex position. In a memo to the PSC, lawyers for mainstream local and national groups wrote that “[although] there is no need for . . . any type of coal plant by FPL [Florida Power and Light], an IGCC plant in Florida can provide electricity at a lower cost than the proposed . . . coal plant.”

To the Krasowskis, the “no . . . but” position taken by Big Green was a mixed message that mistook the rapidly changing attitudes of Floridians—threatened both by hurricanes and rising sea levels—toward global warming. Convinced that regulators would be receptive to unequivocal assertions by anti-coal forces, the Krasowskis simply demanded that Glades be cancelled and replaced with conservation programs like those already implemented in other states. In the end, it was the Krasowskis’ grassroots perspective that prevailed with the Florida PSC in a 4–0 vote that caught most observers off guard.

“We weren’t surprised,” said Bob Krasowski. “We knew that the commissioners are politically attuned; they have their ear to the ground. And we knew how Florida was leaning. Being in the schools, Jan hears what kids are saying, and that’s a pretty good indicator of where their parents are at. As for myself, I constantly hear people in the construction trades talking about how global warming is going to raise insurance rates.”

TO SOME ACTIVISTS, the spat over IGCC/CCS is an example of the healthy give-and-take found in any large movement. John Thompson, director of the Coal Transition Program for the Clean Air Task Force, one of the leading advocates of IGCC/CSS, said diplomatically, “In the environmental movement, there’s never unanimity about how to address every problem. Differences of opinion are helpful, especially since we’re all in agreement over the fact that drastic reductions in carbon emissions will be necessary by midcentury.”

When questioned more closely, however, Thompson’s position hardens: “Look, we need to move forward and get the infrastructure for carbon capture and sequestration in place now. And we can’t look at this from a U.S. perspective only. The largest coal company in the world isn’t Peabody Coal any longer; by the end of next year [China’s] Shenhua will probably be the world’s largest coal producer. We have to get CCS working in this country so that we have a technology that we can provide to China and India. If environmentalists at the grassroots simply want to fight and stop every single coal plant, then IGCC technology will never develop to a workable level. We’ll then have locked ourselves into the melting of ice sheets and widespread extinctions.”

To Alan Muller, however, the central fact is that the country has woken up to climate change and Big Green has failed to recognize the opportunity. “The environmental fat cats were caught with their pants down,” he said. “Now they’re still arguing incremental change—some better way to use coal. They should be talking about much more fundamental change.”

Can the environmental movement muster the necessary clout to overcome the combined forces of Big Oil and Big Coal? To Big Green advocates like Hawkins and Thompson, it’s a fantasy to think that America won’t continue using coal and oil. To grassroots activists like LaPlaca, Overland, and Muller, the fantasy lies in the opposite assumption: believing that the world can survive without a radical shift away from fossil fuels. “Big Green has the resources,” said Muller, “but the grassroots is where it’s happening in terms of leadership, in terms of work, and in terms of results. To anybody who’s following this, I’d say don’t bet too much money on coal right now.”

</div>

Mountaintop removal MTR

Attachments