There’s More to Environmentalism Than Global Warming

Reuters has an article about how Hillary and Obama are playing up the benefits of “clean coal” in West Virginia and Kentucky, a state sitting on top of huge coal reserves:

In a bid to draw voters ahead of Democratic primaries in West Virginia on Tuesday and Kentucky on May 20, both candidates are playing up the ascendant role of commercially untested and so far economically nonviable ways of converting America’s plentiful coal supplies into electricity without spewing massive quantities of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

“We need some big investments right now in figuring out how to capture and store carbon dioxide from coal,” Clinton told a rally in the rural town of Clear Fork on Monday.

[...]

Not to be outdone, Obama’s campaign has distributed flyers in Kentucky stating that “Barack Obama believes in clean Kentucky coal.” The flyers show a picture of giant barges carrying coal down the Ohio River.

Coal-fired power plants generate about half of U.S. electricity supplies, and account for about 40 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions — the biggest single industrial source.

It’s great the candidates are looking at using American energy and at the same time focusing on reducing carbon emissions. What’s wrong is that global warming has become the dominating topic in popular environmentalism. Coal mining, particularly surface mining, which is popular with Big Coal, is an environmental disaster. From destroying pristine mountain tops, to severe water pollution, coal mining can be particularly disastrous to the environment.

But surface mining does more than destroy trees, water, and mountains. Noises, vibrations and dust from the machines and explosions, can create lung cancer and other diseases in local communities. The coal dust also contains sulfur compounds, which corrodes structures. Water contains increased minerals from excess runoff, which lowers aquatic life. A survey by the EPA estimates over 700 miles of Appalachian streams where filled in between 1985 and 2001.

But all is fine, the law requires these sites be “restored.” Unfortunately between waivers and blatant disregard for the law, these sites rarely are. Propents of the half done restoration jobs argue the flatter land has more uses such as farming and game hunting. But opponents note fast growing, non native grass is often planted, which compete with trees for soil nutrients, and thus leave deforested mountain tops more prone to erosion.

Then there’s the issue of sludge ponds, used to store the waste from coal processing. Hundreds of millions of gallons of this waste is stored in dams. The most dangerous dam is located 400 yards above an elementary school. The reservoir’s slowly leaking contents also threaten to flood the school. But there’s also a flash food risk, In 1972 a similar dam broke in what was know as the Buffalo Creek Flood, which killed 125 people.

I’m all for boosting employment in economically depressed rural areas like West Virginia and Kentucky, and having made in America energy is another bonus. But if these candidates are going to use coal they need to strengthen the laws regulating the coal industry. So far Hillary and Obama have shown they aren’t opposed to strengthening these laws. But John McCain is out with an ad indicating he doesn’t believe in “crippling regulation,” political doublespeak for the continued laxness of Bush’s non-environmental policy.

Above image is in the public domain.