EPA officially opened their comment period on the federal regulation of coal ash under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The basic question posed by EPA during this comment period is whether toxic coal ash should be regulated as a hazardous waste under Subtitle C of RCRA or as a solid waste under Subtitle D. Really? Do we need a debate about this??? The very nature of coal ash is HAZARDOUS. Coal ash is riddled with heavy metals that are toxic to humans and the environment. For more information on the nature of coal ash and its impacts on the environment click here.
EPA's Question of the Year: Do we regulate Coal Ash like hazardous waste or like household trash?
Today, the Environmental Protection Agency issued draft rules on the federal regulation of coal combustion waste.
A beginning of the end for MTR?
Yesterday the EPA announced that they would be placing restrictions on the damange to streams and Appalachian watershed due to mountaintop removal and other practices.
From the EPA’s press release:
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. The maximum benchmark conductivity of 500 microSiemens per centimeter is a measure of salinity that is roughly five times above normal levels. The conductivity levels identified in the clarifying guidance are intended to protect 95 percent of aquatic life and fresh water streams in central Appalachia.
“The people of Appalachia shouldn’t have to choose between a clean, healthy environment in which to raise their families and the jobs they need to support them. That’s why EPA is providing even greater clarity on the direction the agency is taking to confront pollution from mountain top removal,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “We will continue to work with all stakeholders to find a way forward that follows the science and the law. Getting this right is important to Americans who rely on affordable coal to power homes and businesses, as well as coal communities that count on jobs and a livable environment, both during mining and after coal companies move to other sites.”
This is not a ban on Mountain Top Removal, but would, to my understanding, restrict mountaintop removal coal mining severely.
“Minimizing the number of valley fills is a very, very key factor,” Jackson said. “You’re talking about no, or very few, valley fills that are going to meet this standard.”
Full audio of the briefing can be heard on Coal Tattoo which has a more in depth analysis.
More information can be found on by Jeff Biggers (author and presenter at CCAN’s Artist for the Climate) here and from our coalition partner Appalachian Voices here.
EPA Proposes Veto of Mine Permit Under the Clean Water Act
Release date: 03/26/2010
Contact Information: EPA Press Office, press@epa.gov, 202-564-6794, 202-564-7873
WASHINGTON Continue reading
Breaking: Anti-MTR Activists Risk Arrest at EPA HQ with Elaborate Protest
Cross-posted from it’s getting hot in here
In an attempt to further pressure EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to enforce the Clean Water Act and halt mountaintop removal coal mining (MTR), activists early this morning erected two 20-foot-tall, purple tripod structures in front of the agency’s headquarters. A pair of activists perched at the top of the tripods have strung a 25-foot sign in front of the EPA’s door that reads, “EPA: pledge to end mountaintop removal in 2010.” Six people are locked to the tripods and say they won’t leave unless Administrator Jackson commits to a flyover visit of the Appalachian Mountains and MTR sites, which she has never done before.
This is the latest in a series of actions and activities aimed at pressuring the EPA to take more decisive action on mountaintop removal coal mining. Today’s tactic is modeled on the multi-day tree-sits that have been happening in West Virginia to protect mountains from coal companies’ imminent blasting. Called the worst of the worst strip mining, the practice blows the tops off of whole mountains to scoop out the small seams of coal that lie beneath.
“We’re losing our way of life and our culture,” said Chuck Nelson, who worked as a coal miner in West Virginia for three decades and came to DC to support today’s protest. “Mountaintop removal should be banned today. The practice means total devastation for communities, the hardwood forests, the ecosystems, and the headwaters. Why should our communities sacrifice everything we have?”
Daily Scandal: Free Big Coal Window Ads in Inhofe and Senate Enviro Committee Office?
This is cross-posted from huffington post.
While the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works is charged with protecting “the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the products we consume have a direct impact on the health of our families,” some of its staffers apparently feel it should also serve as a front for the devastating pollution of Big Coal.
As hundreds of citizens from ravaged coalfield areas in Appalachia and around the nation fill the corridors of Congress this week, calling on the House and Senate to pass the Clean Water Protection Act/Appalachian Restoration Act to stop the illegal dumping of toxic coal waste into our American waterways, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) and his staff on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee are reportedly providing free window space for Big Coal ads in our taxpayer financed federal buildings.
Check out this photo of the Senate minority leader’s office window at the E/PW Committee, sent by concerned coalfield residents from West Virginia, who have repeatedly asked the staffers to take down the offensive T-shirt on government property:
While Sen. James Inhofe’s comments on climate change are legendary, his prairie land and plains state support for flattening Appalachia through devastating mountaintop removal mining is dangerously uniformed. Last spring, Inhofe sent a letter to EPA chief Lisa Jackson, charging her agency for delay in issuing Clean Water Act permits. Inhofe erroneously claimed:
“As you know, mountaintop mining is a vitally important economic activity. It provides a significant portion of the coal that contributes nearly 50 percent of the nation’s electricity. It also provides well-paying jobs and revenues for some of the neediest regions.”
Significant portion of coal?
Setting aside the reality that mountaintop removal’s irreversible destruction has eliminated over 500 mountains and nearly 1.2 million acres of hardwood forests in the carbon sink of America, led to the largest forced removal of American citizens since the 19th century, and jammed an estimated 2,000 miles of headwater streams and waterways with toxic coal waste, Inhofe’s distortion of the true cost of coal and his window dressing for Big Coal overlooks four main points:
1) As everyone else on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee does know–or should know– mountaintop removal mining provides less than 8 percent of all national coal production.
2) Mountaintop removal has bled the Appalachian economy and job market. As the recent study, “The Decline of Central Appalachian Coal and the Need for Economic Diversification,” makes clear:
Despite these economic benefits, coal-producing counties in Central Appalachia continue to have some of the highest poverty and unemployment rates in the region, and due to the dependence on coal for economic development, any changes in coal production will have significant impacts on local economies.
Specifically, a study last year by West Virginia University reseachers found:
The coal industry generates a little more than $8 billion a year in economic benefits for the Appalachian region. But, they put the value of premature deaths attributable to the mining industry across the Appalachian coalfields at — by a most conservative estimate — $42 billion.
And check out West Virginia blogger Clem Guttata’s analysis of the economics of mountaintop removal on the heels of Inhofe’s misinformed comments.
3) Even the most pro-coal legislators in Appalachia and on Capitol Hill recognize that Appalachian coalfields and across the country are facing a clock of peak coal, and need to shift toward a just transition for clean energy jobs and economic development.
4) Sorry Sen. Inhofe: Coal-fired plants provided only 45% of our electricity last year, and it’s declining.
You can let Sen. Inhofe and the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, as well as all members of Congress, know what you think about public financing for Big Coal and misinformation here.
Get in the Game Senator Mikulski
Here’s a question: If you’re a legislator and you voted to strengthen a particular piece of legislation, and that piece of legislation later came under threat, wouldn’t you make an effort to protect it? The answer seems logical enough, but then again, as we all know, everyday logic doesn’t always apply to the world of politics.
How else would you explain Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski’s failure stand up to protect the Clean Air Act from the attacks that it’s recently come under from the likes of Lisa “Dirty Air” Murkowski? After all, as the Senate’s Legislation and Records site shows, Senator Mikulski voted for the 1990 amendments that strengthened the original 1970 Clean Air Act, ensuring that it had the teeth it needed to really bite into problems like acid rain. But now when opponents of climate action are trying to knock those same teeth out, Mikulski is standing on the sidelines. Continue reading
State legislators represent Commonwealth and leave the science to scientists!
The jury presented its verdict on climate change a long time ago. The science says our climate is changing and the results for Virginia and the planet will be catastrophic. The Supreme Court, the EPA, Virginia’s own Commission on Climate Change and even former President George Bush recognized the consequences of climate change.
Yet, amidst typos and lawsuits, today’s press conference a the state capitol in Richmond was a breath of fresh air. It is refreshing to see 19 members of General Assembly standing up for their constituents and allowing the science to speak for itself. The Science that tells us that Virginia is vulnerable to sea level rise, that the Hampton Roads area is ranked #2 in terms of vulnerability. Number one is New Orleans. These threats are real and Virginia is ready to address them head on.
I applaud Senators McEachin and Northam as well as Delegate McLellan for initiating today’s press conference and the other 16 state legislators that joined them to show their support for the science. Addressing climate change and diversifying our economy here in the Commonwealth is no easy task. It’s going to take forward thinking and leadership from Richmond to embrace our potential. It’s also going to take reasonable investments.
The big thing highlighted in today’s conference is the pure fiscal irresponsibility of our Attorney General’s lawsuit. He wants to slap tax payers with $250,000-$500,000 bill to pursue a frivolous lawsuit against the Federal Government, it’s lawyers and its environmental agency on an issue already decided by the Supreme Court. Given the state of Virginia’s economy this is just not acceptable and I am proud that so many legislators had the courage to stand up for their constituents health, the climate and the well-being of the Commonwealth.
Knock, Knock Senator Webb: Stand up for the Clean Air Act!
Today a group of Virginia climate change activists stopped by Senator Webb’s Falls Church district office to urge him to stand up for the Clean Air Act. Armed with hand-made signs and “Stop CO2” stickers, they talked to his staff about the importance of opposing the Murkowski Amendment. The amendment would block the Clean Air Act’s ability to limit global warming pollution by stripping the EPA of its authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
Despite already hearing from many of his constituents, Senator Webb is still considering supporting this crippling amendment. We delivered almost 100 more comments from clean air supporters today, and we have to keep the pressure on. Don’t wait to add your voice by calling his office today to tell him to stand up to big polluters and protect the Clean Air Act!
Would you want these kinds of benefits?
Late last week, after resolving a lawsuit by environmental and public health organizations, EPA officials announced that they have set a deadline for developing standards to limit mercury and other toxins emitted from coal-fired power plants by Nov. 16, 2011. According to the EPA, coal-fired plants in this country emit nearly 50 tons of mercury each year, or about a third of the nation’s total mercury emissions. Initially when the suit was filed last year, only 28% of coal plants used scrubbers for pollution controls. However, these scrubbers are creating another environmental problem: contaminated drinking water. According to an article in the New York Times, one of the biggest threats to our waterways is coal-fired power plants. Yet there are no federal regulations on the proper disposal of toxins from coal plants into waterways or landfills. The EPA announced earlier this week it will begin looking into the contamination effects of fly-ash, a coal by-product created when coal is burned.
In a report released by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation earlier this month, mercury emissions from the Old Dominion Electric Cooperative’s (ODEC) proposed coal-fired power plant for the Hampton Roads region in Surry County would further damage waterways leading into the Chesapeake Bay where state advisories are already posted due to the high levels of mercury contamination.
All of this comes on the heels of a report by the National Academy of Sciences stating that the annual cost of health issues related to emissions from coal-fired power plants was about $60 billion in the United States.
Surry County and the rest of the Chesapeake Bay community don’t need these kinds of “benefits”. Join us in saying NO to this plant.