Mining Into Destruction Of The United States

Naturally historic, beautiful and entertaining, the Appalachian Mountains have long represented a place where life could be lived simply. It is a different lifestyle with its own charm. It is a place where time seems to slow down, and where no population has perfected the skills quite like the friendly people of these storied mountains.

There are many factors that contribute to Idaho’s pollution problem, but mining may be the biggest. Mining is a huge industry in Idaho, hence the nickname “The Gem State”. The biggest product from Idaho’s mines is silver. Silver mines are some of the largest polluters in the state. Bunker Hill, or Silver Valley, as the Coeur d’Alene region is known for its numerous mines, was recently named a Superfund site. A Superfund site is a site under protection for removal of toxic wastes by the EPA. Although that beautiful valley was also once known for its abundant wildlife, now the rivers are flooded with phosphorous, selenium, zinc, lead, silver, cadmium, and arsenic, all from tailings of several mines in the region. Lake Coeur d’Alene now contains over 70 million tons of toxic waste sediments in its bottom. This pollution has endangered people in the area for years. In Smelterville, where a smelter ran for nearly 100 years, a large number of people have been diagnosed with health complications caused by extremely high levels of lead and other toxins in their blood. These conditions, for most, have existed nearly all their lives. Many remember being ill for most of their childhood and on. In 1973, before the smelter was closed, the average lead toxin level per deciliter of blood in children tested was 70. A reading of 10 is considered high alert. Rocky Hill, who grew up in Smelterville and

In Jan. 2011, the EPA decided to veto the dumping of waste from the Spruce No. 1 Mine. But the agency’s efforts have so far been rebuffed by the courts as an overreach: Under the weird legal regime that governs mining, it’s the Army Corps of Engineers, not the EPA, which has the ultimate say-so over those permits. In 2012, the D.C. district court ruled that EPA lacked authority to veto the permit after the Corps had issued it. However, in fact EPA's decision is based on evidence from scientific research on serious environmental harm from mining. In May 2013, a coalition of Appalachian and environmental groups petitioned the EPA to set a numeric water quality standard under the Clean Water Act to protect streams from pollution caused by mountaintop removal mining . They claimed that “State politics and industry pressure have so far failed to end this pollution without such a standard and more and more streams and communities who rely on those waters are left vulnerable. We need EPA to act now.” The EPA’s authority over the Clean Water Act in respect to Spruce Mine No. 1 was finally affirmed by the Supreme Court in March 2014.

I would have to say that from the reading that it can be very harmful for the coal mining chemicals to seep into the ground into our drinking water.

Are you for coal or against coal? Maybe better yet, are you for the preservation of the mountains and nature or are you against it? These questions held such a deep meaning and understanding that on the surface seemed immaterial to large corporations such as the Coal Mining Industry or political leaders within the State of West Virginia. Combating Mountaintop Removal by Bryan McNeil gives us the views of what it looks like from a grassroots environmental activist within the West Virginia coal country. In the book you see how the social and moral arguments are framed from different agents such as the Ant-MTRM (Mountain top removal) organization, the Coal Miners and Union works, to the Coal Mining Companies, and finally the State through political

Wisconsin has a long tradition of being at the forefront of environmental protection. From having pristine national forests, clear water, and tough environmental regulations to keep our forests pristine and water clear. Now, in the 21st Century, Wisconsin is losing that right due to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Walker is a big proponent for a mine in the Penokee Hills. The Penokee Hills are located in Northern Wisconsin, in Iron County, just south of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Ojibwe Reservation. This mine would have been an iron mine, one of the world’s largest open pit mine. The problem with this mine is it would have destroyed most of the Penokee Hills, the environment around it, and polluted everything around it, including

Coal in the United States has long been the #1 producer of energy. Massive seams of coal are found in the Appalachian Mountains, and our reliance on this fossil fuel has meant devastation for many mountain residents and over 500 mountains. As our society advances, the need for more energy advances. What were once beautiful rolling hills are now flattened plateaus reminiscent of a landscape you would see in the desert. We as a nation have only short-term interest in our environment, and choose to ignore the many warning signs this planet continues to offer us. Left in our path of destruction are the many residents of Appalachia and a landscape that begs us for forgiveness.

Some argue that, economically, the mining operation will be a net gain in money for the working class and that 75 to 80 percent of the jobs in northern Minnesota will be local [1]. However, for the project to fully go through, it requires “$200 million to $400 million in financial protections, and would overall be a financial liability for taxpayers” [2]. So despite how many jobs the project will create, it could result in a net loss of money for the people living in that area. Another problem that PolyMet thinks they have solved is the mass amount of pollution that will surface during the mining process. They say they will “use the most advanced mining procedures to extract the materials and prevent pollution during the mines 20 year life” [3]. Not only is this solution incredibly vague in its description, but many argue that “the pollution will be a problem long after the mine plays out and PolyMet is gone. The latest studies shows a possibility that the mine’s wastewater could flow north to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness” [3]. The argument that advanced procedures would be used against pollution falls short of satisfactory when their description is so ill-defined.

Have you ever thought about how your able to use a TV or lamp? There are people who have to work in mines or around dangerous machinery just so we can have that privilege. Thousands of miners and other people have been killed because of coal mining. Coal mining has brought some good thought taxes and jobs created. The most important effects of coal mining on the state of West Virginia are thousands of jobs being created, coal affecting West Virginia economically, and coal being used for energy.

There is an ongoing battle over the everlasting debate of mountain top removal mining. With every object at the center of a controversy there are bound to be many arguments by all sides. Most arguments are biased and others lack efficient sources or credibility to obtain a reasonable conclusion. This paper will dissect all angles of the meaningful arguments and help develop a conclusion on the aspects of mountain top removal mining and its effects to its surrounding environments.

Coal mining, in particular, strip mining has become the latest casualty of the growing green movement in the United States. What is strip mining? Encyclopædia Britannica Online defines strip mining as the removal of vegetation, soil, and rock above a layer of coal, followed by the removal of the coal itself (“strip”). Most Americans don’t realize the impact this material of biological origin that can be used as a source of energy (“fossil”), or fossil fuel, has on their everyday lives or the nation’s economy. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the mining industry directly employs some fifty thousand Americans with nearly half that number working in the more specific field of strip mining, or mountain top removal

Of all the values plaguing Montana socially and environmentally, the issue of mining plays the greatest role in the state. Although recognized as being one of the largest pillars of Montana’s economy, mining poses a serious threat to the ecosystems surrounding it. The main problem within this industry is that after mining takes places, there are many toxic materials, like arsenic and zinc, that remain in the waste rock and tailings. These toxic substances are harmful to people as well as wildlife and once they enter the groundwater, rivers, or soil, they become a very serious health hazard. Currently, there are government regulations for all mining companies that assure none are participating in these harmful practices. Although many new companies

Virginia is most known for it’s biggest economy, industry and agriculture. The main agricultural resource is Tobacco. Tobacco is important to Virginian farmers because Virginia gets thirty percent of its money from tobacco. In addition tobacco is mined in ninety- three percent of Virginia’s farms. Some say that tobacco should represent the state but beneath the mountains of southwestern Virginia, situates a mineral so valuable to Virginians, this mineral's name is coal. Coal is very valuable to Virginia since much of the US don’t have many coal mines so Virginia can sell some for money. However, coal is very dangerous. In the past there was a disease that many coal miners died from because they had been breathing bad air

(Dolley, 2011) According to Wisconsin’s center for investigative journalism, there are currently 131 mining sites that have been permitted or proposed in Wisconsin. All of this mining has caused some concern from many people in the area. Concerns about health risks, traffic, and property value are at the top of the list. With 65% of the sand being transported to its destination by truck, there is much concern of the noise from the trucks near homes and businesses, as well as the impact that all of the traffic could have on the roads. (Dolley, 2011)

An environmentalist named Robert F. Kennedy wrote an article in 2009 for the Financial Times in which he said that the United States must end its “dependence on deadly, destructive coal” (Bryce 58). “Acid rain, airborne particulates, water pollution, and air pollution are just