The Clean Water Protection Act, H.R. 1310 was introduced by Congressman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) on March 4, 2009 and amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) to define “fill material” to mean any pollutant that replaces portions of waters of the United States with dry land or that changes the bottom elevation of a water body for any purpose and to exclude any pollutant discharged into the water primarily to dispose of waste.
For years, the Clean Water Act allowed for the granting of permits to place ‘fill material’ into waters of the United States, provided that the primary purpose of the ‘filling’ was not for waste disposal. The intention was to prevent industries such as coal mining from using the nation’s waterways as waste disposal sites. That changed in 2002, when the Army Corps of Engineers, without Congressional approval, altered its longstanding definition of ‘fill material’ to include mining waste. This change accelerated the devastating practice of mountaintop removal coal mining and the destruction of more than 1,200 miles of Appalachian streams.
H.R. 1310 restores the original intent of the Clean Water Act to clarify that fill material cannot be comprised of mining waste. The legislation has 154 cosponsors and has bipartisan support.
Unofficial transcript on mountaintop removal question:
I think everybody acknowledges it, the President has said it, everybody we talk to acknowledges that there are serious impacts associated with mountaintop mining and we have to address that. Going forward we have to look at what we can do under existing authority to strengthen the oversight of these projects and to see that we are using those authorities fully to try to address the environmental impacts of mountaintop mining. So, does it mean fewer projects? I don’t know the answer to that. But it will mean that we will deal with the environmental impacts of those projects.
If that is the question, then the answer is easy. Dealing with the environmental impacts of mountaintop removal means there will be fewer projects. In fact, it means there will be zero mountaintop removal projects. No amount of regulation can make it environmentally sound, economically practical, or ecologically beneficial to blast the tops of of our mountains and dump the waste into our streams. Dealing with the environmental impacts of mountaintop removal means that we stop the practice. Its that simple.
Last week, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed eliminating a streamlined permitting process — known as Nationwide Permit 21, or NWP 21– which allows coal companies to seek quick approval for their mountaintop removal coal mining projects.
Roughly one-third of mountaintop removal coal mining projects are permitted under nationwide permits, which means that eliminating the streamlined rule will help slow the pace of destruction in Appalachia.
The Army Corps of Engineers is accepting public comments for the next 30 days on its proposal, and they need to hear from you.
Please take a moment to tell the Corps that you support ending the streamlined permitting process for mountaintop removal coal projects:
While the Army Corps of Engineer’s proposal needs to be adopted, it doesn’t go far enough.
After all, when it comes to blowing up our most treasured mountains and destroying the communities of Appalachia, we don’t need better regulations to slow the pace of destruction — we need to just stop the destruction all together.
In the video, you’ll hear from Eagan resident Carol Judy, who talks about a ten mile strip above her home where “the mountain has disappeared.”
Think about that. 10 miles of mountaintop — gone forever. And the area below the mountains is equally devastated.
As Carol points out in the video, mountaintop removal coal mining has damaged the ecological foundation that supports the roots she digs in the woods near her home. And the damage extends far beyond the holler where she lives, because destroying the mountains destroys the water and air purification systems that even people living hundreds of miles away in urban areas rely upon.
As Len Brewer, a former surface miner in Eagan puts it, “We’ve made our living, but we’ve destroyed the very place that we love.”
Click here to watch the latest America’s Most Endangered Mountains video. Then, take a moment to forward the video on to your friends and family.
As the people from Eagan make clear, continuing to destroy the place we love is no longer an option. The Army Corps of Engineers should eliminate the streamlined permitting process — but the Obama administration should step up to the plate and end mountaintop removal coal mining altogether.
As many of you know, yesterday the Army Corps announced that they would be moving forward with suspending the Nationwide Permit 21(NWP 21) process for mountaintop removal and valleyfill operations for Appalachian states. Instead, the Army Corps will be using a slightly more in-depth “individual permitting process” in their review of Section 404 Clean Water Act permits. Notably, the individual permits will include a period of public comment for individual projects. This is a step in the right direction for Appalachian communities and something that many coalfield groups – including members of the Alliance for Appalachia – have been fighting for for many years.
However, one of the main concerns (discussed in Ken Ward’s article below) is that the Corps will continue to allow the use of the NWP 21 permits until a final decision is reached, even though they acknowledge that NWP 21 permits are not sufficient for assessing impacts from large-scale mining operations like mountaintop removal.
The official notice is here, and Ken Ward has a handy summary over at Coal Tattoo.
It sounds like a funny question, but – if you’re burning coal for energy – all tons are not created equal. The value of coal comes not from the raw tonnage, but from the heat content of that coal. The higher the heat content, the fewer tons you have to burn to get the same amount of energy.
Appalachia has been mined for coal for centuries, and everyday we are mining deeper, thinner seams of poorer quality coal. The declining heat content means we have to dig even more coal just to produce the same amount of energy we used to.
Heat content is measured in “British Thermal Units,” or “Btu”s for short. Using data from the Energy Information Administration (and some admittedly poor graph-making skills in Microsoft Word) we can see that the heat content (Btu/ton) of a ton of coal has been steadily in decline for the last several decades.
Ever miss the wondrous liner notes from your old LP’s?
An extraordinary new album, “Still Moving Mountains: The Journey Home,” just released with one of the finest showcases of musical talents from the Appalachian coalfields, has gone one step further: Accompanied by a multimedia website the album includes a map and search engine that allows listeners to see the setting of a song or mining and environmental issue, scroll through photographs, videos, and interviews, and learn ways to become involved in local coalfield citizens groups.
For producer Jen Osha, founder and director of Aurora Lights, the West Virginia-based nonprofit cultural organization formed to raise awareness of the impacts of mountaintop removal coal mining, the album also takes the next step in the coalfield justice movement by focusing on renewable energy and the preservation of the beauty of the Appalachian mountains and heritage.
This just might be the most powerful soundtrack and organizing tool for the coalfield justice and climate change movements today.
Congressman Kennedy said these words earlier this year when speaking to a group of Appalachian citizens, and I hope we can all keep them close to heart:
Unfortunately, we live in a culture that places a value on human beings according to how much money they have. If you happen to be wealthy, you must have done a great job and you deserve everything you get. That’s what our culture tells us. And you know what? After a while, you start to believe it.
And if our culture tells people who are poor in this country that they are worthless enough times, it’s not surprising that after awhile people begin to believe it. They start to internalize that they don’t deserve a voice, and they shouldn’t fight the big corporations who are destroying their land and taking all of their natural resources. They start to accept that companies are making all this money at their expense and dumping all the refuse in their backyard.
It’s quite extraordinary to see it happen. Frankly, it’s the part of our society and its culture that needs to change the most. We’ve got to pass laws. But moreover we’ve got to change the culture.
That’s what Dr. King created in the civil rights movement. He understood very fundamentally that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights. Dr. King understood that we were all worth something. And then he said, “We need everybody to be part of this in order for this to work.” Dr. King didn’t just go to the preachers. He reached beyond the powerful few and enlisted every person in America who believed the time for justice and equality was now. Everybody had a role to play. People weren’t waiting for someone else to do the job.
There are people out there who fought and died to make this country a better place. They did it because they knew this was about making our country a land of opportunity where everybody could live.
Right now this isn’t a land of opportunity if our most basic natural resources, which belong to everybody, are being polluted and torn apart. Instead of being stewards of our future and preserving our natural commons, we are absolutely despoiling them for future generations. We need to do better than that. And we have an opportunity to pass on a much better future to our children.
I’d like to thank all of you for what you are doing to make this movement so much deeper in meaning. It’s a great effort that you’re undertaking. It’s much more than legislating. It’s about educating people that we learn who we are as a people through nature. It is part of our whole culture as a country.
It is impossible to overstate the support the Kennedys have given to the people of Appalachia over many many generations, and our thoughts and prayers are certainly with Congressman Kennedy and his family during this turbulent time for them. He remains one of my heroes and a true advocate for change in Washington, DC and we wish them all the best.
Representative Marcia Fudge, 2nd term Democratic congresswoman from Ohio’s 11th district became the 154th (including Rep. Pallone) cosponsor of the Clean Water Protection Act. Ms. Fudge serves on the Education & Labor and Science & Technology committee’s. Rep. Fudge is the 30th member of the Congressional Black Caucus to become a cosponsor of the Clean Water Protection Act!
Rep. Lloyd Dogget (D-TX25) is serving his 8th term in the U.S. House of Representatives. Mr. Dogget serves on the Budget & Ways and Means committee’s. He is the 155th cosponsor of the Clean Water Protection Act, and was also a cosponsor in the 110th congress.
Hats off to all of the folks out there that made this happen.
MORE THAN 8,000 NEW CLEAN ENERGY JOBS POSSIBLE
IN KENTUCKY, ACCORDING TO NEW REPORT
Investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy show higher job potential than in new coal facilities.
A projected 8,750 new jobs in the energy efficiency and renewable energy sectors, spread out over 87 Kentucky counties, could be created in the next three years according to a new report by the Ochs Center for Metropolitan Studies. The job creation would be possible through investments by the East Kentucky Power Cooperative (EKPC) in such clean energy measures, rather than in its proposed Smith coal fired power plant.
“Economic modeling data show enormous potential for job creation in the areas of home weatherization, hydroelectric dams, solar hot water, heating, cooling and much more,” said David Eichenthal, President of the Ochs Center, a Chattanooga-based data analysis and policy research organization. “EKPC would be doing Kentuckians a great service by enabling such job growth while providing their members with clean, reliable electricity.”
Several Kentucky environmental and economic justice organizations and an increasing number of co-op utility members are encouraging EKPC to abandon its plans for the $766 million Smith plant and instead increase investments in energy efficiency programs and renewable energy such as from wind, solar and hydro sources. A study released in May by Synapse Energy Economy Inc. showed that diversification of EKPC’s energy sources will help protect co-op utility customers from higher costs of coal and coal burning facilities.
“We already know that energy efficiency and clean renewable energy are good for our health, good for the environment and make good economic sense,” said Elizabeth Crowe with the Kentucky Environmental Foundation. “When you add in data on new clean energy jobs and economic growth throughout the region and compare it all to the risks of a new coal burning power plant, the choice is clear: EKPC should abandon its plans for the Smith plant and instead invest in clean energy.”
Key findings in the Ochs Center report include:
There is potential of 8,750 new jobs from clean energy and efficiency programs throughout the EKPC service area over a three year period;
Investments in efficiency and renewable energy would have a total economic impact of more than $1.7 billion on the region’s economy; and
Clean energy jobs could be realized much more quickly than jobs from the Smith plant, since plant construction may be years away.
Besides creating a greater number of sorely-needed jobs, the energy efficiency and renewable energy portfolio in the Ochs Center report has a projected cost of $62.10 per megawatt hour, compared to most recent cost estimate for the Smith plant of $74.73 per megawatt hour.
“Kentucky is fertile ground for new jobs in the area of renewable energy,” said Andy McDonald of the Kentucky Solar Partnership. “There are a lot of people already trained in solar hot water installation, and many more people all over the state who are interested in being trained and put to work. These are safe, solid, community-based jobs that can’t be shipped overseas, and that help people save money by conserving electricity.”
McDonald said that renewable energy and energy efficiency projects are not just concentrated in one place as with power plants. “EKPC could be a catalyst for creating green jobs all over the state, benefiting their members and the communities in which they serve,” he said.
“I have serious concerns about the proposed Smith 1 Power Plant and believe there’s an alternative that will be better for the environment, less costly to co-op members, and far more beneficial economically,” said Rachel Harrod, a long-time resident of Owen County and a member of the Owen Electric Co-op. “I can’t tell you how significant this would be to an area that has lost much of its agricultural base in recent years. The jobs generated by a clean energy portfolio would be a welcome boost to our local economy,” she said.
Harrod continued, “If EKPC indeed wishes to do what’s best for the region it serves, it will abandon plans for the new Smith Power Plant and proceed with the sustainable, clean energy approach.”
Ken Ward Jr. of the Charleston Gazette reports on his Coal Tattoo blog:
Tomorrow’s edition of the Federal Register (available here by the magic of the Internet) will include this notice from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, making good on part of the Obama administration’s plans for dealing with mountaintop removal coal mining.
As outlined last month, the Corps is proposing to eliminate the use of its streamlined permit process — in this case Nationwide Permit 21, or NWP 21 — for the approval of surface coal mining in Appalachia.
But the new Federal Register notice includes at least one twist that has critics of the Corps (and of mountaintop removal) a little concerned … I’ll get to that in a minute.
I’ve mentioned before that a federal judge already has told the government to stop using this streamlined permit procedure, at least in Southern West Virginia, where most mountaintop removal mining is taking place. Oddly, the Obama administration, while saying it wants to do away with NWP 21 for this kind of mining, also filed a notice that it would appeal that court decision.
.
.
.
Tomorrow’s notice kicks off a 30-day comment period on the Corps’ proposals.
The notice includes a very straightforward statement from the federal government about the impacts of mountaintop removal that have environmental regulators concerned:
AAEA opposes mountaintop removal.
