Comments on: Coal Lawsuit Puts EPA’s Moutaintop Removal Rules on Trial

By: Chin Moya

Chin Moya — Tue, 17 May 2011 07:22:29 +0000

Personally, I actually do such as the name, I believe it’s form of neat. I do think it’s just a little easier to say. I do believe these are being very in line with their products and I relate to them whenever the retail price preceding the name.But, like with other things, we all have our own individual preferences. Each to his or her own, I usually say. What’s your decision?

By: Daniel J. Andrews

Daniel J. Andrews — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:17:46 +0000

Can’t hurt, but it is a time-waster. All their arguments and counter-arguments are well known and have been rebutted to death, even from an economic perspective. Even the continued use of coal as an energy source is very costly in the long-run when the environmental impacts (e.g. acid rain, drinking water contamination) regardless of how the coal is removed.

The mining/coal industry has little problem with fabricating numbers, cherry-picking data, and generally sowing confusion in an effort to keep on with business as usual. Kind of hard to do the “teach the balance” thing with people who lie.

By: David H

David H — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:23:40 +0000

Jeff,

How about hearing them out anyway? Maybe we’ll learn something new. Maybe they will point out the expenses of this type of mining versus other types; maybe they’ll give their views about the engineering involved and how they believe it is the soundest method to retrieve this coal. Who knows? Maybe all of their arguments can be easily defeated. You could point out that there are less damaging mining methods that could be tried, that coal could be mined from other locations, etc. But why not listen to them, especially when the decisions you’re discussing will impact their lives more than anyone else’s? Can you imagine how you would feel if a coal company decided that it is going to turn your back yard into a mine and didn’t really care how you felt about it, that you’re opinions were really irrelevant since you are just some whiny tree-hugger anyway? Would that be fair? In that situation, you would probably think hearing from all sides is a good idea. Really, what can it hurt?

By: jeff

jeff — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:09:33 +0000

Why not hear arguments from the coal promoters in an article about environmental laws and practices? How about because they have a well known history of having fought tooth and nail to keep the clean air and water acts from being enacted, of buying off politicians , of destroying the habitat of both animals and humans with no thought to the harm caused in the pursuit of greater wealth for the mine owners who have knowingly poisoned millions of acres of land, strip mined other peoples property without recompense and who do not care what filth you, your children or your grandchildern have to live in as long as the dollars keep flowing into their coffers. Hmm… We want better outcomes from our energy production ,not more of the same robber barony from our past.

By: David H

David H — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 09:32:29 +0000

This is a rather one sided piece. I can agree that these mines are potential environmental disasters, but this article was hardly balanced, like a scientific discussion should be. It provides three extensive quotes from sources opposing the practice and one from a source discussing one opponent’s political campaign. No quotes from anyone on the other side. The article’s author merely summarizes his/her view of the other side as being nothing more than partisan politics. Can’t we hear the other side’s argument? Is it too dangerous to expose us to it? Just dismissing one side of the debate as irrelevant is hardly the way science should be conducted. Aren’t the energy and the jobs produced by these mines worthy of consideration? If in the end it is decided that the environmental damage outweighs the economic gain, then so be it. By why not let both sides present their cases evenly?

By: Plaid

Plaid — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 12:58:29 +0000

Dear mountain killing coal companies: the more I learn about your companies , the more I prefer you all close down and all the miners go on public assistance. We love the mountains, and I’d love to take my grandkids there, so knock it off. The era of big business ignoring the earth is over. Not to mention, I, and most other people, prefer to have clean air to breathe and clean water to drink.

By: Rhacodactylus

Rhacodactylus — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 20:54:56 +0000

Regardless of the environmental impacts of this procedure, they clearly didn't consult a PR guy when they came up with the name; there's just no way to spin "mountaintop removal" as a positive. ~Rhaco