Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Its often a tough call, it would be nice if the removal was out of close sight of major highways. I have done a lot of back packing and I value the inherent beauty of the great outdoors. I also happen to believe that we have to encourage mining and manufacturing unless we want to live like a third world country.
As long as the mining company can replace enough top soil and some trees, when they are done, for nature to heal itself, then I encourage mining.
They undo millions of years of geologic development causing a blight upon the landscape and pollution to the rivers, streams and other bodies of water. They do this just so they can extract the same soft coal which contributes to acid rain and climate change while employing only a handful of workers who are able to run the colossal machines used in permanently defacing the ancient terrain.
They undo millions of years of geologic development causing a blight upon the landscape and pollution to the rivers, streams and other bodies of water. They do this just so they can extract the same soft coal which contributes to acid rain and climate change while employing only a handful of workers who are able to run the colossal machines used in permanently defacing the ancient terrain.
In lieu of burning coal for energy, you propose what?
The practice is absolutely horrible and if you are a conservationist you should be against it. The burying of ENITRE WATERSHEDS, polluted water tables, the devastation of forests and soils are not worth it in the least. It leaves communities MORE IMPOVERISHED as the overall quality of life declines. Eastern Kentucky is among the poorest regions in the US so you can't make the argument that reliance on coal has been a good thing at all. I have talked to many locals in areas impacted by MTR and the MAJORITY are against it- even considering employment it provides.
Absolutely not. If Massey had its way it would level more mountains and leave the rural population even more impoverished. It's a never ending downward spiral.
I am a retired machinist and farmer,avid fisherman and consider myself to be kind of a tree huger.I have live around these hills all my life and love them from the top to the bottom.As long as we all use electricity at the rate we do now the same amount of coal is going to come out of the ground to feed them until at some time another form of energy is used to produce the electricity.These opinions are my own from watching mining for over fifty years.There is less overburden pushed into the hollows for each ton of coal produced from mountain top removal than if they just go around the hill and leave the top.Mountain top removal a lot of the time leaves large flat areas of land which in time can become productive pasture land or forest or even land to build on.No matter how strip mining is done it leaves an ugly mess until it is reclaimed and has time for vegetation to grow back.Wish we didn't have strip mining but as long as we do it should be done the most productive way.
Jake
In lieu of burning coal for energy, you propose what?
Not sure & that's certainly debatable, but E KY should start diversifying itself instead of relying so much on coal for their bread n butter. Look to E TN as an example for this.
Point is, using coal for energy is not going to last forever & it's on the outs. Once it happens, you're basically gonna be left with no economy & a once beautiful landscape that's been torn to shreds.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.