Army Corps clamps down on debris dumping by mountaintop coal-mining operations

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American



On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Surface coal mining—the controversial procedure that levels mountaintops and pollutes streams in the quest for the nation’s dirtiest fossil fuel—will face stricter rules under the Obama administration.

Since 1982, coal-mining operations in the U.S. have been able to dump rubble in pristine streams without undergoing the typical environmental review and public comment period required under the Clean Water Act.  This morning, the Army Corps of Engineers announced plans to suspend this streamlined nationwide permit program, called NWP 21, which affects a large fraction of permits issued in Appalachia.

“By getting rid of nationwide permits, it will hopefully slow the process down and make it more open,” says Tierra Curry, a biologist at the Center for Biological Diversity in Portland, Ore.  Although she is pleased with the regulations, she says they don’t go far enough. Earlier this spring, after the administration said it had plans to scrutinize individual permits more closely, it proceeded to approve 42 of 48 new mountaintop removal permits. “That’s the most permits than have been approved in years,” she observes.

Teri Blanton of Kentuckians for the Commonwealth also welcomed the proposal, but worried that it would grandfather in some 100 pending permits in Kentucky. “Thirteen miles of stream are slated to be buried on the north fork of the Kentucky river,” she says. “I really hope they do individual permits and take the cumulative impact into account.”

The Corps will issue a final decision in the fall, following a public comment period.

In related news, the Associated Press reports that mountaintop mining operation Massey Energy, has obtained a court order barring protesters from returning to the site. Last month NASA researcher James Hansen and other protesters were arrested at a Massey processing plant in West Virginia.

Image of West Virginia mining operation courtesy rachelmolenda via Flickr

Brendan Borrell is a freelance journalist based in Brooklyn, New York. He writes for Bloomberg Businessweek, Nature, Outside, Scientific American, and many other publications, and is the co-author (with ecologist Manuel Molles) of the textbook Environment: Science, Issues, Solutions. He traveled to Brazil with the support of the Mongabay Special Reporting Initiative. Follow him on Twitter @bborrell.

More by Brendan Borrell

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe