Buried in Coal Ash?

After yet another coal ash spill, is there anything that can be done to deal with the toxic waste? David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The U.S. burns 900 million metric tons of coal per year. The combustion produces billions of tons of CO2, but also more than 100 million metric tons of coal ash, which includes nasty stuff like mercury and lead.

There's so much coal ash that it's hard to find places to put it. It ends up in old coal mines. It ends up in cement. It even ends up in farmer's fields.

But most often it’s put into dumps near coal-fired power plants. These ponds and landfills have a tendency to fail—witness the coal ash collapse into Lake Michigan this week or the big spill in December 2008 that annihilated a swath of the Emory and Clinch rivers in Tennessee.


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.


The EPA is studying which coal ash piles are most dangerous. At the same time, coal companies and electric utilities are fighting proposed EPA rules that might class coal ash as hazardous waste, since that would make disposal more expensive.

Of course, the only way to truly solve the coal ash problem is to stop burning coal. Which makes the elimination of coal ash yet another reason to invest in the development of alternative energy.

—David Biello

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

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