With politicians suddenly falling all over themselves to say something about Massey Energy and Marsh Fork Elementary School, I thought I’d check in with my friend Gov. Joe Manchin on this issue.
Recall that I asked the governor back in July 2005 if he would feel comfortable sending his grandchildren to the school, located just down the hollow from a huge slurry impoundment. Manchin answered:
I don’t know enough. I haven’t been there. I don’t know enough about the site.
So, I contacted Matt Turner, the governor’s communications director, and asked him to put the question to Manchin again. Here’s what he told me via e-mail:
I don’t think you can question Gov. Manchin’s record when it comes to the health and welfare of our state’s children — their health and safety are always the top priority.
That said, the governor would never send any child to a school that isn’t safe, sound or sanitary. We rely on experts to examine building conditions and to make those determinations.
Subscribe to the Coal Tattoo
you’d think after 4 years,he’d gone down an inspected it hisself.i don’t know where his top priorities are for kids,but it sure isn’t the top.i’d also like to know just who his experts are.
“That said, the governor would never send any child to a school that isn’t safe, sound or sanitary. We rely on experts to examine building conditions and to make those determinations.”
That said, Gov Joes’ expert made sure the heating and cooling system were working properly. When asked about testing for chemicals in the dust his expert said(paraphrased)
” There’s a bizillion different chemicals, which ones would you test for?”
The school and the preparation plant with refuse impoundment was there in 1992 when Massey purchased this property from Peabody, the original owner and builder of the mine complex.
So what if the school and the preparation plant with the refuse impoundment was there in 1992. If Peabody still owned property today, a new school would still need to be built for these children at Marsh Fork Elementary School.
This is my opinion, but I believe that Peabody would have been co-operative in getting a new school built. Time changes things, and also the sludge dam gets bigger and more dangerous with time.
I don’t understand why people on Little Coal River have always been given the shaft by the School Board in Beckley, and also our leaders in Charleston.
It is as the people in the Southern part of the state don’t exist. The coal barons would have you believe that only the mountains that they want to do mountain top removal mining on are there, but no people live within miles of these sites.
God knows they exist, and have lived there for many years, and raised families and paid taxes just as the other people in other parts of West Virginia have done.
Thanks Gene for answering that … I was away from my computer and hadn’t been able to get back to Scott 14’s inquiry yet …
though I think his quest was actually on a different thread. I’ll provide a little more information here …
Basic background on the permitting history of this site is available in the Supreme Court’s decision in the Goals Coal silo case, here:
http://www.state.wv.us/wvsca/docs/spring09/34138.htm
I think that Massey actually took over the permits from Peabody in 1994. See this story, http://www.wvgazette.com/News/MiningtheMountains/200507160003.
It’s also important to note that Massey has enlarged the impoundment numerous times since taking over the site.
Ken.
I attended that school when it was Marsh Fork Jr. High back in 1966 and 67 and there was a great community and relatives living there where the dam is now. The community was Shumates Branch. It is true that Armco and Peabody was the first to start small operations but when Massey took over they greatly expanded the dam and encroached further on the school. Whether it is Armco, Peabody or Massey, there should never be mining operations that close to a school. When children are gathered together at one place, that place must be safe. It is sad how people become accustomed to being near strange and/or unsafe practices/things and then dismiss it because it has been there so long.
The point is that for at least 3 years, people from WV and all over the country have called, written and emailed this governor about the Marsh Fork Elementary School. Ignorance is no excuse. As close as it is to Charleston and he has never been to the school to see for himself. Manchin didn’t seem to have too much trouble making 2 trips to Washington (one with Blankenship in tow) to ask the EPA to not do their job.
This sad state of affairs will continue until public campaign finance is enacted.
Manchin has made trips all over the place. Anywhere the coal industry meets it seems that Manchin is always free to go meet with them. However he never seems to have the time to meet the coalfield residents. He always sends out Turner to talk for him when we are concerned.
Joe Manchin on Marsh Fork Elementary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jqENyow0cQ
Manchin has always claimed he doesn’t have the authority to get the kids a new school. Oddly, though, he has the authority to set up a series of football games, has the authority to travel all around the world promoting the WV coal industry, has the authority to lobby the EPA on behalf of the coal industry, has the authority to direct the DEP to go gently on the coal industry, and has the authority to get a lavish remodeling at his Manchin Mansion.
Way back when Ken reported on the state board of education’s Bill Elswick’s unqualified “air quality investigations.” The Center for Health, Environment, and Justice reviewed the results and stated that they provided “meaningless information” and “do not provide the ‘thorough investigation’ requested by the Governor.”
Governor Manchin was provided CHEJ’s assessment of Elswick’s test and chose to ignore it. Ken, I’m emailing you the CHEJ letter for your use, if you don’t already have it. CRMW provided this information to the press in 2005.
What is it specifically that is unsafe about this impoundment? Given all of the regulatory required monitoring surely this can be identified. Or is it that all impoundments, and coal mining in general, should be abandoned?
Casey — Here’ s something to consider. The level of monitoring is really not so good.
Here’s what happens when you go out and do a more thorough test: http://www.wvablue.com/diary/5102/all-north-carolina-coal-ash-ponds-are-leaking-toxic-pollution-to-groundwater
There’s a lot of “don’t ask, don’t tell” in current monitoring. The regulatory bodies are setup for the government to be able to say it is doing something but to also say (much to the satisfaction of politicians and industry) that all is well. Given how many people are ready to “shoot the messenger”, no one wants to find a problem that’s expensive to remedy on their watch.
Much better than monitoring a threat to public safety is eliminating it. Wet storage is a ticking time bomb–damns will inevitably fail. The TVA has decided to eliminate all wet coal ash impoundments and move only to dry storage. (http://wdef.com/news/tva_plans_conversion_of_all_wet_coal_ash_storage_facilities_to_dry/09/2009 ) It is an expensive undertaking, but much cheaper in the long run than dealing with catastrophic failures.
Casey, it’s important to note that this dam is operated by the same company that operated the Martin County KY sludge dam, which had disasters in 1994 and again in 2000, after MSHA said it was okay. The “required monitoring” is simple cursory visual inspection, of which Massey has had several violations at this dam. Ken Ward and Dan Heyman have both done some extensive pieces on this.
And making the leap from getting a new school for the kids to abandoning coal is logically comparable to selling your car because you have a low tire. There are dry press methods of processing coal that would place the community in far less danger, but increases the companies cost a tiny bit.
Ultimately, we will not burn coal for electricity (you can only burn it once and there’s a limited amount left–20 years or less in WV). All electricity will be generated by renewable sources (wind, solar, etc.) or nuclear (not good either). We need to make the transition to renewables now and not wait until the coal’s gone. Projects such as the Coal River Mountain Wind project would be a great start www.coalriverwind.org), but our “leaders” refuse to support it.
Dam monitoring is more than visual and includes piezometer readings. Failures of impoundments (or dry storage fills) can result from elevated water saturation levels in the dam (the dam is designed to leak). Professional engineers lay their career on the line when they certify these dams. The Martin County failure was not of the dam but of a short circuit of the impoundment into an adjacent underground mine.
I understand the emotions associated with the school’s location and perhaps the best course of action may be to relocate. But I think the real reasoning behind the push by most is the hope and desire as Vernon states for “all electricity will be generated by renewable sources”.
Let’s hope that all dam engineers and dam construction personnel, along with the dam inspectors, do a dam good job.
Vernon, I think your projections of 20 years or less of coal left in wv, is a little short. On our mine site alone we have 300 million proven and recoverable reserves. At current production levels, and assuming we can wrestle permits away from the courts. We have 60 years of coal on our job alone. As for the coal river moutain wind project. Im all for it. Go find some private investors and buy the property from massey and start your wind farm. It seems to me that you could work with massey and they would re-grade the land after they mine it to 1 provide the interstructure for the turbines.2 work with engineers to design the slopes to funnel the wind toward the turbines. Steps such as these would use the moutains total energy potental.
scott 14 – Maybe I missed it when you mentioned it before, but what site would you be talking about?
I think you may be over-estimating the role of “the courts” and underestimating other market forces.
How is the sulfur content of the coal there? Have you calculated that into the market competitiveness of WVa coal?
I’ve noticed that even West Virginia electricity plants are starting to import coal from Western states. Are you seeing more price competition from PRB coal as transportation routes further open up from there to the East?
Massey doe not own all the land on Coal River Mountain, most of that land has Rowland Land Company’s name on the deed. Please go to coalriverwind.org and read. There should be studies that prove that once the mountain is surface mined and lowered, the potential for industrial strength wind generation is gone and the land is unstable for the industrial size turbines. The coal industry gets plenty of corporate welfare and there is no reason why there should not be help provided for a push to set up a wind farm that would provide clean, safe, energy and jobs forever there on Coal River Mountain. Coal can only be mined and burned once. Regardless of the amount of coal left, at current use, even Congressman Rahall has talked about 20 years of good coal left. The easy to get , good coal is almost gone.
Ms Bonds. Can you please explain just what corporate welfare coal companys get that other campanys dont get. As for the land owner of coal river mountian. What do you propose, a goverment land grab. The taking of private land for the so called public good? If the windfarm is such a money maker as your group has suggested then you would have investors beating a trail to you door. Clem, I would like to tell you our mine site but I dont want to be responsable for trespassers chaining themselves to our equipment or people camping in trees on the property line.Rest assured that if we can economicly permit and mine the property then this mine will be around a lot longer than this blog. Our coal runs in the 12.5 to 14.0 btu range with a .8 to 1.5 lbs so2. Certain areas of the reserve are less in sulfer than others. I hadnt heard of pbr coal comming into this state. With all of the permiting problems it doesnt surprise me. With scrubbers being installed along the ohio river valley and all through the south. Northern app and central app coal will be burnt for along time in the east. Also a lot of mid western coal is now attractive due to favorable geology for longwall mining that coal is more of a challange to app coal than pbr coal is.