In this photo released by the Xinhua news agency, men gather near a coal mine where a fire occurred on Monday night in Xinmi City in Zhengzhou, capital of central China’s Henan province, on Tuesday March 16, 2010. The electrical fire at the illegal coal mine in central China has left 25 people dead, the latest fatal accident to rock the country’s mining industry. (AP Photo/Xinhua, Zhao Peng)

Twenty-five workers were killed earlier this week in a coal-mine fire in central China. Four top local government officials and three mine inspection officials were fired after the incident. According to China Daily, the mine had resumed production without obtaining a license.

There’s been an interesting story going on out west, where Arch Coal expanded its reserve base in the Powder River Basin, by successfully bidding $85.8 million for the right to mine 8,300 acers of state-owned coal in southeastern Montana.

The Billings Gazette had a story about how money from the state lease might — and might not — be used.

Northern Rockies Rising Tide activist Genevieve Schroder is removed from the State Land Board meeting in the capitol building Thursday, March 18, 2010 in Helena, Montana by Helena Police Department officers after refusing to leave. The five Missoula residents arrested moved out of the audience and on to the floor in front of the board after chanting with other protestors “Hands off Otter Creek! You’re not listening!” as secretary of state Linda McCulloch moved to approve leasing of the state-owned Otter Creek coal. (AP Photo/The Independent Record, Eliza Wiley)

But there were also protesters at the meeting. Members of Northern Rockies Rising Tide argued that moving forward on Otter Creek would open the door to a major coal industry expansion and lead to poisoned rivers and the disruption of rural communities.

Back east, coal industry supporters had a rally of their own down in Louisville, Ky., to criticize EPA efforts to more closely regulate mining and greenhouse gas emissions.

But in Washington, D.C., opponents of mountaintop removal held their own elaborate protest outside EPA headquarters. Here’s a photo of that:

Adrian Wilson, sits atop of giant tripod as he joins other protesters outside EPA headquarters in Washington, Thursday, March 18, 2010. The group was protesting in hopes of getting the EPA to stop mountaintop removal coal mining (AP photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

The protest prompted an interesting Greenwire piece (brought to use by The New York Times) and a Huffington Post blog piece in which Jeff Biggers again went after EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson for not visiting Appalachia to see mountaintop removal for herself.

A couple of interesting points about this … Jeff noted that Administrator Jackson “tweeted” about the protest, saying:

People are here today expressing views on MTM, a critical issue to our country. Theyre concerned abt human health & water quality & so am I

And now, there’s this whole Twitter campaign against Jackson, aimed at pushing her to make the trip to the coalfields. Now, I’m on Twitter, as many Coal Tattoo readers know, and I’ve found learning this method of communicating interesting and challenging. But I’ve noticed that Lisa Jackson is mostly no different from other government officials and politicians who tweet … their feeds are mostly one-sided, and they don’t really engage in discussion as much as make pronouncements from on high. I am no expert, but I don’t think that’s what social networking is all about.

Another thing is that Jackson’s press secretary is quoted a couple places making similar remarks about what EPA’s role is concerning mountaintop removal. There’s this from that Greenwire story:

Adora Andy, spokeswoman for EPA, said both today’s protest and the Senate report are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of EPA’s role. The agency, she said, does not determine how much mining goes on in Appalachia, it is responsible for ensuring that projects comply with the Clean Water Act.

“First and most important, EPA has no problem with coal, nor do we regulate mining,” Andy said. “EPA does have a big problem with coal pollution in our waters, and we intend to do our job under the law by protecting the water Americans drink, swim in and fish from.”

Instead of “holding up” permits, Andy said, EPA is working with coal companies and the Army Corps to reduce the amount of waste dumped or the number of valleys filled.

Then, there’s this from Jeff Biggers’ post:

But, according Adora Andy, spokeswoman for EPA, today’s protest “is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of EPA’s role. Adora went on to explain that the EPA does not regulate the mining industry, but is only “responsible for ensuring that projects comply with the Clean Water Act.”

Jeff says Adora Andy and EPA have it all wrong:

And here’s the real fundamental misunderstanding: Mountaintop removal, which provides only 8 percent of our national coal production, is a needless crime–one of the most egregious human rights and environmental violations today. If mountaintop removal waste-dumping operations are in clear violation of the Clean Water Act, as panels of scientists and the EPA and Jackson have noted, then MTR or MTM operations still remain in violation of the Clean Water Act, even if the EPA and Army Corp strike a compromise to reduce the amount of waste dumped.

OK … not let’s be clear: EPA’s legal authority over mountaintop removal (and other types of coal mining) does come from the Clean Water Act. But the idea you get from Adora Andy’s quotes — that all EPA is supposed to do is see if the discharges comply with water quality standards — ignores some important parts of EPA’s Clean Water Act authority.

In particular, EPA’s authority to block the Corps of Engineers from issuing “dredge-and-fill” permits for burying streams goes beyond that. EPA can veto Corps permits whenever it determines that the activity proposed to be permitted:

… Will have an unacceptable adverse effect on municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery areas (including spawning and breeding areas), wildlife, or recreational areas.

Maybe that’s a bit of a nit to pick with my good friend Adora Andy, but it’s important that folks in the coalfields who are trying to follow what EPA’s up to understand just what EPA’s authority is and isn’t.

And with that in mind, there’s something in Jeff’s HuffPost blog that is worth clarifying as well … He wrote this about what Jackson has said EPA is doing or is going to do:

Following a nearly 40-year policy, Lisa Jackson thinks she can “minimize” and regulate the impact of mountaintop removal, despite the overwhelming evidence by a recent scientific study that, “the science is so overwhelming that the only conclusion that one can reach is that mountaintop mining needs to be stopped.”

But it’s worth noting that the most recent words out of Lisa Jackson’s own mouth went farther, even if only a tiny bit:

I’m really proud of the fact that EPA has stepped forward and said we’re going to review each and every one of these outstanding permits to try to minimize, if not end, any environmental degradation to the water.

Anyway, back to other coal news and commentary … Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., weighed in again on climate change,with an op-ed in The State Journal about legislation to block EPA from regulating greenhouse gases.

Meanwhile, Greenwire had details of what may be the latest version of a climate change and energy bill to hit Congress, and Joe Romm at Climate Progress had commentary on those details.

This entry was posted on Friday, March 19, 2010 at 4:00 pm and is filed under Media coverage. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.