Riceville, NC – Now folks can leave their mark on the Pisgah National Forest without having to lace up their boots. A new online survey invites forest users to weigh in on a recent Forest Service proposal in the Shope Creek area of Riceville.

Adjacent to the Asheville watershed and the Blue Ridge Parkway, Shope Creek provides excellent habitat for black bear and wild trout, but lacks sufficient public access. In April, the Forest Service proposed improving public access at Shope Creek, but the agency also included plans to log 68 acres and reconstruct five miles of forest roads, placing the entire 1,500 acre forest at risk.

“Shope Creek is Asheville’s best kept secret,” said Stan Cross, a resident of the area. “Those of us who use this amazing forest for recreation or hunting know how stunning it is. That’s why it’s critical that our community weighs in on this proposal—taking the survey is an important first step.”

Currently, the agency has provided limited information regarding their plans for Shope Creek. At the community’s request, Southern Appalachian Biodiversity Project (SABP) is assisting residents and forest users to develop an alternative proposal, which the Forest Service has agreed to consider. To help gauge community sentiment, SABP has designed a brief online survey that examines the various goals of the Shope Creek Project.

“We hope this survey gives folks an opportunity to consider the options for Shope Creek and perhaps offer up some common sense solutions that meet the Forest Service’s goals,” said SABP’s campaign coordinator, Chris Joyell.

Click here to complete the survey

Science Panel Finds Fault With Estimates of Coal Supply
By Matthew L. Wald

WASHINGTON, June 20 — The United States may not have nearly as much coal as is popularly believed, and mining the remaining resources may be more dangerous for workers and the environment than current operations, the National Academy of Sciences said in a report Wednesday.

With domestic production of oil, gas and uranium far below peaks, coal has been promoted by elected officials and energy experts as the only bright spot in the national fuel supply picture. But as Congress considers billions of dollars in aid for projects to make gasoline and diesel substitutes from coal, and to build coal-fired plants that would capture their own carbon emissions, the study said that estimates of coal reserves were unreliable.

“There is probably sufficient coal to meet the nation’s needs for more than 100 years at current rates of consumption,” the study said. “However, it is not possible to confirm the often-quoted assertion that there is a sufficient supply of coal for the next 250 years.”

The 250-year estimate was made in the 1970s and was based on the assumption that 25 percent of the coal that had been located was recoverable with current technology and at current prices, said one member of the study group, Edward S. Rubin, a professor of environmental engineering and science at Carnegie Mellon University.

But he said that more recent studies by the United States Geological Survey showed that at least in some areas, only 5 percent of the coal was recoverable with today’s technology and at current prices. The 100-year forecast was based on current consumption rates, about 1.1 billion tons a year. By 2030, the rate of coal consumption could be 70 percent higher or 50 percent lower than it is now, the study found.

The impact of carbon constraints, if the government imposes them, are not clear, members of the study program said. The new report, which was requested by Congress at the urging of senators from two coal-producing states, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, raises the possibility that taxes on carbon dioxide emissions will sharply lower the demand for coal.

It also points out that mining will increasingly occur above or below seams that have already been excavated, raising questions about safety and the disruption of underground water flows.

The federal government spends hundreds of millions of dollars a year to research ways to use coal cleanly and tens of millions on miner safety. But the committee said more research was needed to find better ways to mine coal, to estimate reserves and to store carbon dioxide captured from plants. Carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is a major factor contributing to climate change, scientists say.

Yesterday, Jeff Goodell was on NPR’s Fresh Air with Terry Gross discussing his book, Big Coal. Jeff Goodell is a contributing editor at Rolling Stone and a frequent contributor to the New York Times Magazine. His analysis of the power and peril of the coal industry is some of the best out there (not to mention extremely readable). Check out the broadcast here.

We’re making progress toward stopping mountaintop removal coal mining, but we need to ensure that Congress does not pass a bad energy bill that would increase America’s consumption of dirty coal. And right now, Congress is doing just that as it considers several bills that would offer BILLIONS of dollars in tax breaks and subsidies to promote the conversion of coal into liquid form for use as transportation fuel and chemicals. Now you can help by emailing your congressperson and senators here.

No sound way to turn coal into liquid gold
By Marquita K. Hill

I am beyond disappointed in Rep. Rick Boucher’s total embrace of the coal industry (June 5 editorial, “Billion-dollar boondoggle”).

Coal-to-liquid oil technology is expensive and harmful to the environment. Even if coal liquefaction could be environmentally justified, mountaintop removal mining to obtain that coal is enormously destructive of whole ecosystems, not to mention its negative impact on human lives.

If coal companies truly want to safely sequester carbon dioxide, let it be carbon dioxide produced by coal gasification technology, i.e., gasification to produce electricity, not liquefaction to produce oil.

And if coal companies have truly developed a sense of social responsibility, let them abandon radical strip mining and emphasize underground mining — taking great care to make it safe for their workers.

Liquefying coal to produce oil would not be economically viable without billions of dollars in subsidies. Clearly, that is what coal companies want — government subsidies.

Boucher’s mind is doubtless beyond changing. So, let’s contact Sens. Jim Webb and John Warner. Strongly urge them to oppose converting coal to liquid fuels.

Boucher’s bill would cause tremendous harm
By Brad Wood

Rep. Rick Boucher is drafting a bill to subsidize the coal industry’s scheme to construct plants that will convert coal into gasoline.

The subsidization of coal gasification during a worldwide global warming crisis is undiplomatic and irresponsible. Burning coal gas emits twice as much carbon into the atmosphere as diesel fuel, and even worse pollution is created during the gasification process.

Despite the “green” rhetoric coming from the coal industry, there is no such thing as clean coal. Even if carbon can one day be sequestered to the center of the Earth, extracting the coal will remain extremely detrimental to the environment.

With mountaintop removal mining (“stripping”), the cheapest and most harmful method of extraction, coal companies simply blow up the land and scoop out the coal from the ruins.

Mountaintop removal has transformed 500 miles of mountaintops to moonscapes (it takes 100 years for an inch of soil to return to a stripped site) and has buried more than 1,000 miles of streams in central Appalachia.

By bowing to King Coal and Mammon, Boucher and others will further devastate our tormented environment.

Instead of giving the hogs a second helping, he should be drafting a bill to assist the establishment of renewable energy industries.

Mine ponds ruled illegal – Judge deals second blow to coal industry by United States District Court
– By Ken Ward Jr.

Richmond, VA – Coal operators cannot evade the Clean Water Act by building sediment-treatment ponds just downstream from strip mine valley fills, a federal judge ruled Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge Robert C. Chambers essentially outlawed the common coal industry practice of turning small stream segments downstream from fills into waste treatment systems.

In a 26-page decision, Chambers concluded that the Clean Water Act protects parts of streams where mine operators traditionally build sediment-control ponds. The judge also said the law protects small segments of streams between those ponds and the bottom of valley fills.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Chambers declared, “has no authority under the Clean Water Act to permit the discharge of pollutants into these stream segments.”

Wednesday’s ruling is the second time in three months that Chambers has dealt a major blow to the coal industry with a ruling to more strictly regulate mountaintop removal mining.

. . .

Originally published in the Charleston Gazette in Charleston, WV. Click here to read the entire article.

In a process called mountaintop removal, the coal-mining industry blows off the tops of mountains with explosives to get at coal faster and cheaper, she said. As a result, surrounding areas are buried by pollution and waste, streams dry up and a soot lingers in the air, she said.So with the help of Google, the non-profit built a virtual “national memorial” for 470 topless mountains in the area—marked by half-mast flags—with information and guides on the process of mountaintop removal. The map layer, found in Google Earth’s “featured content,” also shows historic before and after aerial photos of the mountains; overlay comparisons to illustrate the scope of destruction; and links to first-hand stories and videos from the communities affected by mountaintop removal.

“This has revolutionized our thinking,” Hitt said here Wednesday at the Fifth International Symposium on Digital Earth. “It’s given us the ability to give the kind of tour of the mountains that we only could give previously to the media or government officials. This gives an audience of 200 million people,” she said.

. . .

Click here to read the full article.

By Carley Petesch
United Nations – A coalition of environmental groups called on the United Nations May 9 to take a stand against ecologically destructive coal mining practices in the Appalachians region of the U.S., saying that the federal and local governments were not paying attention. The groups from Tennessee, West Virginia and Kentucky asked the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development, which is holding its annual session through Saturday, to shun coal in favor of policies promoting renewable energy and cuts in fossil fuel consumption. The delegation told reporters outside the U.N. that coal extraction has destroyed more than a million acres (400,000 hectares) of forests, 500 mountains and 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) of streams in recent years in the Appalachians. “We need the help of the U.N. to expose and bring an end to coal mining abuses,” said Larry Gibson, a board member of the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition in Huntington, West Virginia.

Bill Caylor, the president of the Kentucky Coal Association, said the group was exaggerating the environmental effects of coal mining.

“We’re helping to develop the region,” he said. “They’re just a very emotional, anti-business group … taking their case to the United Nations, I think, is extremely inappropriate.”

Ann League, vice president of Save Our Cumberland Mountains of Lake City, Tennessee, said the groups were appealing to the U.N. because the U.S. and local governments had failed to address the problem.

More information

U.S. Forest Service chief visits Valdosta
[Georgia]

One traditionally doesn’t think of conservationists and foresters as having common interests, but as the pressures mount on both government and private landowners to develop and sell off natural resources once thought to be limitless, these two groups have found common ground in the interest of protecting the future of the land and the health of our communities. In an effort to educate private landowners, foresters, conservationists and others interested in learning more about protecting the state’s natural resources, the Georgia Conservancy invited Gail Kimbell, the chief of the U. S. Forest Service, as well as Robert Farris, interim director of the Georgia Forestry Commission, Paul Bradley, Georgia’s acting forest supervisor and Dr. Bob Warren of the University of Georgia’s Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources to speak to the challenges currently facing the state.

News notes are courtesy of Southern Forests Network News Notes
www.southernsustainableforests.org

Part 1
Part 2

But what about the Navajo, Hopi and Crow? Peabody destroyed the Black Mesa, a sacred place of worship for Native Americans in Northern Arizona. And the Washington Group uses Crow labor in the Absaloka mines of Montana, and gives nothing back to the reservation.

And about the people of Appalachia, people desperate for jobs and opportunity? Their land is literally crumbling around them as mountain top removal coal mining erodes more than just the landscape. A once self sufficient people have been raped of their resources. No farms can grow on the barren rock beds, and fish can not survive in streams inundated with toxic sediments. The little life remaining is subject to poor air quality, toxic water and constant removal of habitat.

It becomes obvious the coal companies desire profits at the expense of the poorest, most depressed regions of our country. And what does congress suggest? MORE! Yes, and it’s bi-partisan. Even democratic presidential candidate Barrack Obama has co-sponsored the senate bill advocating liquid coal. He is joined by four other senate democrats, who are supporting the bill with eight republicans. The house bill also has multiple co-sponsors from both parties.

Researchers at the MIT believe $70 billion would be needed to develop infrastructure for liquid coal, so it could be made available to the American masses. As legislators make one of the most important decisions for our future, they should think ahead, keeping in mind the cost and long term involvement with this project. And what happens when we’ve used all the coal?

Why not give our farmers subsidies for making renewable fuels instead of Fortune 1000 energy companies? After all, Rudolph Diesel developed his engines with the idea that they could all be sustained from a personal farm. The prototype ran on peanut oil and was made to run on plant oil derivatives. Mr. Diesel would be appalled at the current status of his invention, and having his name on every gas station billboard in America.

One person in Washington, D.C. does have it right. Senator Jeff Bingaman, D-NM, is drafting a bill supportive of renewable energy sources and not coal-to-liquids. A part of his proposed legislation would also ask energy companies to use renewable fuels for 15% of their production by 2020.