(07-28-2019, 10:08 AM)MalabarJag Wrote:

(07-28-2019, 09:39 AM)mikesez Wrote: I find that line of argumentation to be so insincere.
If coal waste doesn't belong in streams, then it doesn't matter which level of government says so.
look at the science and the consequences and decide if it's acceptable to dump coal waste in streams or not.
Don't expect a document that was written before people were ever mining coal to have much to say about how to manage that activity for the benefit of everyone in society.

---

First comment: A better argument would be if the coal waste was carried by the streams to other states. If it's just a local matter then the decision should be made locally as to the trade off between energy/jobs vs. pollution. The Federal government has a history of treating every drainage ditch as a protected wetland.

there's more to think about than how far the waste might be carried when it rains.
The coal itself is going to be sold across state lines. And every supplier will play a role in setting the price. If a supplier in West Virginia can put their waste wherever they want, but a supplier in Virginia can put it only in certain well regulated places, the supplier in West Virginia will have more profit and, it won't be long before all the coal mining jobs will go to West Virginia. Is this fair to the coal miners in Virginia? Is it even fair to the miners in West Virginia? Guess who has to live next to those polluted streams and bathe in the polluted groundwater? Is it the regulators in Charleston, or the miners themselves, living outside Beckley? Should the coal miners in Virginia have to debase themselves in the same fashion before they can get jobs?
What I am saying is that there is a proper venue to impose certain minimum standards of living and dignity. It's usually a local level, but not always.

---