Mountain Top Removal Part Deux

After we watched 30 Days in class (though I missed it, I was able to catch up through the discussion) I decided I might revisist my thoughts on mountain top removal.  Mountain top removal is basically what it sounds like-- you take the top off of a mountain.  After that, you are free to take the coal from the mountain.  The downsides: it takes less workers, thus leaving miners (who have no other prospects) unemployed, and it is detrimental to the environment.  The upside: it costs less (according to some estimates) and it causes far less fatalities (this is also contested as people die from drinking water contamination due to the crude nature of mining).

After the mining disaster in the beginning of April, I was forced to rethink my stance on mountain top removal, and at first I began to support it.  I believe I was mistaken.  On the one hand, the prospect of fewer tragedies like those at the Upper Big Branch mine is enticing.  At the same time, I have to imagine that there are many more people dying quietly from the effects of contaminated drinking water.  I think that what we need is to move to nuclear power.  Not only is it relatively safer (though there have been fatalities), it is much better for the environment.

Wind farms and solar panels are simply not efficient enoug, so we will need to end up with some sort of waste.  Thus, our only true choice is to cut back.