Zinke reopens Federal land coal mining

go4thegusto

Senior Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
1,016
Location
Fargo ND
Yes, pretty much. Just read some of this last night. Coal has been on a slide for 40 years, way before becoming politicized. There are now more than 20 fold the amount of jobs in natural gas, wind, solar and other alternative energies. Coal needs a follow-up arrow...it has the dying quivers no matter which team thinks they are in power.

Lets destroy some more ground in order to speak to a few in the angry Trump base. These guys are knuckleheads and in the end market forces will win. Another coal powered power plant just went offline last week. Excel Energy announced a huge wind farm this week. Critical thinking industry leaders are ignoring this temporary Alt-Right making noise in Washington.
 

WyoBowhunter21

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
1,519
Location
Casper, Wyoming
Normally I would say yes but due to my state going under due to what has happened with coal I would say no. I am hoping it can be done in moderation and maturely so that we can utilize all public resources. Coal is one of the cheapest forms of energy we have so to continue the lifestyle we love that will be the best source. Natural gas is becoming more efficient and a good source of energy but in my mind it is best used for heating and cooking. Coal has come a long ways since the 30s and 40s. Look at kentuckys elk population and how it has benefited from coal mining. I may sound silly but I would rather see a coal mine than a wind turbine. Without coal we may turn into a energy poor economy further blustering the economy. This is just my thoughts and take it for that.
 

Ntgm37

Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Messages
74
Location
Wyoming
Not to mention that our smog is worse than Los Angeles due to the natural gas mining in South western Wyoming. Wyoming has been hit HARD since Obama cut the coal. Not saying it's answer, but it helps Wyoming and Montana alot.
 

dotman

1
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
8,206
I would rather see limited resource extraction on federal lands then see lands sold off. Long after the coal mining is gone hopefully it comes back to its once natural state for future generations to explore. Mining still needs some regulations so that we don't ruin the ground but it all needs to be sensible. We need to obtain resources efficiently in an inexpensive manner that still does not pollute the ground such as the old gold and copper mines of past have. Hopefully our lessons learned in the past will allow for some common sense regulations.

In a perfect world it would be great if we could leave all public lands untouched and only for wildlife without any road access but we don't live in a perfect world. I have a feeling we are at a point where we'll have to compromise with some resource extraction to save our access to public lands. I'd be ok with allowing for timber harvests to be allowed again to not only help out our economy but help recreate healthy forests for future generations.
 
Last edited:

texans42

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
1,119
Yes, pretty much. Just read some of this last night. Coal has been on a slide for 40 years, way before becoming politicized. There are now more than 20 fold the amount of jobs in natural gas, wind, solar and other alternative energies. Coal needs a follow-up arrow...it has the dying quivers no matter which team thinks they are in power.

Lets destroy some more ground in order to speak to a few in the angry Trump base. These guys are knuckleheads and in the end market forces will win. Another coal powered power plant just went offline last week. Excel Energy announced a huge wind farm this week. Critical thinking industry leaders are ignoring this temporary Alt-Right making noise in Washington.
Wind farms only work well in a few parts of the country. Winds are also seasonal and few place have true consistent night winds.


If coal is out then it won't be leased, probably has more todo with what's coming down the pipeline.

"Zinke signed two other directives Wednesday to implement Trump's policy. One kicks off a two-year review of the fees and royalties that companies pay to produce energy like oil, natural gas, coal or renewables on federal land, to see if they're fair to lessees and taxpayers, and establishes an advisory committee, including stakeholders, to help that process."
 

COSA

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
181
Location
Montana
Done responsibly, mining reclamation areas typically support increased numbers of ungulates. Mining has had gotten a bad rap from some past bad practices decades ago, and in many cases rightfully so. Current mining practices and regulations are much stricter, and support excellent habitat for wildlife. There are several reclamation areas that are the primary wintering grounds for bighorn sheep, elk, & deer populations. I'm in no way saying that our pristine areas should be mined, but if you use cars, computers, concrete, electricity, petroleum, or anything else that can't be grown; then where? Kind of like rich Hollywood actors complaining about global warming while they fly across the globe in their private jets & yachts...
 
OP
B

brocksw

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
621
Location
North Dakota
I know there is a lot of talk about responsible mining and reclamation practices, along with strict regulation but the Republican Party introduced H.R. 861. This is a bill to completely terminate the Environmental Protection Agency in 2018. The EPA is the agency that would enforce and regulate those responsible mining and reclamation practices. I guess if HR 861 goes through, we'll get a first hand look at what the energy corporations have in store for our public lands. Just a reminder... These are the same lobbyists and corporations that supported selling off the public lands.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

dotman

1
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
8,206
I know there is a lot of talk about responsible mining and reclamation practices, along with strict regulation but the Republican Party introduced H.R. 861. This is a bill to completely terminate the Environmental Protection Agency in 2018. The EPA is the agency that would enforce and regulate those responsible mining and reclamation practices. I guess if HR 861 goes through, we'll get a first hand look at what the energy corporations have in store for our public lands. Just a reminder... These are the same lobbyists and corporations that supported selling off the public lands.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
I'm ok with getting rid of the EPA, let Congress set the regulations. The EPA is way too powerful and started to overstep what it was created for. It also was not an unbiased common sense government deptartment. We can implement regulations and still apply enforcement in other ways such as through the department of interior.
 

HookUp

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
688
I'm ok with getting rid of the EPA, let Congress set the regulations. The EPA is way too powerful and started to overstep what it was created for. It also was not an unbiased common sense government deptartment. We can implement regulations and still apply enforcement in other ways such as through the department of interior.
States have laws in some cases stricter than the EPA. The entire notion that citizens and state governments don't care about there environment is false. People are much more involved and in tune with what is happening with their power, food and resources. While I am not sure I agree with elimination the EPA's role should be reduced and revised.
 
OP
B

brocksw

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
621
Location
North Dakota
I'm ok with getting rid of the EPA, let Congress set the regulations. The EPA is way too powerful and started to overstep what it was created for. It also was not an unbiased common sense government deptartment. We can implement regulations and still apply enforcement in other ways such as through the department of interior.
I could agree that the EPA has been inefficient and certainly added to a bloated bureaucracy. However, I don't believe letting Congress have more control is any better. In fact, I believe it may be worse. Let's not forget that this Congress is in the pocket of many of these large corporations and they will set regulation and make laws that are in the best interest of those corporations. I concur that the EPA has gone a little to far to the left in terms of political agenda... But I think that's a good example of having balance. Once an EPA is removed the scale tips too far to the right and corporatism is free to run rampant. Balance is needed and the state and local governments will not have as much say as one might think when it comes to federal land. I'm in the Oil and Gas industry and I see first hand how little say the state has in energy development on federal land, how inefficient and slow the EPA can be, and how the forest service is really the only organization that's fighting for the wellbeing and preservation of the lands themselves and not for profit or agenda.

We must not forget that the states typically profit via taxes when energy industries are doing their thing. This can cloud judgement and is one of the reasons we as outdoors enthusiasts have been against the transfer of federal land to the states.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

dotman

1
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
8,206
I could agree that the EPA has been inefficient and certainly added to a bloated bureaucracy. However, I don't believe letting Congress have more control is any better. In fact, I believe it may be worse. Let's not forget that this Congress is in the pocket of many of these large corporations and they will set regulation and make laws that are in the best interest of those corporations. I concur that the EPA has gone a little to far to the left in terms of political agenda... But I think that's a good example of having balance. Once an EPA is removed the scale tips too far to the right and corporatism is free to run rampant. Balance is needed.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
And that is why we vote, we need to keep Congress in check. People need to not sit back and think they can do nothing. We have a voice and social media has made it loud and clear, also, being a member in organizations that support your beliefs helps.

It's time to speak our minds and reduce crappy government initiatives and bring back a smaller more efficient and responsible government.
 

idig4au

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2012
Messages
467
Location
Back to Central Asia again...
Done responsibly, mining reclamation areas typically support increased numbers of ungulates. Mining has had gotten a bad rap from some past bad practices decades ago, and in many cases rightfully so. Current mining practices and regulations are much stricter, and support excellent habitat for wildlife. There are several reclamation areas that are the primary wintering grounds for bighorn sheep, elk, & deer populations. I'm in no way saying that our pristine areas should be mined, but if you use cars, computers, concrete, electricity, petroleum, or anything else that can't be grown; then where? Kind of like rich Hollywood actors complaining about global warming while they fly across the globe in their private jets & yachts...
A great educated post! Refreshing! Thanks! Mining and responsible extraction of natural resources is the back bone of any flourishing economy.

If it's not grown, then it has to be mined.
 
OP
B

brocksw

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
621
Location
North Dakota
And that is why we vote, we need to keep Congress in check. People need to not sit back and think they can do nothing. We have a voice and social media has made it loud and clear, also, being a member in organizations that support your beliefs helps.

It's time to speak our minds and reduce crappy government initiatives and bring back a smaller more efficient and responsible government.
Some true words there. My only comment would be of constant vigilance. Smaller government has some real benefits and is the way it should be. However, with the neoliberal movement in the past 30 years a small government can just mean there is a snake in the grass. Corporations have a lot of power in this country, more than anyone is willing to admit. So while a government may get smaller in terms of number agencies, number of employees or dollars spent, it may not necessarily be a clear picture of what's going on. Corporations are just another branch of the government, and no matter how small our government gets, they don't get any smaller.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
OP
B

brocksw

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
621
Location
North Dakota
Done responsibly, mining reclamation areas typically support increased numbers of ungulates. Mining has had gotten a bad rap from some past bad practices decades ago, and in many cases rightfully so. Current mining practices and regulations are much stricter, and support excellent habitat for wildlife. There are several reclamation areas that are the primary wintering grounds for bighorn sheep, elk, & deer populations. I'm in no way saying that our pristine areas should be mined, but if you use cars, computers, concrete, electricity, petroleum, or anything else that can't be grown; then where? Kind of like rich Hollywood actors complaining about global warming while they fly across the globe in their private jets & yachts...
I believe the EPA could take a little credit for some of those improved mining and reclamation practices. Some regulation is needed.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

wildcat33

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2015
Messages
352
Location
Lakewood, CO
The viability of coal is all about economics. The price of coal has been on the slide for a long time now. Global demand is diminishing, hell even china is cutting back on burning coal. The only rank doing any good is coking coal. Reclamation is a romantic idea but the west (and probably the east, but Ive never been there) is littered with legacy mining projects waiting to be reclaimed. Sure modern projects are bonded for closure costs, but what happens when a new coal project goes bankrupt in 5 years because commodity prices continued to slide and the economics were marginal to begin with??? Traditionally it was the EPA. See the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, but even that has lacked the proper funding to do what needs to be done. The gold king mine and the Animas River headwaters are prime examples.

If we don't look at "energy independence" rhetoric with a critical eye, I think there is the potential to be fooled. I love mining (strip mining does in fact prevent forest fires), but we need sportsmans, conservation groups, and the EPA to be our counter force so that the doling out of our resources is in fact done to the benefit of everyone.
 

tkaldahl2000

Junior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2016
Messages
33
Location
Hardin, MT
Some true words there. My only comment would be of constant vigilance. Smaller government has some real benefits and is the way it should be. However, with the neoliberal movement in the past 30 years a small government can just mean there is a snake in the grass. Corporations have a lot of power in this country, more than anyone is willing to admit. So while a government may get smaller in terms of number agencies, number of employees or dollars spent, it may not necessarily be a clear picture of what's going on.

Corporations are just another branch of the government,

and no matter how small our government gets, they don't get any smaller.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Did you mean that government is just another branch of the corporations?
 

Trial153

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
4,330
Location
NY
Well, we do have a corporate government partnership right unlike the world has ever seen, so much so we are in danger of losing our republic.
 

KurtR

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
731
Location
South Dakota
I know there is a lot of talk about responsible mining and reclamation practices, along with strict regulation but the Republican Party introduced H.R. 861. This is a bill to completely terminate the Environmental Protection Agency in 2018. The EPA is the agency that would enforce and regulate those responsible mining and reclamation practices. I guess if HR 861 goes through, we'll get a first hand look at what the energy corporations have in store for our public lands. Just a reminder... These are the same lobbyists and corporations that supported selling off the public lands.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
The epa has little to nothing to do with mining that is MSHA the mining saftey and heath administration. They are the ones who check air quality and every thing else that has to do with either surface or under ground mining. They are also the ones who make sure reclamation is done in a certain time. If not fines are a lot. They come at a minimum 2 times a year to inspect every mine. Having dealt with them and the epa they make the epa guys look like your best buddies the msha guys are very serious and are not afraid to levy some serious fines.
 
Top