The Effect of Eastern Kentucky Coal Fires on Local Air Quality and Personal Health
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Coal Mine Water Pollution: an Acid Problem with Murky Solutions J
Kentucky Law Journal Volume 64 | Issue 3 Article 3 1976 Coal Mine Water Pollution: An Acid Problem With Murky Solutions J. T. Begley Appalachian Research and Defense Fund of Kentucky John Philip Williams East Tennessee Research Corporation Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj Part of the Environmental Law Commons, and the Water Law Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Begley, J. T. and Williams, John Philip (1976) "Coal Mine Water Pollution: An Acid Problem With Murky Solutions," Kentucky Law Journal: Vol. 64 : Iss. 3 , Article 3. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj/vol64/iss3/3 This Symposium Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kentucky Law Journal by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Coal Mine Water Pollution: an Acid Problem With Murky Solutions By J. T. BEGLEY* and JOHN PHILIP WILLIAMS** I. INTRODUCTION Since 1973 the American public has been bombarded by news of the "energy crisis" and the need for "national energy independence." This public awareness of energy needs has spurred the creation of a new federal agency, the Federal En- ergy Administration (FEA), which has initiated "Project Inde- pendence," a national program designed to achieve energy in- dependence for the United States in the 1980's.1 In speeches throughout the country, FEA officials have declared that to achieve this goal our country must double its annual coal pro- duction. -
Table 9. Major U.S. Coal Mines, 2019
Table 9. Major U.S. Coal Mines, 2020 Rank Mine Name / Operating Company Mine Type State Production (short tons) 1 North Antelope Rochelle Mine / Peabody Powder River Mining LLC Surface Wyoming 66,111,840 2 Black Thunder / Thunder Basin Coal Company LLC Surface Wyoming 50,188,766 3 Antelope Coal Mine / Navajo Transitional Energy Com Surface Wyoming 19,809,826 4 Freedom Mine / The Coteau Properties Company Surface North Dakota 12,592,297 5 Eagle Butte Mine / Eagle Specialty Materials LLC Surface Wyoming 12,303,698 6 Caballo Mine / Peabody Caballo Mining, LLC Surface Wyoming 11,626,318 7 Belle Ayr Mine / Eagle Specialty Materials LLC Surface Wyoming 11,174,953 8 Kosse Strip / Luminant Mining Company LLC Surface Texas 10,104,901 9 Cordero Rojo Mine / Navajo Transitional Energy Com Surface Wyoming 9,773,845 10 Buckskin Mine / Buckskin Mining Company Surface Wyoming 9,699,282 11 Spring Creek Coal Company / Navajo Transitional Energy Com Surface Montana 9,513,255 12 Rawhide Mine / Peabody Caballo Mining, LLC Surface Wyoming 9,494,090 13 River View Mine / River View Coal LLC Underground Kentucky 9,412,068 14 Marshall County Mine / Marshall County Coal Resources Underground West Virginia 8,854,604 15 Bailey Mine / Consol Pennsylvania Coal Company Underground Pennsylvania 8,668,477 16 Falkirk Mine / Falkirk Mining Company Surface North Dakota 7,261,161 17 Mc#1 Mine / M-Class Mining LLC Underground Illinois 7,196,444 18 Tunnel Ridge Mine / Tunnel Ridge, LLC Underground West Virginia 6,756,696 19 Lively Grove Mine / Prairie State Generating Company -
Kentucky Ground-Water Quality
KENTUCKY GROUND-WATER QUALITY By James L. Kiesler, Lloyd H. Woosley, Jr., and Robert W. Davis U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 87-0727 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director - For additional information: For sale by: Chief Hydrologist U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section 407 National Center Federal Center Reston, VA 22092 Box 25425 Denver, Colorado 80225 Use of trade names in this report is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey FOREWORD This report contains summary information on ground-water quality in one of the 50 States, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands, Saipan, Guam, and American Samoa. The material is extracted from the manuscript of the 1986 National Water Summary, and with the exception of the illustrations, which will be reproduced in multi-color in the 1986 National Water Summary, the format and content of this report is identical to the State ground-water-quality descriptions to be published in the 1986 National Water Summary. Release of this information before formal publication in the 1986 National Water Summary permits the earliest access by the public. Contents Ground-Water Quality .................................................. 1 Water-Quality in Principal Aquifers ...................................... 1 Background Water Quality ......................................... 1 Alluvial Aquifer .............................................. 2 Tertiary and Cretaceous Aquifers ............................... 2 Pennsylvanian Aquifer System ................................. 2 Mississippian Aquifer System .................................. 2 Ordovician Aquifer System .................................... 2 Effects of Land Use on Water Quality ................................ 3 Waste Management and Chemical Storage ..................... 3 Mineral Development ........................................ -
REFERENCE GUIDE to Treatment Technologies for Mining-Influenced Water
REFERENCE GUIDE to Treatment Technologies for Mining-Influenced Water March 2014 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation EPA 542-R-14-001 Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................................... 5 Notice and Disclaimer..................................................................................................................... 7 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 9 Passive Technologies Technology: Anoxic Limestone Drains ........................................................................................ 11 Technology: Successive Alkalinity Producing Systems (SAPS).................................................. 16 Technology: Aluminator© ............................................................................................................ 19 Technology: Constructed Wetlands .............................................................................................. 23 Technology: Biochemical Reactors ............................................................................................. -
Title:Kentucky Coal, Reclamation And
Kentucky Coal, Reclamation and Subsidence Title: Kentucky Coal, Reclamation and Subsidence Level: Secondary Day/Time: One class period or Homework assignment KERA Goals:1.2, 5.3, 6.3 Background Information: Every day, Kentuckians benefit from one of the coal industry’s most notable, environmentally significant achievements – the successful reclamation of mined lands. And chances are, they do not even know it. That is because most of the reclamation achieved by the coal industry is "invisible." Reclamation means returning the land to its original condition or other productive use. Unless there is a sign or other form of identification nearby, it is difficult to tell that a reclaimed site was once an active coal mine. Careful mining of our land benefits people in two ways: as a source of plentiful and reasonably priced coal and as reclaimed, productive, attractive and useful areas. Whether turned into a state park, a housing development, wildlife preserves or simply returned to productive farmland, reclaimed sites represent the coal industry’s commitment to a sound environment. Even though coal production has increased substantially over the past decade, the impact of this activity on the environment has been minimal. In Kentucky, coal is mined by one of two methods– surface mining or underground mining. Surface mining is the extraction of coal by first removing the soil, rock and other materials lying above the natural deposits. Underground mining is the extraction of coal by underground excavation of the coal deposits. For underground mining, special effort is devoted to constructing the mine and the mining plan in such a way that undesirable surface effect are minimized. -
Coal and Coal Mining in Washington
State of Washington ARTHUR B. LANGLIE, Governor Department of Conservation and Development ED DAVIS , Director DIVISION OF MINES AND MINING SHELDON L. GLOVER, Supervisor • Report of Investigations No. 4 Coal and Coal Mining in Washington By STEPHEN H. GREEN OLYMPIA STA1'E PRINTING PL ANT 19'1 (' CONTENTS Page Foreword .. 3 Introduction . • . 5 Selected bibliography . 6 Historical . 7 Coal areas of the State. 8 :Northwestern Washington ..................................... 8 King County . 9 Pierce County . 10 Southwestern Washington ..................................... 11 Kittitas County .. ............ .. ........................... 11 Anthracite . 12 Whatcom County ............................ .................... 12 Lewis County ........ ................... ....................... 13 Coal production ..................................... .. ..... ........ 18 Coal mining methods.. 20 Coke industry ...... ·.... -· ................ , ......... : ................ 16 Conditions affecting mining.. 20 Carbonization and hydrogenation of coal. ............................... 17 Fuel briquets . 16 :New prospects and developments.. 41 Present status of the coal mining industry ............................... 24 Properties operating in 1943. 25 King County . 26 Kittitas County . 38 Lewis County . 36 Pierce County . 33 Thurston County . 35 Whatcom County .......................... ..... ................ 25 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Map showing principal coal areas of Washington ........ Facing 8 Figure 2. Graph of production 1860-1942, inclusive . -
Health Impact Assessment of Coal and Clean Energy Options in Kentucky
Health Impact Assessment of Coal and Clean Energy Options in Kentucky A Report from Kentucky Environmental Foundation By Elizabeth Walker, PhD Deborah Payne, MPH Acknowledgements The authors thankfully acknowledge the following experts for reviews and comments on drafts of this report: Carla Baumann, MSN, RN Philip Curd, M.D., MSPH Richard Futrell, PhD Michael Hendryx, PhD David Mannino, MD John Patterson, MD, MSPH Monica Unseld, PhD Any remaining errors are entirely our own. The authors also thank contributions of interviews carried out by students of Berea College’s Health in Appalachia course (HEA/APS 210), Fall 2010 and 2011. About Kentucky Environmental Foundation: The Kentucky Environmental Foundation (KEF) is a non-pro!t organization dedicated to securing solutions to environmental problems in a manner, which safeguards human health, promotes environmental justice, preserves ecological systems and encourages sustainability. Design and layout: Rob Gorstein Graphic Design, Inc. i Health Impact Assessment of Coal and Clean Energy Options in Kentucky Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................3 Health Impacts of Coal Mining ............................................................................................5 1. Surface mining ...........................................................................................................6 -
Kentucky Geological Survey Earth ResourcesOur Common Wealth
Kentucky Geological Survey Earth ResourcesOur Common Wealth Annual Report 19992000 Annual Report 19992000 Cover Illustrations 2 1 3 4 6 5 7 À Quartz-pebble conglomerate from Cumberland Falls. Photo by Stephen Greb. Á Portion of geologic map of Harrodsburg 30 x 60 minute quadrangle, by Thomas Sparks, Garland Dever, and Warren Anderson. Â Karst landscape in central Kentucky. Photo by Deanna Davis, Barrys Photography. Ã Polished core from the CambrianOrdovician Knox Group in Cumberland County. Photo by Lyle VanHorne and Patrick Gooding. Ä Kentucky agate. Photo by Collie Rulo. Å Sandstone bluff in Carter Caves State Park. Photo by Douglas Reynolds Jr. Æ Big South Fork of the Cumberland River, McCreary County. Photo by Brandon Nuttall. Earth ResourcesOur Common Wealth Kentucky Geological Survey Annual Report 19992000 228 Mining and Mineral Resources Building University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 859.257.5500 fax 859.257.1147 www.uky.edu/KGS Project Manager and Writer: Carol Ruthven Editor: Margaret Luther Smath Designer: Collie Rulo Contents 1 Directors Desk 2 Energy and Minerals for Our Economy 8 Clean Air and Water for Our Quality of Life 14 Helping Our Communities Become Resistant to Natural Disasters 18 Enhancing Access to Geologic Maps and Data for Our Citizens 22 Upholding a Tradition of Quality Public Service 25 Mentoring Future Geologists 27 Recognizing Excellence in Research and Public Service 28 New Publications 30 Active Research Projects 32 Staff Roster State Geologists 18382000 1838: William W. Mather, State Geologist. No organizational structure. 183953: No organizational structure; no State Geologist. 185460: First Survey. David Dale Owen, State Geologist, 185457; Robert Peter, State Chemist, supervised the activities of the office from 185760. -
UK Mining Engineering: Over a Century of History
Mining Engineering Volume 03, Issue 1, Summer 2009 UK Mining Engineering: Over a Century of History During the fall a single college and the program converted of 2008, the to the Department of Mining and Metallurgy. UK Mining Department of Engineering The separate mining department was closed Mining Engineering in 1968, and the program became a specialty 230 Mining & Mineral Foundation celebrated its area in the Department of Civil Engineering. Resources Building In the later part of the 1970s, a large national Lexington, KY 40506-0107 25th anniversary. demand for mining engineers developed Phone: (859) 257-8026 During this event Fax: (859) 323-1962 it was noted that as a result of the energy crisis. In 1980 approximately 26 accredited mining engineering send correspondence to: the department has the unique programs produced over 800 mining engineers Geaunita Caylor distinction of nationwide. Under Professor Ted D. Haley’s 107 Mining and Mineral leadership, the UK mining engineering specialty Resources Building being both one Lexington, KY 40506-0107 of the oldest and area graduated 39 students in 1980, which remains the largest graduating class in the Phone: (859) 257-2820 youngest mining Fax: (859) 257-2173 history of the program. Within a four- year period Charles J. Norwood. Image courtesy of engineering from 1979 to 1982, the program produced www.engr.uky.edu/mng University of Kentucky Archives programs in the country. A brief review of the over 130 new mining engineering graduates. If you would prefer to have this newsletter sent by email, please program’s history follows. In response to the demand and request of the send your email address to [email protected] The UK Department of Mining Engineering Kentucky mining industry, the Department of was originally established in 1901 under Mining Engineering was reopened in 1981 under the direction of Professor Charles J. -
Study of Waste Water Quality Management in Iilawarra Coal Mines
University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Engineering and Information Coal Operators' Conference Sciences 1998 Study of Waste Water Quality Management in IIlawarra Coal Mines R. N. Singh University of Wollongong H. B. Dharmappa University of Wollongong Muttucumaru Sivakumar University of Wollongong, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/coal Recommended Citation R. N. Singh, H. B. Dharmappa, and Muttucumaru Sivakumar, Study of Waste Water Quality Management in IIlawarra Coal Mines, in Naj Aziz and Bob Kininmonth (eds.), Proceedings of the 1998 Coal Operators' Conference, Mining Engineering, University of Wollongong, 18-20 February 2019 https://ro.uow.edu.au/coal/268 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Study of Waste Water Quality Management in IIlawarra Coal Mines ABSTRACT This paper is concerned with two case histories of wastewater quality management in underground coal mines in the I1lawarra region. The first investigation briefly presents an analysis of mine water discharge having an extremely high concentration of suspended solids and consistently high barium concentrations, averaging 14.4 mg/l Barium, over the sampling period. A laboratory study of chemical precipitation processes has indicated that about 91% of barium could be removed by using ferric sulphate and lime. On the basis of the information obtained from the environmental audit process an alternative water treatment and reuse system incorporating 51% reduction in the water consumption with 32% less off-site discharge has been suggested (Thomas, 1995). The second case history is concerned with the storm water management at a mine situated in the Illawarra escarpment where only 20% of the wastewater generated in the colliery is discharged off -site. -
The Environmental Impacts from Coal Cradle to Grave: the Environmental Impacts from Coal © 2001, Photostogo © 2001, Photostogo
Cradle to Grave: The Environmental Impacts from Coal Cradle to Grave: The Environmental Impacts from Coal © 2001, PhotosToGo © 2001, PhotosToGo Clean Air Task Force 77 Summer Street, Boston, MA 02110 June, 2001 Clean Air Task Force 77 Summer Street, Boston, MA 02110 Tel: (617) 292-0234 Fax: (617) 292-4933 CATF gratefully acknowledges support for this report from the following foundations: The Turner Foundation The John Merck Fund The Joyce Foundation The Heinz Endowments The Rockefeller Brothers Fund The Energy Foundation The Kapor Foundation Credits: Writer: Martha Keating, Clean Air Task Force Editing: Ellen Baum, Clean Air Task Force Amy Hennen, Izaak Walton League of America Design Editor: Bruce Hill, Clean Air Task Force Design: Jill Bock Design Printing: Spectrum Printing & Graphics, Inc. June, 2001 Cradle to Grave: The Environmental Impacts from Coal Cradle to Grave: The Environmental Impacts from Coal he electric power industry is health. Some are known to cause the largest toxic polluter in cancer, others impair reproduc- the country, and coal, which tion and the normal development Tis used to generate over half of of children, and still others the electricity produced in the damage the nervous and immune U.S., is the dirtiest of all fuels.1 systems. Many are also respira- From mining to coal cleaning, tory irritants that can worsen from transportation to electricity respiratory conditions such as generation to disposal, coal asthma. They are an environmen- © 2001, PhotosToGo releases numerous toxic pollut- tal concern because they ants into our air, our waters and onto our lands.2 Nation- damage ecosystems. Power plants also emit large ally, the cumulative impact of all of these effects is quantities of carbon dioxide (CO2), the “greenhouse gas” magnified by the enormous quantities of coal burned each largely responsible for climate change. -
2021 River Basin Management Plan
2021 River Basin Management Plan Mine waters challenge Published: 22/10/2019 Contents 1. Summary .................................................................................................................. 1 2. Mine water pressures ............................................................................................... 3 3. Addressing the challenge ......................................................................................... 6 4. Future challenges and actions .................................................................................. 9 5. Case studies: abandoned metal mines ................................................................... 12 6. Choices ................................................................................................................... 17 7. Contacts and supporting information ...................................................................... 18 8. References ............................................................................................................. 18 1. Summary Mining played a major part in Britain’s rich industrial history, but this also led to thousands of abandoned mines left scattered across our landscape. Most of these mines closed well over 100 years ago but they still pollute our rivers, harm fish, river insects and ecosystems and can have an adverse impact on economic activity. Discharges from abandoned mines continue to pollute over 1,500km (3%) of rivers in England. Pollution from coal mines is easy to see, because the iron rich water they