logologo_light
  • News
  • Blog
  • States
  • Resources
  • Videos
  • About Us
  • Take Action
  • News
  • Blog
  • States
  • Resources
  • Videos
  • About Us
  • Take Action

Stream Rule – Destined for the Dumpster

December 20, 2016

Although bitterly opposed by the mining industry, states and Native American communities among others, the stream rule finalized Monday by the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) serves a very useful purpose.  It shows what’s wrong with this administration’s regulatory policies and the malign motivation behind them.

The stream rule achieves a rare trifecta.  It delivers no environmental benefits, rests on fictitious legal and “scientific” authority, yet will be economically ruinous for mining communities. If the stream rule were a Broadway play, it would fold after opening night.  Given the promised opposition from the president elect and Senate Majority Leader McConnell, that will likely be its fate.

To learn what’s wrong with this rule, ask what’s right with it.  Water quality controls are already effectively imposed by the Army Corps and the Environmental Protection Agency as well as by state agencies. Wildlife protection measures are enforced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Translation: pointless duplication.

Annual state reclamation reports offer no evidence to support the rule, which explains why OSM avoided consulting state agencies. States are a tedious hindrance to OSM, an attitude that prompted 19 states to call for a regulatory redo.

OSM conjures legal authority it doesn’t have but ignores restrictions it does have.  The agency offers a one-size-fits-all rule that flatly contradicts congressional intent to maximize flexibility for States with topographies as different as Wyoming’s and West Virginia’s. Yet the agency ignores language in SMCRA, the law governing coal mining, that prohibits the very inter-agency conflicts and duplications that OSM painstakingly created in this 1648-page behemoth.

Bigger here is not better. An independent analysis of the draft rule conducted at 36 operating mines shows up to 64 percent of the nation’s coal will be rendered uneconomic and upwards of a third of coal related jobs could be lost.  OSM by contrast based its cost analysis on “hypothetical” mines, consistent with the virtual reality it lives in.

So why destroy tens of thousands of additional jobs with a rule that states don’t want and the country doesn’t need? Maybe because OSM needs a new mission to compensate for the dwindling number of coal mines it now regulates.

  • On December 20, 2016
Recent Blog Posts
  • Strengthening Energy Security: DPA Action Reinforces America’s Coal Advantage
  • PJM’s Power Crunch: Why Coal Is Critical to Closing a 60-Gigawatt Gap
  • China’s Coal Playbook Is Winning
  • Today’s Gas Glut, Tomorrow’s Price Shock
  • The Global Pivot to Coal Is About More Than Electricity
  • New U.S. Coal Capacity is Coming
  • Another Global Pivot to Coal?
Popular Posts
  • Be part of the revolutionApril 14, 2015
  • Missouri Should Oppose Obama’s “Clean Power Plan”August 14, 2015
  • NMA Calls EPA’s Power Plant Rule a Reckless Gamble with the EconomyJanuary 7, 2014
Recent Comments
  • Clean Power Plan Facing Opposition in Missouri | Count on Coal on Missouri Should Oppose Obama’s “Clean Power Plan”
  • Death of a Shalesman: U.S. Energy Independence Is a Fairy Tale | SuddenlySlimmer on Voices
Tags
affordability baseload power Bloomberg California carbon capture utilization and storage China coal Department of Energy (DOE) electricity grid electricity prices Electricity Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) emissions energy addition energy transition Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Europe Fatih Birol Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) fuel diversity Germany grid reliability infrastructure International Energy Agency (IEA) James Danly Jim Robb Joe Biden Mark Christie Michael Regan Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) National Mining Association (NMA) natural gas New England North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) PJM Interconnection polling renewable energy Rich Nolan Southwest Power Pool (SPP) technology Texas transmission lines U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) United Kingdom Wall Street Journal wind power

Sierra Club Pressed EPA to Create Impossible Coal Standards

Scroll
Count on Coal
Recent Posts
  • Strengthening Energy Security: DPA Action Reinforces America’s Coal Advantage
  • PJM’s Power Crunch: Why Coal Is Critical to Closing a 60-Gigawatt Gap
  • China’s Coal Playbook Is Winning
  • Today’s Gas Glut, Tomorrow’s Price Shock
  • The Global Pivot to Coal Is About More Than Electricity
RECENT TWEETS
Tweets by @countoncoal
Privacy Policy | © Copyright Count on Coal 2024