Examining the Mat-Su Valley’s coal dilemma

The presence of an open-pit coal mine within a mile of people’s homes in the Moose Creek area presents a dilemma for the Mat-Su Borough. It would be useful to have an honest discussion of what the dilemma entails.

The borough has a well-established history of coal mining. The history is visible in the names of our roads, signs in convenience stores and the annual miner’s ball. Hopes for future coal development are also written into the borough’s economic development plan.

On the other hand, the borough has never had a coal mine like the one proposed at Wishbone Hill. If all goes as planned, Usibelli Coal Co. will begin in a year by blasting a 30-story-deep pit. This will be the first of two large pits over a period of 20 years. It will extract more than 1 million tons per year. The most that has ever been extracted before was 100,000 tons a year. Usibelli will do this within a mile of a residential neighborhood and within a couple of hundred feet of Moose Creek. It will also create an unlined slurry pond larger than any slurry pond the Valley has ever seen.

While it has been argued that these new residents should have known they were moving into an area with a history of coal development, we should remember that no one could have imagined a mine of this size this close to their homes. This is not the coal mine of yesteryear with shovels and pickaxes. This is an operation of a completely different scale.

It’s not clear what impacts a 30-story hole in the ground will have on ground water. Have the aquifers in the area been mapped? If so, then the borough assembly should get independent help analyzing those maps to find out just what impact the proposed mine will have on the water system. The Usibelli permit is relying on an out-of-date model based on ungrounded assumptions. The mine could rob water from Moose Creek and, ultimately, from residential wells in the area.

We also don’t know enough about what impacts more than 1 million tons a year of coal mining will have on air quality. We do know that if there are health impacts, it will be very difficult to hold the company accountable. When the planning commission was presented with a statistical analysis showing higher-than-normal cancer rates in East Coast mining towns, a Usibelli Coal spokeswoman explained the findings away. She wrote that the areas in question were populated by poor people and that poor people were more likely to smoke cigarettes.

The borough does not have direct regulatory authority over coal mining, but that fact doesn’t relieve the borough assembly — and the mayor — of responsibility over what happens now and in future mines.

So far, the borough assembly has taken the coal controversy and treated it as an “us vs. them” issue. It’s been more likely to act as cheerleader than as a responsible steward of the taxpayers’ health, safety and welfare. I’m not asking the assembly to take a hard-line anti-coal stance. I’m simply asking that assembly members be honest brokers for the taxpayers and stop scoffing at every concern.

The borough assembly needs to sit down with representatives of Usibelli Coal, in a public meeting, and have a long, serious and difficult conversation about how to minimize the risks and damage associated with open-pit coal mining. It needs to tamp down the cheerleading and ask difficult, detailed questions about every aspect of the mine.

How can Usibelli include residents in the monitoring of water and air quality? How will the mining company protect the slurry pond? Is it really going to be a “zero discharge” mine? Would water quality, from coal slurry waste — and from having to pump out highly saline alkaline waters from deep in the ground — change surface water quality if it had to be discharged? What sort of emergency planning is necessary for a potential cataclysmic event? What kind of financial resources will Usibelli Coal Co. put into emergency planning?

These are serious questions. They need to be asked now, not later. Wishbone Hill is likely to be the first of a string of new mines opening up in the near future. These mines will dramatically change the nature of our community. How the borough responds to the Wishbone Mine will set the precedent for future mines in the area.

The borough assembly needs to do due diligence and ask hard questions. The mining companies owe more than just campaign contributions. They owe the assembly — and the taxpayers — real answers. A vague “we’ll work with you” response isn’t good enough. Answers need to be in writing, and they need to be backed up with resources set aside to allow for resident monitoring of every aspect of operations.

David Cheezem serves on the Mat-Su Borough Planning Commission. He had some technical assistance from the Center for Science in Public Participation in the preparation of this column. The views expressed are his.