Originally Posted by The Other Guy
You haven't seen what strip mining has done to the Appalachian Mountains.
When it's done all they leave is flat treeless terrain that doesn't drain and floods out areas downstream.
So you do what most places do these days and limit operational site area so if they want to strip mine an area they have return depleted sections to original condition before they can open up new areas, it has worked extremely well with groups such as the forestry industry locally.
There is no doubt it will cost more initially but in the long run clever industries will learn to minimise that cost and in some industries (such as forestry) they can turn a profit on the process through renewable planting.
Originally Posted by Chukpike
I guess I was not clear on coal, because I agree with you. The problem is more that the environmentalists have the ear of government and the bar for coal plants makes it expensive to use. Right now outside of Kansas City a new coal plant is still trying to get on line after meeting all the standards that were set to build it.
Bottom line if environmental restrictions make it unprofitable companies are not going to build them. Environmentalists sue to run up the costs and make companies unpopular to investors.
These are the same people that scream if the power goes out and they can't use their computers to email their congressmen.
There is nothing wrong with being environmentally aware, just being fanatical about it.
I agree, the key to this process is to make changes that are economically acceptable to all and that means that the extremists at both ends of the process need to be marginalised.
I think most people understand that we have to make changes if not for the environments sake then for our own it is just a matter of finding the balance.