Browsing by Author "Roth, Richard A."
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- An Analysis of Household Water Supply Impacts by Underground Coal Mining in VirginiaZipper, Carl E.; Balfour, William; Randolph, John; Roth, Richard A. (Virginia Tech. Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research., 1994-05)Underground coal mining can affect wells and springs used as water supplies. Subsidence caused by underground mining is generally acknowledged to be a primary cause of groundwater resource effects. In coal producing regions of Virginia and neighboring states, many rural residents depend on groundwater as their primary water source. Although it is well known that underground mines can impact groundwater supplies, guidelines for determining if a specific mining operation will be likely to affect a particular water supply have not been developed for the Virginia coalfield area. Complicating factors include variations in mining methods, depth of mining, and geology among locations within the Virginia coalfield area, and between the Virginia coalfield and mining areas in other states. Throughout central Appalachia, contested allegations of water supply impacts have been the subject of disputes between mining firms and residents. The costs associated with disruptions of groundwater supplies in rural areas can be substantial. When a household's water supply is disrupted, an alternative supply must be developed or the property must be abandoned. One way or the other, somebody must pay. When the cause of a water supply disruption is disputed, both sides must bear costs to resolve that dispute, through litigation or other means. Rational resource management requires that clear guidelines be available for determining cause-and-effect relationships. Such guidelines are not currently available for application to potential water supply impacts of underground mining operations in Virginia. The purpose of this paper is to report the results of an analysis of water supply impacts of underground mining in Virginia. We analyzed reports of 73 water supply investigations conducted by the Virginia Division of Mined Land Reclamation (VDMLR). These investigations were conducted between 1981 and 1987 for the purpose of resolving disputes between surface residents and underground mining firms. The results of the VDMLR investigations were analyzed with reference to guidelines for identifying the zone of subsidence influence on groundwater supplies which were prepared by geologist Henry Rauch (1989). based on research which he and his students conducted in the northern West Virginia - western Pennsylvania area. Rauch's "rules of thumb" are the most complete and explicit published guidelines for determining subsidence impacts on water supplies in Appalachia. This research addresses a subject that is relevant to recently enacted legislation. Section 2504 of the federal Energy Policy Act of 1992 requires mining firms to replace water supplies damaged by underground mining. Virginia House Bill 1687 (1993) also requires water replacement. In developing regulations to implement these laws, federal and state agencies must develop guidelines for determining whether or not alleged water supply impacts are, in fact, mining related.
- High-Extraction Mining, Subsidence, and Virginia’s Water ResourcesRoth, Richard A.; Randolph, John; Zipper, Carl E. (Virginia Tech. Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research., 1990-05)The Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research was established in 1977 as an "interdisciplinary study, research, inrormation and resource facility for the Commonwealth. As a public service research organization, the Center's mission is to research and provide information on coal and energy issues or public interest. It was with this mission in mind that we initiated this project to explore the technical, regulatory, and legal issues concerning mine subsidence and water resources in Virginia. Because of the sensitive nature or this subject to the coal industry, citizens' and environmental groups, and state agencies and policy makers, we have undertaken a deliberate and lengthy process of research, draft reports, and circulation for review and comment. The research was initiated in May 1988. The original draft was prepared in May 1989 and circulated lo state agency representatives and coal companies. Extensive comments were received over the next several months and a second rewritten draft was circulated for wider review in October 1989. Once again, lengthy comments were received, prompting further research which was incorporated into this final report. It has been our intent in this study to provide the most balanced review possible of a most complex and sensitive subject. We sincerely hope that we have achieved that objective and that this report will contribute to further discussions and research on mine subsidence and water resources in Virginia.
- Longwall mining, subsidence, and protection of water resources in VirginiaRoth, Richard A. (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1989)In the coalfields of Southwest Virginia, Iongwall technology accounts for an increasing proportion of underground coal mine production. lt is a highly productive, capital intensive method that provides a degree of mine safety greater than conventional methods. However, subsidence caused by Iongwall mining has been blamed for, among other things, damaging wells, springs, and streams above the mines. Surface landowners whose water supplies are affected by Iongwall mines may negotiate with mining companies for compensation, or they can seek redress in the courts. At the same time, the U.S. Surface Mine Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) provides a framework for regulation of the environmental effects of coal mining, including hydrologic effects. The Department of Mines, Minerals, and Energy, Division of Mined Land Reclamation (DMLR) is responsible for implementation of Virginia’s primacy program under SMCRA. This research has assessed the potential of Iongwall mining to damage the groundwater and surface water resources In Southwest Virginia; and examined whether existing laws and regulations, as implemented, provide an adequate and appropriate level of protection to both water property rights and the environment. Methods included review of published and ongoing literature on effects of underground coal mining on hydrologic systems and methods of mitigation; review of mining permits and complaint investigations on file at DMLR; review of court case decisions involving mining effects on groundwater and surface water; review of regulatory documents from other states active in Iongwall mining and the Federal Office of Surface Mining (OSM); and interviews with coal company personnel, DMLR and OSM officials, researchers, and regulatory officials in other states. Review of both DMLR complaint investigations and published reports of numerous hydrologic investigations indicate that longwall mining is likely to alter the hydrologic regime in the vicinity of the mine. The knowledge base for regulation of hydrologic impacts has been inadequate but is being improved in Virginia. Both DMLR and some coal companies recognize the need for more and better data, and are taking steps to develop the requisite data and models. Regulatory personnel in Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Kentucky have expressed recognition of similar data deficiencies in their states. At least one state, Ohio, has dealt with the problem of water rights by enacting legislation that assigns liability for replacing damaged water supplies to the mining companies. West Virginia, through its regulatory program, also requires water replacement. Recommendations are offered that have as their main objective the reduction of uncertainty about the effects of longwall mining and about compensation of surface owners for damage to water supplies.
- Sustainable development: political/ideological aspects and implications for planningRoth, Richard A. (Virginia Tech, 1993)Recent evidence of widespread environmental degradation and global changes resulting from human activities have revived a debate about the sustainability of the progress of human welfare that began at least 200 years ago. In this renewed debate, the seriousness and causes of environmental degradation are subject to widely divergent interpretations. There are many conceivable sustainable futures; the most important differences among them are not technical but political and ideological. The practice of environmental planning is concerned with a wide variety of contexts and situations at the human-environment interface. Because land use is at the root of many of the problems of environmental degradation (e.g., habitat destruction, air pollution, water pollution), land use planning is an appropriate focus for consideration of the role of environmental planning in sustainable development. Planning as a profession, with its inherent future orientation and focus on public values, is well situated to deal with the kinds of problems raised in the discourse regarding sustainability. Examination of mainstream land use planning practices, however, reveals a reactive, reformist incrementalism that responds to environmental degradation caused by growth, but that addresses neither its causes nor its dynamics. Mainstream land use planning approaches have attempted to resolve conflicts between development and environment through spatial solutions at various scales. The need to plan for ecological sustainability is difficult to reconcile with the democratic ideal of local self-determination. Many alternative approaches to land use planning for sustainable development focus on design solutions. The requirements of sustainability are not merely technical, however. There are both emancipatory possibilities and their opposite in sustainability. Implementing sustainability offers planners a number of choices. They can act as mediators, demystifyers of technical information, exposers of hidden ideological assumptions, and advocates. They can strengthen existing authority, or work towards an enlightened self-determination at the local level.