The Martin County Coal Slurry Spill:

An Appalachian Environmental Disaster

 

Kyle Jaracz

 

 

 

Frankie Finley

English 203-201

15 October 2003

            On October 11, 2000, our nation suffered one of its worst environmental disasters ever, the release of over 300 million gallons of toxic waste, in the form of coal slurry, into 2 eastern Kentucky streams, which in turn polluted the Big Sandy River, and finally the mighty Ohio River.  The most amazing part of this entire event was that it passed by relatively unnoticed by the general public.  In this report I will correct that problem, relaying to you the background that lead to this disaster, what actually happened, and the devastating effects that the surrounding area will be feeling for years to come. 

 

BACKGROUND

What is coal slurry?

            As you probably know, coal accounts for a major portion of our nation’s electric energy.  It is a relatively abundant resource, and America is home to nearly 25% of the world’s reserves. Table 1, below, shows the top four producers in America by state.

Table 1: Top Coal Producers in America

1

  As you can see Kentucky is a major player in the industry, and much of its fortunes are tied to coal.  The problem with coal is that it is not a particularly clean fuel to burn, and is a major contributing factor to acid rain.  Around the mid-80’s, the United States and Canada came up with the Clean Coal Technology Program to combat this problem.  Electric companies were required to “scrub” coal before it was burned, to remove some of the impurities, which, along with air filters in the smoke stacks, lowered emissions.  In turn, these electric companies began requiring cleaner coal from the coal miners, so many mining companies created “prep” plants to clean the coal.  The basic process involved grinding up the coal in water, and the good coal would float, and whatever sank to the bottom was pumped out, along with the filthy water and stored in enormous storage ponds, until the mixture evaporated and could be covered up with dirt in what is called reclamation.  These ponds contain billions of gallons of a black, toxic sludge, with the consistency of molasses, known as coal slurry.²  The Appalachian region is scattered with hundreds of these storage ponds that can best be described as ticking time bombs.

 

THE EVENTS

What Makes These Ponds so Dangerous?

            The problem with these ponds relates to their enormous size, and the instability of the surrounding ground.  Since most ponds are created on land owned by the mining company, which has already been mined, the surrounding terrain is often littered with old mine shafts that deteriorate the strength of bedrock, and in some cases provide an avenue for the sludge to escape its enclosure and contaminate the area.  This is exactly what happened in Martin County.

 

 

What Happened?

            On October 11, the roof of an abandoned shaft underneath a 70 acre storage impoundment gave way causing the sludge to race through the abandoned mine and out 2 outlets on either side of the mountain, one into the Coldwater creek and one into the Wolf creek, both of which flow into the Big Sandy river.  The total amount was astronomical.  Approximately 300 million gallons made it out of the impoundment and 270 million made it into the water supply.  To put that in a little perspective, the following graph compares this number to the total amount of oil released into the ocean during the Exxon Valdez disaster, probably the most famous environmental disaster ever. ³

Figure 1: Martin County Slurry Vs. The Exxon Valdez

            As you can see, the slurry spill was approximately 30 times bigger than that of the Valdez, yet you heard very little about it on the national news.  While there was nightly footage of the oil covered ducks during the Valdez, little was made about the 20 miles of stream that was wiped out of all aquatic life. Many more miles were severely polluted.  Sludge piled up 7 feet deep in areas, contaminating farmland and ruining drinking water.  Many towns were forced to close down there water treatment plants because their only source was more coal than water.⁴

            It could have been worse, the local residents where lucky that this flow of sludge was given two paths to follow, dissipating its energy.  Something the residents around Buffalo Creek did not get.  In the 1972, after heavy rains, a dam holding back 172 million gallons of liquid coal waste, gave way, unleashing a tidal wave of sludge through the valley.  125 people were killed, 1,100 injured, and over 4,000 left homeless. ⁵ It is truly amazing that this flow of 300 million resulted in no loss of human life.  However, it wasn’t without plenty of problems for the residents.

 

The Effects

What are the Residents still dealing with now, 3 years later?

            At first glance, when you come to the area, things appear normal, but upon closer inspection, you find that is not the case.  While vegetation has been replanted around the creeks and rivers, you can still see the rings on the trees from how high the sludge reached.  Ground water was contaminated to unsafe levels; local residents are advised not to drink from their wells.  The contaminated soil that was removed from their fields also happened to be fertile topsoil, and was replaced with waste dirt from the mining process, full of rock and can not be farmed.  There is also the problem of human waste disposal.  The spill ruined many septic tanks, and new ones can’t be installed in the replaced soil yet, because it by law must settle for several years.⁶ 

            There are some signs of hope, 15 species of fish have worked their way back into the streams that were completely wiped out, but it will takes many years to reach normal levels.  The first phase, to clean and repair 20 miles of waterway closest to the spill is complete, but now a 5 year project to clean up 90 miles of waterway begins, and the cost is great.  The spending for the cleanup is projected to cross 70 million, with the funding breaking down as follows:

Figure 2: Cleanup Expenses

₇

            Martin County coal has paid 45 million, but now the community is left looking for help to pay for the remaining 25 million plus that will be needed to return there homes to normal. 

 

            The spill did not have a major effect on the coal industry in Kentucky, whose output has been in decline for several years, but was not affected much by the spill as evidenced in the graph below.

 

Figure 2: Coal Output

            The industry’s steady decline continued, but did not dramatically decrease as you might expect after a disaster of these proportions.⁸

            The government is know trying to make sure such an accident won’t occur again, hoping that through improved inspections and stiffened penalties companies will take more precautions to safely store their waste.  However, with our country’s insatiable thirst for power, and the risks already out there, it is probably only a matter of time until this happens again.

Notes

1. “Resource Extraction”, 2000-2001, (Oct 10 2003)

            http://www.kyeqc.net/pubs/soke01/soke%20pdf/extractpdf/extractindicator1.pdf.

2. “Sludged” (Oct 10 2003)

            http://mcweb.martin.k12.ky.us/hillsweb/articles/sludged.htm.

3. Alford, Roger, “Greenery Now Covers Site of Coal Slurry Spill”, Courier Journal,

June 17, 2003,  http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2003/06/17ky/met-4-sludge0617-3620.html, (Oct 10 2003).

4. “Sludged”  (Oct 10 2003)

            http://mcweb.martin.k12.ky.us/hillsweb/articles/sludged.htm.

5. “The Sludge Report”, The Kentucky Lawyer, 2001,

            http://www.louisvillelaw.com/news/sludge_report.htm.

6. Alford, Roger, “Greenery Now Covers Site of Coal Slurry Spill”, Courier Journal,

June 17, 2003,  http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2003/06/17ky/met-4-sludge0617-3620.html, (Oct 10 2003).

7. Maimon, Alan, “Coal Slurry Spill Still Taint E. Kentucky”, The Courier Journal,

            http://www.wvhc.drw.net/VoiceNov01/MasseySpill.JK.htm

8. “Resource Extraction”, 2000-2001, (Oct 10 2003).

            http://www.kyeqc.net/pubs/soke01/soke%20pdf/extractpdf/extractindicator1.pdf.

 

 

Bibliography

Alford, Roger, “Greenery Now Covers Site of Coal Slurry Spill”, Courier Journal,

June 17, 2003,  http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2003/06/17ky/met-4-sludge0617-3620.html, (Oct 10 2003).

“Big Sandy Among Nations Most Endangered”, American Rivers, April 11, 2001,

            http://www.amrivers.org/pressrelease/pressbigsandy4.11.01.htm (Oct 10 2003).

Louviere, Amy, “MSHA Publishes internal review on Kentucky Slurry Spill”, US Department of Labor, http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/msha/MSHA2003027.htm.

Maimon, Alan, “Coal Slurry Spill Still Taint E. Kentucky”, The Courier Journal,

            http://www.wvhc.drw.net/VoiceNov01/MasseySpill.JK.htm

“Resource Extraction”, 2000-2001, (Oct 10 2003)

            http://www.kyeqc.net/pubs/soke01/soke%20pdf/extractpdf/extractindicator1.pdf.

“Response Photographs”, US Coast Guard

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/nsfweb/nsfcc/ops/Response/archive/InezCoalSlurry/photo.html, (Oct 10 2003).

“Sludged” (Oct 10 2003)

            http://mcweb.martin.k12.ky.us/hillsweb/articles/sludged.htm.

“State Coal Profile: Kentucky”, Energy Information Administration,

            http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/st_coal_pdf/0576n.pdf

“The Sludge Report”, The Kentucky Lawyer, 2001,

            http://www.louisvillelaw.com/news/sludge_report.htm, (Oct 10 2003).