Weber_Coal+Country

** Coal Country ** **Film, Director, Release Year ** The documentary Coal Country was directed by Phylis Geller and released in 2009.
 * Ashley Weber, Annotation #5, Date: 11/12/10 **

**What is the central argument or narrative of the film? **  This documentary exposes the environmental sustainability issues revolving around mountaintop removal coal mining by taking viewers deep into the Appalachian region, the heart of Coal Country, which has been affected most by this issue. Coal Companies perform mountain top removal mining which involves using explosives to blast the top of mountains to get to the coal underneath. This depletes the soil of nutrients that is necessary for plants to thrive; resulting in the loss of biodiversity as well as the mountaintop itself. The film interviews current and retired miners, activists against coal mining, government officials, and coal company workers. It presents all angles on why this issue revolving around coal and the power it has to provide electricity, jobs, destroy mountaintops, cause harmful health effects on people in the area without many people even realizing much about the way coal is mined.

**What sustainability problems does the film draw out? **  1. The reason coal companies use mountain top removal itself is a sustainability problem. Companies use this method because it is an efficient and cheap way of getting coal. Coal mining is a capital intensive but not labor intensive business which in reality is not creating jobs for these locations. The toxic coal slurry created in the processing of coal is placed in between mountains by the coal companies which creates a hazardous issue. In 2008, a sludge lake broke through and spilled, devouring a neighborhood. 2. Reclamation is relatively new law that is not being upheld to the fullest extent. Coal companies claim they are restoring the land they destroy after they mine it, however, the definition of restoration is not exactly defined or consistent. The land will actually never be the same after it is blown apart, however, the coal companies believe replanting non-native trees and grass is good enough as far as satisfying the reclamation law. 3. Many coal miners are very dependent on their jobs as their main source of income to support their families. They believe without these coal companies they won’t be able to provide for them. So, this leads to all current miners backing the coal companies. One coal company on the film mentioned the average wage was over $50,000 for a coal miner, so this type of income would be difficult to find at another business without as specific level of education. Residents of these places shown in West Virginia are split on whether to support coal or not. Those who are against mountain top removal face a difficult decision of jobs vs. cancer. While many people are fighting against the coal companies, the residents in support of the companies are making it a more challenging fight. The location of these harsh coal mining operations shown in the film happened to be in West Virginia, the poorest state in the country. One interviewee in the film mentioned that mining practices would be extremely different in locations such as the Berkshires. This type of mining is also contributing to the lack of development in these poorer areas. 4. Coal companies have become very powerful in the Appalachians. West Virginia is the poorest state and relies heavily on these coal companies at the current time. One activist in the film mentions that these coal companies want it to be the only option these people have, which seems to be an extremely valid point. Another issue with the lack of higher education of the people in these poorer locations makes it difficult to fight against coal companies in courts. The film mentioned that the activists are having to educate themselves to learn policies in order to present a strong case. Lastly, the ignorance and disrespect of Don Blankenship CEO of Massey Energy towards others was very prevalent in the short time he was shown in the film. At one point he made a statement that ‘Greeniacs’ are standing in the way of using coal the way it should be used. 5. The film brings out several issues regarding the law and the government’s and military’s actions. One lawyer interviewed in the film worked mostly on cases involving coal mining. Many of his cases won, until the army overturned the ruling. This army division was considered to be more conservative and kept appealing and overturning the ruling the court had made to punish the coal companies. After a coal company was brought to court for their coal dust, the court ‘forced’ the company to trap their coal dust and monitor the coal dust emitted. However, the devices put out are completely ineffective and no data or collection has been made by the coal company. Where is the enforcement of their sentence? The film brought up another issue where Rockefeller, a government official in West Virginia, originally was against strip mining when he first ran for office. He was unsuccessful in getting into office on his first try and blamed this on the stance he took the issue. So, when he ran the second time around he changed his stance. So much for having a belief and sticking to it.

**What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? **   One part of the film catches Don Blankenship the CEO of Massey Energy putting his hand on an ABC news reporter’s camera and pushing it away, which was a persuasive piece that demonstrated the disrespect this coal company leader had towards others. The visual footage of the mountain tops being blown to pieces was very persuasive especially since I hadn’t seen this process before. It was devastating to watch the process as well as see the aftermath of the flat grey mountain tops surrounded by green mountains. The imagery provided in the film was persuasive in demonstrating the process of coal mining as well as the effects seen on the people living nearby these mining operations. It was horrific to see several of the West Virginia residents who live nearby these coal mining locations show their water filters, and toilet water that was contaminated. It was also compelling to hear the two older women explain and show how close they lived to the coal slurry and that if it would happen to spill out they would have no time to leave. They also caught on camera the buildup of coal dust on the teachers’ vehicles outside the school. This visual evidence makes the negative effects of the mining easier to believe than just words.

**What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why? **   Towards the end of the film, it brings up the point that although the coal industry is promoting green coal, there is no such thing. It suggests alternative methods of energy that are more sustainable as better options in place of coal. However, I think another lesson the film draws out is the fact that it may be difficult to change the industry unless a residents of these locations are in opposition and divided like they currently are. Many people in West Virginia for example are voting to keep government officials in office that are in support of coal mining in order to keep jobs and also because they do not see a problem with the current methods used. I think in order to move on to a different method of power either there has to be a slower transition like going from coal to “clean” coal first because otherwise there wouldn’t be much support from the coal miners. Then using this transition to move to an even greener technology that will provide jobs to those miners would be more compelling to the miners.

**What audiences does the film best address? Why? **   I feel that this film is very effective and compelling for people who are unaware of mountain top removal mining and the dependence our country has on this form of mining to obtain coal used in our everyday lives. The film gives a broad overview of the issues and interviews are presented in a manner that is easy to make people aware the issue. However, this film may not be as effective for people who already have an opinion towards coal mining or those who rely on more scientific figures and data regarding the issues presented rather than testimonials and visual evidence.

**What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value? **   I think it would have been nice to learn more about the mining practices that other areas across the country are using in comparison to the ones presented in the film in the Appalachian. It would be interesting to know more about the efforts or lack of effort necessary to protect other mountain ranges across the country that are not located in such poor areas. Also briefly mentioning some statistics on the whole country and worldwide issues with this type of mining would have been informative.

**What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does ** **not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective. **   <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">This film provides several examples of ways people in West Virginia have worked to fight against mountain top coal mining. Two of the people interviewed in this documentary were both considered pretty introverted until they were affected by these coal mining practices. Both stood up against these practices and fought back by pressuring politicians. The film showed how one town in West Virginia was able to pressure the court to make a Coal company either close, cover the coal dust or move. The ruling wasn’t completely effective however the dome being used is protecting the people and the environment better than it was prior to the hearing. Many people are unaware that this environmental problem exists. However, one activist is bringing exposure to this issue by informing as many people she can.

**<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references.) ** <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">It was interesting to hear of the Ohio County that was being impacted by the coal power plants, so I decided to look a little more into that. I found an article that was the Economic Impact Analysis of Coal and Electricity in Meigs County, Ohio. It evaluated the impact of adding a new coal mine operation, and one, two, or three new coal-fired power plants. I didn’t see anywhere where there was an environmental assessment performed.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">[]

<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">I came across this article that discusses the negative health side effects presented in the film to an even greater level. It leaves you wandering why the county officials would even think of considering the addition of a new mining operation or plant.

<span style="color: #0000cc; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">[]

<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">I found on this sight a map showing the strong correlation between poverty rates and surface mining operations



<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">[]