On Monday, August 11, 2014 3:48:30 PM UTC-7, notbob wrote:
> On 2014-08-11, Mayo > wrote:
>
>
>
> > But land can be reclaimed as coal strip mining here in the US has
>
> > demonstrated.
>
>
>
> What alternate universe do you live in?

As the late Senator Moynahan famously said: "You're entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts." (Also attributed to others.)

IOW, NotBob, give it up. They create the "facts" that validate their opinions.

HB

On 8/11/2014 7:43 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Monday, August 11, 2014 6:13:23 PM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>
>>
>>> Pray tell what do you do with 100 square miles of poisonous tailing ponds
>>
>>> that will, not may, breach? Just how do you clean up a trillion tons of
>>
>>> poisonous sludge?
>>
>>
>>
>> How do you know they'll breach?
>>
>>
>
> http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...ill-emergency/
>>
>> Are you a specialist in pond liner technology?


So one spill is enough to indict all?

Sorry, that's just disproportionate fear-mongering.

On 8/11/2014 7:58 PM, Hypatia Nachshon wrote:
> On Monday, August 11, 2014 3:48:30 PM UTC-7, notbob wrote:
>> On 2014-08-11, Mayo > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> But land can be reclaimed as coal strip mining here in the US has
>>
>>> demonstrated.
>>
>>
>>
>> What alternate universe do you live in?
>
> As the late Senator Moynahan famously said: "You're entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts." (Also attributed to others.)
>
> IOW, NotBob, give it up. They create the "facts" that validate their opinions.
>
> HB
>
I did not create these facts:

http://ecorestoration.montana.edu/mi...ca/default.htm

Site Status 10 Years After Reclamation

Representatives of the Colorado Division of Mines and Geology visited
the site in 1987 and 1990 to monitor revegetation progress. No
additional maintenance work was required. The engineer for the project
visited the site in July, 1996. The following sites were visited:

Coal Flat 2
The Landslide
Coal Flat No. 3
All three areas had lush stands of vegetation. There was little evidence
of soil loss or erosion, even on the steeper slopes of reclaimed Coal
Flat 2. Wildlife (deer and marmots) were spotted using the reclaimed
area; closer examination by wildlife experts would probably reveal
evidence of use by other local species. The landslide area showed no
signs of movement. A local resident who had been present during the
reclamation projects revealed that a local land developer was
considering part of the reclaimed parcel for up-scale home sites.

The most remarkable feature of the three sites was the invasion of
sagebrush and native plants, especially on the upper slopes of the
landslide area. A cursory examination of the dominant species in the
seed mix planted in 1986 revealed no sagebrush species.

A Colorado DMG representative familiar with the site speculated that the
native sagebrush seeds would have been present in the original plant
growth medium salvaged from the spoil ridge crests. If this were the
case, at least some sagebrush would have been observed in the reclaimed
Coal Flat 2 area, which also received the same salvaged soil as the
ridgetop above the landslide area. Such was not the case. The author
speculates that the sagebrush is a native volunteer whose primary seed
source was the natural ground upwind of the site. The development of
this advantageous situation might be encouraged in some surface mining
reclamation plans through the judicious use of native species-bearing
“islands” of undisturbed land. Undoubtedly, some mines, tiering off
Mother Nature, have employed this reclamation tool either
unintentionally (as in the case presented) or within the broader context
of a well-conceived reclamation plan.