The latest West Virginia mining disaster has evoked the usual outcry about citations of the mine for safety violations, why isn't more being done to correct problems, calls to shut down the mine, and the like.
Most of these protestations seem to me to miss an important point: Mining is dangerous work. Yes, no doubt a better safety regime -- laws with real teeth, more expensive technology, a stronger commitment from management -- could improve matters and save lives. Why doesn't that happen? How is it that the CEO of Massey can remain essentially unperturbed about the loss of 25, possibly more, lives, or about the company's moral responsibility to do more on safety?
It's a matter of economic assumptions: Too many industries and power plants still run on coal; local miners and their families depend on the mines for their livelihood (and the wages apparently are pretty good); shutting down a mine for safety violations can disrupt large swathes of the economy both nationally and locally; and most important, coal's cost advantage as an energy source could disappear if too much were invested in safety, in environmental protections, and in making the mining and burning of coal really "clean."
These are not matters that concern only coal-company executives, though. Politicians from coal mining regions have, in my view, been too timid in pushing for changes -- for the same "economic" reasons stated above. Do we hear Congressmen from those regions boldly calling for reforms except when there's an accident? Not to my recollection. Do Congressmen from other areas push for changes and safety improvements as a matter of equity? I haven't noticed that they do. Both of them seem to fear that the repercussions of action could be worse than the loss of a couple dozen miners' lives. The assumptions - some of them fostered by the coal companies - need to be challenged by those most directly involved; until that happens, change isn't likely.
Comments