796
I bet it's an engineering marvel though. (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/funny@sh.itjust.works
81 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 128 points 1 year ago (33 children)

We make logging companies "replant forests" (yes it's not at all the same as the old growth but it's something). Why do we let mining companies completely rape the land and replace nothing? It doesn't even look like they backfill with the unused debris, much less restore topsoil or plant anything.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 33 child comments
    •
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    Here in the UK I know of lots of old mines and quarries that, because the ground is inherently unstable once the mining has finished, the land gets reclaimed as a nature reserve. Think nice walks, wildflowers, native trees, marshlands etc. A lot of effort goes into making habitats for insects, birds and animals.

    Whether or not it is all paid for by the mining companies, I don't know.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That's how we do it here in the US if they're operating near an urban area. My understanding is that they are required by law to do that in exchange for the permits or something.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Underground mining and strip mining are very different in the possibilities to recover.

    Both underground mining and strip mining will devastate natural and urban areas in Germany for centuries. For the former black coal and iron mining areas they basically have no solution except to keep the pumps running indefinitely as the flooded underground mines would collapse, causing sinkholes and eating the houses on top. For the strip mining, these will be scars on the earth until geology has taken care of it in a few million years.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Well, not 100% on this, but maybe because we're an overaged society that elects corrupt politicians rather than accept that change in lifestyle is necessary? Or maybe it is the brainwashing of the Springer-press that continues to vilify the Greens. Maybe a mix of both.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Or maybe it is the brainwashing of the Springer-press that continues to vilify the Greens

    The German greens are the greatest insult to ecology and progressivism in the history of Earth. Born out of the antinuclear movement and immediately coopted by fossil fuel lobbies, the only thing they've done is to encourage MORE coal plants to be opened (due to pushing for the closure of nuclear plants), and supported every single neoliberal anti-welfare budget and every military intervention (think bombing of Yugoslavia, bombing of Libya, invasion of Iraq). They're seriously one of the worst parties in the EU.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Remind me again, who ordered the nuclear plants to be closed, and who prolonged their runtimes? Who came up with Agenda 2010 and who blocked Bürgergeld being more than a name change?

    And if they are one of the worst parties of the EU, I envy your selective reading. We have parties more or less openly advocating for fascism. "SocDems but with a green coat of paint" don't even make the top ten.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    This account is a known pro-russia anti-liberal troll.

    Don't feed it. plonk

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Must be convenient being a European lib and discarding everyone further left than you as a "Ruzzian troll bot". I also haven't fucking commented or posted in the previous month essentially, if you actually go through my account history, but go ahead with your thought-terminating clichés. Seriously, the "Russian bot" is the "woke" of libs, just a series of words you repeat to discard information that doesn't suit your preconceived notion or your point of view.

    For reference, I'm a Spaniard who voted for Podemos since they appeared in the political spectrum, and militant in a socialist org in my homeland. But whatever floats your boat.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Did not call you a bot, but I have read your comments before and flagged your username as someone who appears left-aligned, but unreasonable, pro russian and anti-NATO when it comes to the russian war of aggression against Ukraine.

    This is, I presume also the main point in your opposition to the german Greens, a party very much aligned with a free Ukraine and opposed to russian imperial aggression.

    Because from my point of view, it looks like in your worldview everything western, everything touched by the US, everything that opposed the eastern block in any way is tainted by imerialism. Your comments lack any evidence of nuance or understanding that both the west and the east were and are are ruled by horrible people and good people trying their best. I'm forced to fucking both-sides-ism upon reading your history, because your radical positions lack so much dearly needed nuance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago*

    Did not call you a bot

    Sorry, assumed that because of the plonk, what did you mean by that then?

    pro russian

    I'm not "pro-Russian" except in terms of ethnicity. Currently there's pervasive and state-supported russophobia all over the western world, and I consider myself anti-racist. Regarding the Russian government, not only do I think it's on a downwards fascist spiral, oppressing women, LGTBQ and minorities, I have loved ones directly suffering under the Putin regime.

    You call my lack of nuance, but as a western-european socialist, what's the nuanced alternative? Supporting the military rearming of the western genocidal empire currently funding genocide and neocolonialism? I'm not "in favour" of the Russian invasion of Ukraine per-se, I just understand that it's the necessary consequence of imperialist struggle to see who controls the former Soviet block's sphere of influence. The Russian bourgeoisie, born in the 90s' plundering of the formerly state-owned economy, won't accept subservience to North American and Western-European capital, so it naturally revolves against that.

    The west has been, despite the agreements of the 90s, pushing NATO further east, and funding and staging colour revolutions all over the former eastern block. Given the current Russian lack of soft power, the only alternative to western control (at best, as in the case of Poland) and colonialism (at worst, as in the case of the Ukraine resource extraction deal) is Russian military intervention. It's a sad state of affairs, but the Russian bourgeoisie tried to establish economic links with Europe and it wasn't allowed to do so, with tensions peaking after the US-sponsored blowup of Nordstream.

    My analysis is that Russian militarism is the only tool the Russian bourgeoisie has been allowed to maintain its sphere of influence. My proposal is the rapprochement of Western Europe with Russia to defuse the tensions, and to stop trying to destroy Russian influence in its neighbouring regions, because as bad as Russia is, I don't think it's a solid strategy for peace that Russia would, for example, start soft coups in Mexico or Guatemala (just as a comparison). Creating other routes could perfectly well defuse militarism in Europe from both sides which, as a male below 30, I see desirable (since I dont wanna die in imperialist war).

    Now please tell me what part of my analysis is lacking nuance. You may disagree, but I don't think lack of nuance is my problem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Where I live they are required to rehabilitate the land afterwards, but usually that's after the mine has been running for like 30+ years and by the time they shut down, they do some weird financial trickery and declare bankruptcy despite having made millions in profits the previous decades and then they just walk away and tax payers need to clean up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Why do we let mining companies completely rape the land and replace nothing?

    The government spend billions to brainwash people and turn them complicit. Check out the "germany rearming" threads to see how even on lemmy plenty of people are happy with the raping.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Tbh there is a lot done do make the Land usable once the mining process is through

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    And not nearly enough because no human activity can realistically cover some 100-200 million years of geological processes.

    In most places they just want to flood the hole. These artificial lakes then become a toxic hole because the Iron-Sulfide exposed during mining oxidizes into Iron-Sulfate, leading to these lakes being diluted Sulphuric Acid for decades if not centuries.

    Also the groundwater cannot recover a century of pumping it out in less than multiple centuries. Then the water used for flooding is diverted from rivers, which already are running low in these region and the artificial lakes are evaporating a lot of water, further drying things out.

    Oh and of course the holes tend to be sold to some smaller private investors by the end of their lifetime who do not have nearly enough funds to be held liable for renaturization. So the tax payers will be looking at dozens if not hundreds of billions of damages to front over the next centuries while the profiteers moved their money elsewhere.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    First of all I very much agree with you, no amount of human made renaturalisation will make the Land the same again. Nontheless I wish to explain the current process that exists in Germany from my first and second Hand experience.

    To start, these surface coal mines span a much larger area than the lake that remains at the end, means they are moving through the landscape generally taking multiple years. During active mining plans about the final state of the landscape are already being drawn up and the company responsible for the mine is required to build up finances to fully finish renaturalisation, with is a process that already starts during active mining in areas where the coal has already been taken out of the ground, as they filled up by the earth taken from the active side of the mine. In doing so it is generally planned in a way to have similar soil roughly back in the layer it used to be before, so top soil will be on top again, once the ground is there again, plants are grown. Depending on the area planning there are generally mostly areas for farming and for forests, on farming areas there is a certain set of plants that are meant to be grown to increase the fertility of the ground and I believe in forest areas things may be similar, in any way, those areas are prepared (over multiple years obviously) and are often times already in use/pretty far developed even as the mine is still going.

    When it comes to the end of such a mine and the often necessary lake, they are usually flooded through external water input and not the ground water, allowing for a better water quality. This of course doesn't change anything about the lowered ground water level that takes decades or more to recover and the increased evaporation but at least you can swimm in it without the fear of it melting your skin off. Besides that a problem that may occur with landslides on the piled up dirt side of the lake is nowadays generally eliminated with ground ramms to basically make the soil set in a stable position.

    As to holes being sold of I cannot say much, I do know tho that they are under "bergaufsicht" so under surveillance by the ministry of the state responsible for mining till renaturalisation is finished and in the case that the original owner cannot finish it for whatever reason or some so far unknown late damages occur the ministry is also responsible.

    Over all I wish to say that I am not defending the general practice of digging up mass amounts of earth, destroying existing eco systems, sometimes destroying villages and leaving a lasting impact on the area but I just wanted to at least mention that at least a whole lot is being done to try and mitigate the effects it has...in Germany...currently...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    In the former mining pits there is a great deal of biodiversity.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •