Abstract

This paper explores how policy structure, institutions, and political climate impact the ability of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) to ensure the reclamation of surface coal mines. We conduct a policy review that traces the impacts of the three parts of SMCRA; Reclamation Standards, Reclamation Bonding Requirements, and the Abandoned Mine Land fund. We examine the implications the act and its approach have for the mining industry and their ability to reclaim mining areas. We find that each of the three parts of SMCRA’s approach face substantial problems in their implementation. Though largely a positive force for internalizing the environmental costs of surface mining, those issues commonly elucidated in the public choice literature reduce the efficacy of the policy approach and call into question the act’s ability to ensure reclamation occurs. Both in the structure of the bonding requirements and in the regulatory structure created by the act, misaligned incentives sometimes hamper effective reclamation. Further, the funds created under SMCRA to reclaim and restore mined lands have often been directed towards projects that are politically expedient for politicians instead of those that would best serve the fund’s original reclamation purpose. After revealing these problems and putting them in the context of the public choice literature, we suggest updates to the current policy that would align reclamation incentives and better ensure that the reclamation of surface mines occurs. We emphasize the cooperative elements of SMCRA and suggest how other countries, especially those without major existing frameworks for handling reclamation, can emulate the successes of SMCRA while avoiding its implementations snags.

Highlights

  • Coal once provided the majority of American energy and still fuels one third of domestic electricity production [1]

  • Whether the policy tools established by Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) are effective at ensuring reclamation of surface mines, guides our exploration of policy and our evaluation of the policy is considered in light of this core question

  • SMCRA requires that coal companies post bonds for mine reclamation and sets up the Abandoned Mine Land fund, which taxes coal producers to pay for reclamation of old abandoned surface mines

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Coal once provided the majority of American energy and still fuels one third of domestic electricity production [1]. The act established a regulatory program that, among other things, detailed the exact reclamation standards that surface coal mines must meet, required financial assurance to guarantee that reclamation would occur in the event of a company shut down, and established the Abandoned Mine Land fund (AML) to pay for reclamation in coal mines that had already been abandoned. Resources 2019, 8, 25 the effectiveness of their use to date, reviews public choice problems facing U.S coal reclamation, and offers policy alternatives for mine reclamation in the United States

Approach and Methods
Background of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977
SMCRA’s Policy
Regulatory Concerns
SMCRA’s Bonding Requirements
Corporate Surety Bonds
Collateral Bonds
Self-Bonding
Public Choice Issues in Bonding
A Potential Alternative Policy Approach
Funding Union Benefits
Non-Coal Mine Reclamation
Unrelated State Spending
Policy Recommendations
Expand the AML’s Ability to Reclaim Coal Mines While Restraining Its Misuse
Reform Bond Valuation and Release
Implications for Future Resource Extraction Policy and Policy Diffusion
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call