Burning the Future is a brilliant documentary that has been directed by David Novack which bases its attention on the impacts of coal mining in America. The film focuses more on the effects of the coal mining in the Appalachian states. The greater focus is however on West Virginia, where coal is mined in substantial quantities. Apparently, the coal obtained from the mountains of West Virginia is sufficient to sustain half of America. David Novack has used a number of characters, who have been interviewed to provide their insights on the issue. The documentary addresses the realistic problem that is associated with coal mining in the country.
David Novack has used one key character, Ms. Maria Gunnoe, to address the side effects of coal mining in the area. The key focused of the movie is on the coal extraction method that is used to mine coal. Apparently, the rich coal deposits are positioned underneath mountains which can be geographically proven. This being the case, the miners have to institute a mining methodology that involves mountaintop removal so as to enable them to mine the deep seated rich coal deposits. This method of mining is seen to be better placed as well as cost effective and time saving as compared to the traditional coal mining methods.
The removal of mountain tops as the film illustrates, have been the key problem in the country. This is so because the removal of mountain tops has had adverse effects environmentally. As Ms. Maria Gunnoe points out, the mining technique of removal of the mountain tops have had adverse effects on the areas atmosphere. It has been shown to bring about adverse floods that have never been experienced in the area. The floods were experienced as a result of removal of the earth part in the mountains that allowed for infiltration of the water into the ground. This water thus did not infiltrate into the ground thus this resulted in an increase in the volume of surface runoff which results in devastating floods.
Besides this, the coal mining process has also been noted to have an effect on the fresh water sources in that the mineral contents of coal have contaminated the water resulting in Black water. This water is not only unsafe for drinking since it is dirty but is also harmful to the residents’ health. The film also featured a doctor who addressed the issues that the residents have reported that have resulted in severe side effects. Also the people of West Virginia have individually noted the adverse effects of the water have had on their children and them as adults. This has led to the initiation of campaigns against coal mining in the region.
This film thus addresses the issue of the future of the US coal supply. The likelihood of the stoppage of the mining from the Mountains tops of West Virginia is a possible director towards the possibility of reduced coal production in the country. The possibility of banning the mountain top mining of coal puts US coal reliance at a risk. This calls for the US government to institute better energy management strategies. Also, new energy sources have to be established. The future of the coal industry is at a risk. This can be seen by the initiative that the Virginian people to reclaim back their land and state.
Other themes that have revealed themselves in the film were the unity of the people and the social responsibility of the residents West Virginia. Previously, the problem of mountain top mining was not seen as a problem. This can be proved to be so since the practice has been in progress for around five years and yet the public did not address it over that period of time. However, the unity of the people has been shown by the initiatives that the government has taken. The action that the people of West Virginia have been shown through the instant initiative to reclaim backs their land. The role of the people in stopping coal mining since their children have been reported to have endless ailments shows social responsibility.
The director has used a number of characters who have been interviewed in the documentary. The casts include a public lawyer, an ecologist, a miner, a machinery executive, a doctor and the members of the public. The interviews were not biased. However, the response given by the interviewees was somehow biased. This is evident through the majority of the respondents’ response being focused more on the adverse effects of the mining. None of the respondents have directly supported the mining technique. However, this was the key intention of the documentary.
The film has considered the recent Washington policies that were aimed at developing the current situation that has resulted from the mining of coal. However, the policies have not been adequately represented since they have been mentioned on a minor part of the documentary. However, the policies have been criticized since the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Acts, as the ecologist, been stout points out the Clean Water Act calls for the elimination of the metals in coal. To eliminate these metals, chemicals must be used to dissolve them. These chemicals have resultantly polluted the atmosphere and thus though the Clean Air Act works to have the air pure from coal mining dust and chemicals used in the process, the Clean Water Act on the other hand is functioning to pollute the environment.
This documentary has successfully managed to address the issue of environmental pollution which has resulted from the mining of coal. The mountain top mode of mining has adversely affected the state. Ways to manage it have also been suggested as well as the legal procedures and the involvement of the Bush administration in the mining business.
References
Gambitt. (2008). Burning the Future: Coal in America (2008) Movie Review. Internet Movie Database. Retrieved on 30th April, 2011, from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1065120/
