An Update on the Taywood West Surface Mine

After our discovery of what appeared to be a significant amount of mining taking place outside the permit boundaries provided by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP), we did a little digging to try and get a better idea of what exactly happened.

With the help of colleagues at Appalachian Voices, we found that a Notice of Violation (NOV) was issued for the Taywood West mine on February 22, 2018 (see the NOV here), for a sediment violation on the southern side of the mine. After some additional investigation, Appalachian Voices found that the Taywood West mine has had two boundary revisions over the course of its lifetime. One of these revisions accounted for ~35 acres of the disturbed area we previously wrote about.

This map shows the Taywood West Surface Mine permit boundary, shaded in red and yellow, and the area added to the existing permit in orange.

As of the time of writing, the updated permit boundary for the Taywood West Surface mine is still not present in the data available from to WVDEP. We were able to georeference the WVDEP’s updated permit map (see above), and display it over PlanetScope imagery. To see the discrepancy yourself, check out the slider below:

It is not clear why this permit boundary revision has not yet been included in the official mine permits database provided by WVDEP. But this example serves to highlight that — in addition to enabling scientific research — our mine footprint map can be used in a monitoring capacity as well, by anyone interested in watchdogging this mining activity. You can view our surface mining data here.

Planet Imagery sheds light on Mine Expansions outside of Permit Boundaries

We were recently reviewing imagery of mine sites which experienced growth in 2017. We overlaid the mine permit boundaries that show where the government has legally granted companies permission to mine. We used our Landsat-based surface mining data to identify a set of candidate sites to examine more closely with higher-resolution Planet imagery through Planet’s Ambassadors Program. While looking at these sites, we noticed mining activity that seems to be occurring outside of permitted areas.

The Taywood West Mine as it appeared on a high-resolution Planetscope satellite image in July 2017. The mining permit boundary is shown in red; mining-disturbed land, based on SkyTruth’s analysis of lower-resolution Landsat 8 satellite imagery, is shown in orange and closely matches what we are able to see in this Planet image.  Apparent mining-related activity outside the permit area is highlighted in yellow.

The mine site continued to expand after July; the image below shows the extent of mining on October 19. More land outside the permit boundary appears to have been cleared since July 30.

The Taywood West Surface Mine is located in Mingo County, WV approximately 12 kilometers northeast of the town of Kermit and 76 kilometers southwest of the state capitol in Charleston.

The Taywood West Surface Mine (pictured above) caught our attention when we noticed evidence of mining activity, which fell outside the mine’s permit boundary. In the image, areas overlain in red show the extent of the mining permit; the bright areas of bare rock and soil on the image show where mining activity (cut and fill) activity has apparently occurred as of the date of the image (October 2017). Fifty-two acres of mining-disturbed land lie outside of the permitted area. According to permit data downloaded from the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP), the permit for the Taywood West mine was issued to Southeastern Land, LLC in August 2005 and will expire in August 2020.

A 2004 study conducted in West Virginia showed a surprisingly high degree of mismatch between permit boundaries and actual mining, but we thought the situation had improved since then. Now we are not so sure, and we’re wondering how widespread this problem is. Accurate assessment of the location and amount of existing mine-damaged land is critical for forecasting the cumulative downstream impacts of mining in deciding whether to approve permit applications for new mining. And it’s critical for planning and executing the extensive reclamation work this region needs to recover from the negative impacts of coal mining. Whose job is it to make sure miners stay within the boundaries of their mining permit?

Aerial survey photos from the 2013 National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) show how drilling and fracking have altered the West Virginia landscape.

SkyTruth data supports Maryland’s ban on fracking

In April 2017, Maryland Governor Larry Hogan signed a bill reinstating a fracking ban in the state. The Maryland General Assembly imposed a temporary moratorium on hydraulic fracturing for natural gas in 2013, and — following similar bans in Vermont in 2012 and New York in 2015 — the 2017 bill makes Maryland the third state in the country to ban fracking. 

SkyTruth’s crowd-assisted FrackFinder work mapping oil and gas well pads played an important role in this environmental and public health victory. Lawmakers evaluated recent research led by Dr. Brian Schwartz at Johns Hopkins that found higher premature birth rates for mothers in Pennsylvania that live near fracking sites. In a related study, Johns Hopkins researcher Sara Rasmussen found that Pennsylvania residents with asthma living near fracking sites are up to four times more likely to suffer asthma attacks.

The research conducted by Johns Hopkins relied on oil and gas infrastructure data produced by SkyTruth. That means our work was among the things that Maryland legislators considered when they chose to extend the state’s ban on fracking. It’s incredibly exciting to see our work play such a direct role in policy-making, and it highlights the importance of continuing to update our oil and gas footprint data sets and sharing them for free with researchers and the public. We’re continuing to map the footprint of oil and gas development in Appalachia, so keep checking in for updates.  Way to go Maryland!

Pretty Parallax Planes

While scanning the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Sentinel-2 satellite images for signs of the Sanchi oil slick, I came across an unusual sight of what appeared to be three, brightly-colored aircraft flying in tight formation. I’m not enough of a GIS rookie to be fooled into thinking China’s latest stealth jets were malfunctioning, what I was observing was a single aircraft’s image split into three spectral bands of red, green, and blue.

This flight was snapped by Sentinel-2 on its way to Tokyo (flight data from Flightradar24.com).

To explain why this happens, we need to take a look at the source of these images: Sentinel-2’s MultiSpectral Instrument (MSI) sensor. This can be thought of as a very advanced camera that can see beyond the usual visual spectrum and into the near-infrared (great for monitoring vegetation) and shortwave infrared. Instead of just one sensor in a camera, the MSI sensor has 12 in a row. For a more technical explanation, take a look at ESA’s guide on the MSI sensor here. Imagine a push-broom with 12, wide bristles and you’ll have an idea of how these sensors sweep across the Earth as the satellite flies overhead. Each sensor splits the image into 10 different spectral bands using a stripe filter which means not only is each band detected at a slightly different angle, they are also detected at slightly different times. What this means for an image like the one above, a “true color” composite made up of the MSI’s red, green, and blue bands, is that when the bands are combined, an assumption has to be made about how far away the object is to correct for the parallax and “focus” the image on the target — and for earth-observation systems like Sentinel, the target is the surface of the earth. An element of parallax is factored in when we combine the bands in the same way that our brains adjust for the parallax of the different angles our eyeballs are seeing. This is called orthorectification. For an example of this, hold your finger halfway between this screen and your face and focus on these words. As well as being a bit blurry, you should be seeing more than one finger. In the same way, the RGB bands are combined with the focus on the surface of the Earth so an aircraft at a higher altitude splits into three images, one for each band. Since this Airbus A321 was cruising at an altitude of about 33,000 feet, the aircraft’s position was projected onto the Earth’s surface resulting in three different images, one for each of the bands.

The time difference between when each band is detected also adds to the offset. This isn’t noticeable for stationary or slow-moving objects but an aircraft is moving fast enough to see a difference. In the image we found, the aircraft’s speed, about 550kts (according to Flightradar24.com), is probably the biggest cause of the shift between images but if you look closely at the contrails, you can see some sideways drift between the first and last image of the plane. The image below, from just off the east coast of Bulgaria, better highlights the two effects of the forward motion of the aircraft and the sideways shift due to parallax.

Example of parallax off the east coast of Bulgaria.

If we really wanted to fix the aircraft’s image, we would need to adjust for the parallax at that distance as well as the delay between each band’s detection (to account for the aircraft’s speed). The result would be that the aircraft would now be one, complete image but everything else would be a multicolor mess.

For more info on this effect, check out this post by Tyler Erickson, or some direct information from the European Space Agency (skip to chapter 2.5).