Tag Archives: Coal

L J Furman, MBA

February 27, 2010

An Orca in the Pacific ocean near Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada, image courtesy of Whale-Images.com

Tilikum, an Orca, attacked and killed Dawn Brancheau, a trainer at Seaworld, Orlando, on Wednesday, Feb. 24, 2010.

As reported in Asia One, Ric O’Barry and Dave Phillips of the Earth Island Institute have called for a federal investigation into the death of Ms. Brancheau.

In their statement, O’Barry and Phillips said,

“SeaWorld allowed public and trainer contact with an orca that was a known risk, and after three deaths they’re suggesting that it actually continue…. We believe this situation warrants the immediate initiation of a federal investigation into SeaWorld’s possible negligence and violations of the Marine Mammal Protection Act….Along with sadness of this tragic event we can’t help feeling anger toward those who insist upon exhibiting these wild creatures in habitats that can drive them to violence.”

Let’s look at this from another side.

Orcas eat fish, as do other whales, dolphins, and humans.
Fish are high in mercury. (All mercury pollution comes from human industrial activities, much of it from burning coal in power plants).
Mercury causes brain damage.

This leads to a few questions:

What is the level of mercury in the Tilikum’s brain and central nervous system?
Is it causing nervous system damage?
Is Tilikum “Mad as a Hatter?” Is he suffering from Minamata’s Disease?

Sustainability and Carbon Sequestration

Abstract. By burning fossil fuels we have put 3.6 trillion tons of Carbon Dioxide, CO₂ in the atmosphere^¹ in the last 200 years – most in the last 60. This has changed the concentration of atmospheric CO₂ from 270 parts per Million, ppm, to 390 ppm, an increase of approximately 31%. This increase of atmospheric CO₂ is resulting in changing precipitation and rising temperatures, from the equator to the poles.

The typical modern reductionist approach is to simplify the problem to develop a solution:

“Burning coal, oil, and natural gas puts CO₂ into the atmosphere. All we need to do to solve the problem is modify the machines so they burn fossil fuel without releasing CO₂ into the atmosphere. How do we do that? We should capture the carbon dioxide, and the arsenic, mercury, other heavy metals, radionucleotides, etc, and store it somewhere.”

But we need to remember that we are burning coal, oil, and natural gas for a reason: to generate heat, hot water, electricity and transportation. There are alternative energy technologies, including nuclear, solar, and wind.

Coal with Carbon Sequestration is estimated to cost $10 to $15 Billion per gigawatt, without considering the costs of mining, processing and transporting the coal, cleaning up after mining, and isolating the arsenicals, mercury, and radionucleotides released from burning coal. Solar is estimated to cost $6.5 Billion per gigawatt – with no fuel and no wastes. Wind $2 to $3 Billion per gigawatt – with no fuel and no wastes.

We at Popular Logistics think, feel and believe that we need to replace coal with solar and wind immediately.

Continue reading →

Coal Miner Deaths

In China, 407 Coal Miners Died THIS YEAR

the eagle movie theater

. 104 Died THIS WEEKEND in the Xinxing coal mine – described by Chinese authorities as a SAFE

download movie #1 cheerleader camp online

mine. 528 miners were underground at the time of the explosion – in which 19.7% of the miners were killed! China Mine Disaster Continue reading →

Clean Coal – Doesn't Exist But Promises to Be Expensive

full movie of no strings attached

Mountaineer Coal Plant, New Haven, W. Virginia, Photo Copyright, NY Times.

According to Kevin Riddell, in the New York Times, (click here for article) the 20 MW carbon sequestration subsystem at the Mountaineer Plant in New Haven, West Virginia, will cost “well over $100 million.” Ridell says:

American Electric Power is spending $73 million on the capture and storage effort, which includes half the cost of the factory. Alstom, the manufacturer of the new equipment, paid for the other half of the factory, hoping to develop expertise that will win it a worldwide market. Alstom would not say what it spent, but public figures indicate that the two companies are jointly spending well over $100 million.

just go with it movies

I pulled out my trusty pencil and paper, and did some calculations. If “half the cost” of the facility is $73 million, then the other half is also $73 million. That “well over $100 million” adds up to about $146 million. For a 20 mw facility, that means $7.3 million per mw. It’s not clear from the article whether this is the cost of the carbon sequestration facility or the costs of the turbine plus the carbon sequestration facility. The article also mentions that the energy costs of the carbon sequestration operation are projected at 15% to 30% of the plant’s output. “More expensive than solar or nuclear.” Utility scale Solar is $6.5 billion per mw, 89.0% of the cost of this facility, even before you factor in the costs of fuel, mining, and clean-up.

true grit movie

King Coal: Wise Monarch or Cruel and Ruthless Despot?

Chris Dorst, Charleston, WV Gazette.

According to Mortality Rates in Appalachian Coal Mining Counties: 24 Years Behind the Nation, by Michael Hendryx, of the Department of Community Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV <pdf>, mortality is 10.21 % higher in Appalachia than elsewhere in the US, and 18.45 % higher in in coal mining counties where 4 million tons or more of coal are mined. (See also Coal Tattoo.)

Part of the problem is poverty, lack of education, smoking, and other factors, but these are all related to the coal economy.

Continue reading →

Coal Is Really Dirty

Burn Coal – release arsenic, mercury, radioactive particles, and carbon – lots of carbon. Here’s how the National Resources Defense Council, NRDC, describes it: Coal is Dirty and Dangerous

Coal is America’s dirtiest energy source — and the country’s leading source of global warming pollution.

Coal mining destroys land, pollutes thousands of miles of streams and brings massive environmental damage to mountain communities.

… produces dirty air, acid rain and contaminated land and water … childhood asthma, birth defects and respiratory diseases that take nearly 25,000 lives each year.

“Coal is the single greatest threat to civilization and all life on our planet.” – James Hansen, NASA’s top climate scientistThere are far cleaner and cheaper ways to meet America’s energy needs. Yet industry apologists are spending millions of dollars to block clean energy solutions and persuade Americans that they can keep using coal without the consequences.

…

Green technologies and renewable fuels will create millions of good-paying jobs, … reduce dangerous pollution and help fight global warming.

Coal Plant Disaster Leads to New Coal Mines

As noted on this website, (click here ) On Dec. 22, 2008, a billion gallons of sludge covered 300 acres, and spilled into the Clinch River and the Tennessee River when the retention pond burst at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Kingston Steam Plant. That’s 1,000,000,000 gallons of toxic soup containing Arsenic, Lead, Mercury, Selenium and other toxics and carcinogens. Knoxvillebiz.com.

posted on Yale Environment 360 (Click Here)

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has approved 42 mountaintop removal coal mining permits in the Appalachian Mountains, dashing hopes among many environmentalists that the Obama administration would move quickly to crack down on the destructive and controversial practice. U.S. Rep. Nick J. Rahall (D-W.V.), chairman of the

Photo by Teri Blanton

House Natural Resources Committee, said the EPA has given the green light to 42 of 48 mountaintop removal projects currently under review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In mountaintop removal mining, coal companies blast and bulldoze the tops off mountains to get at coal seams below. In recent years, the practice has destroyed nearly 1 million acres of Appalachian forests and buried close to 1,000 miles of streams in mining debris. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said recently that the agency was reviewing the permits because the projects might violate the U.S. Clean Water Act, but she added that “the bulk” of the pending permits did not appear to raise environmental concerns. Environmental leaders criticized the EPA for not taking a stronger stand and called on the White House Council on Environmental Quality to take action to stop the 42 projects from proceeding.

Coal Plant With Carbon Sequestration

Tweet SCS Energy, of Concord, Mass., wants to build a new coal plant in Linden, NJ.

18cleanmap According to Kate Galbraith, reporting in the NY Times, “A Plan for U. S. Emissions to Be Buried Under Sea“, 90% of the carbon dioxide will be captured, compressed, pumped thru a 24 inch diameter pipe, approximately 70 miles south-east, past Staten Island, New York, and Middlesex, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties in New Jersey, to a point 25 or 30 miles east of Atlantic City, New Jersey,and injected by a well drilled a mile beneath the sandstone floor of the Atlantic Ocean. The Atlantic is about a half mile deep at that point.

Gailbraith reports that the plant could cost $5 billion if completed on time and on budget. And it will need $100 million a year in Federal Government subsidies, which amounts to another $4 billion over the plant’s 40 year operating life span.

The carbon sequestration is projected to use 25% to 40% of the energy released from burning coal, so the 750 megawatt plant will be a 450 to 562.5 mw plant. That’s $16 Billion to $20 Billion per gigawatt or $16 to $20 per watt, depending on the overhead costs, of sequestering the carbon.

Solar is roughly $6.50 per watt with no subsidies, no fuel costs, very low maintenance, and no loss in transmission. Offshore Wind is $3.00 per watt, with no fuel costs.

Continue reading →

Republican Alternative Energy: Coal, Oil, & Nuclear Power

“The Republican Road to Recovery” according to John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Mike Pence, Thaddeus McCotter, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, John R. Carter, Pete Sessions, Kevin McCarthy, David Dreier, Roy Blunt, who signed it, “Keeps Energy and Fuel Costs Low.” It mentions wind and solar, but focuses on coal, oil, oil shale, offshore drilling, and nuclear power.

The document says “Republicans want energy independence with increased development of all natural resources, including renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar.” It doesn’t mention “global warming.” It mentions the term “greenhouse gases” once, stating, incorrectly, that nuclear power doesn’t produce greenhouse gases. Mining, processing, and transporting nuclear fuel, and managing radioactive wastes, produces tremendous amounts of greenhouse gases.

It points out that “Senators Ted Kennedy and John Kerry … have long fought a renewable wind project in waters off of Massachusetts…. Cape Wind, would provide 75 percent of the electricity demand for Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket island. “

The document focuses on coal, oil, and nuclear power. These are not clean, renewable, sustainable energy sources. Ultimately, therefore, it attempts to “greenwash” coal, oil, and nuclear power.

the Administration has already taken steps to hinder the leasing of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) which is estimated to hold at least 19 billion barrels of oil, and Democrats have long championed the prohibition on drilling in the Arctic Coastal Plain – which is estimated to hold 10.4 billion barrels of oil. Furthormore, Democrats continue to block the procurement of advanced alternative fuels from sources such as oil shale, tar sands, and coal-to-liquid technology. U.S. Oil shale alone could provide about 2.5 million barrels of oil per day.

Republicans also support opening the Arctic Coastal Plain to energy exploration and development.

And despite expert agreement that nuclear power is reliable, clean, and affordable without producing air pollution or greenhouse gases, Democrats continue to block its development.

Republicans realize that there are better solutions to restore freedom and security in our energy market. Republicans recognize the importance of exploring for American oil and gas in an envionronmentally-sound manner and support immediately leasing oil and gas resources in the OCS through an an expedited and streamlined procedure.

Republicans support removing government barriers to new nuclear reactors as long as they meet strict security and safety criteria.

Americans realize that the future of energy is in alternative and renewable sources. In order to promote the development of renewable and alternative energy, Republicans support promoting the leasing of federal lands which contain alternative energy such as oil shale. … spurring a market by using fuels derived from oil shale, tar sands, and coal.

Clean Coal, My Ash

On Dec. 22, 2008, a billion gallons of sludge covered 300 acres, and spilled into the Clinch and Emory Rivers when the retention pond burst at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Kingston Steam Plant. That’s 1,000,000,000 gallons of toxic soup containing Arsenic, Lead, Mercury, Selenium and other toxics and carcinogens. Tennessean.com, Knoxvillebiz.com.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s law firm, Kennedy, Madonna, LLP, and the Levin Papantonio Law Firm have joined to investigate the Tennessee Coal Spill on behalf of property owners living in the impacted area. For more information call 888-435-7001 or click here.

According to TVA spokesman Gilbert Francis, “Most of that material is inert. It does have some heavy metals within it, but it’s not toxic or anything.” However, according to the EPA, coal fly ash and sludge contains carcinogens and high concentrations of heavy metals. Furthermore, “concentrations of arsenic to which people might be exposed through drinking water contaminated by fly ash could increase cancer risks several hundredfold” AP, NYTimes, Yahoo.

Continue reading →

Statement at Marlboro Green Awareness

In Monmouth County, NJ, the Marlboro Republican Club, and the Manalapan Republican Club, are hosting a Green Awareness Event, “An Event to Educate and Benefit our Environment” Tuesday, December 9, 2008 @ 7:00 PM, Marlboro Recreation Building – 1996 Recreation Way, Marlboro Township. This is the statement I planned on making. I did not get a chance to speak.

However, I did get a chance to Listen.

Freeholder Barbara McMorrow, Monmouth County Board of Chosen Freeholders, who told us what the Freeholders will be doing for Monmouth County.
Mayor Fred R. Profeta, Jr, Deputy Mayor for Environment, Maplewood, NJ, who told us what people are doing in Maplewood.
Madea Villere, NJ Sustainable State Institute, Rutgers University, who offered a clear, succinct definition of “Sustainability” – meeting the needs of the present without compromising the needs of the future – and told us what we can do in our communities.

I’d like to thank the Manalapan Republicans and the Marlboro Republicans for holding this event.

I’d am available to talk about Nuclear Power and Coal and then Solar and Wind.

Continue reading →

EPA Goes After Biological Methane

The EPA is planning on licensing fees aimed at livestock operations with more than 100 tons of carbon emissions per year, according to Nick Butterfield, speaking for the EPA, quoted by Bob Johnson, AP, published in the Washington Post. The farmers are against this. Ken Hamilton, of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation says it will cost owners of a modest sized cattle ranch $30,000 to $40,000 per year. This seems correct – if you do the math, the fee is $30,000 for 172 dairy cows, which seems high.

The fee structure seems, to this non-farmer, high and skewed against dairy farmers. It reaches $30,000 per year with only 172 dairy cows, 343 head of beef cattle, and 1,500 hogs. But, by generating popular support against carbon emission regulations, this seems really designed to support the coal industry.

The fee structure:

Dairy Cows: $175 per head, with 25 or more.
Beef Cattle: $87.50 per head, with 50 or more.
Hogs: $20 per head, with 200 or more.

Head of livestock for $30,000 annual fee:

Dairy Cows: 172
Beef Cattle: 343
Hogs: 1,500

While Popular Logistics understands that too much of American agriculture is non-sustainable, and while we are in favor of regulating carbon emissions, we would start with Coal, Nuclear, and factory farms, and increasing the CAFE standards and auto mileage requirements, not by taxing modest ranches of 25 or 50 head of cattle. Popular Logistics also recognizes a distinction between carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels, the nuclear fuel cycle, and the environmental effects of mining, and carbon emissions from cattle ranching and hog farming, especially from organic farming. We would therefore suggest that the EPA create a carbon offset program that would allow ranchers and hog farmers to offset the carbon emissions of their livestock with trees, wind turbines, and photovolotaic solar installations.

SIERRA CLUB KILLS KING COAL

In a decision just made public ( full text PDF ) the EPA has ruled that it will abide by the 2007 Supreme Court decisions and limit carbon emissions from new and proposed coal plants – essentially killing off the construction of new coal-fired power plants in the foreseeable future. According to the Sierra Club “The decision means that all new and proposed coal plants nationwide must go back and address their carbon dioxide emissions.”

What’s next? Nuclear Power? Auto emissions? Carbon Dioxide is Carbon Dioxide, whether from a coal plant, a tail pipe, or the nuclear fuel cycle. Will we see plug in hybids? Plug in hybrids running on biodiesel and methane? Charged by PVSolar and Wind power? I think it is a matter of when, not if. Toyota led the way with the Prius – the status car of the decade for people who care about the planet. New taxis and limos in New York City and elsewhere must be hybrids. Toyota is capturing the ‘Black Car’ market while Ford, with the Escape hybrid is leading the yellow cab market. In MOTOWN GM announced the Volt, a worthy successor to the EV1, and now Ford announced the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan hybrids.

Continue reading →

ENERGY POLICY & PUBLIC HEALTH

There really is no such thing as “Clean Coal.” Mining coal destroys mountains, and often kills the miners. Burning coal releases tons of carbon into the atmosphere and the oceans, and even if you could sequester the carbon, burning coal releases other pollutants, including mercury into the biosphere. The mercury makes its way into fish. This is why people, especially children and pregnant women, should not eat a lot of tuna or swordfish. Wind, solar, geothermal, ocean current, and “negawatts,” on the other hand, really are clean energy. Offshore wind turbines don’t release pollution. On the contrary, they create artificial reefs, which enhance fish habitat. This is also good for fishermen, the economy, etc.

Coal – Going the Way of Nuclear Power

What killed nuclear power was not Three Mile Island or Chernobyl, or the demonstrations of public opposition such as at Seabrook, NH in the late 1970’s or the Musicians United for Safe Energy concerts in New York, Sept. 19-23, 1979, (both of which I attended).

What killed nuclear power was the realization by the bankers on Wall St. that after an event like Three Mile Island their multi-billion investment very quickly became a multi-billion pile of junk with virtually zero salvage value and a tremendously negative return on investment.

And coal today?

According to the National Energy Technology Laboratory “Historically, actual capacity has been seen to be significantly less than proposed capacity. For example, the 2002 report /of the National Energy Technology Lab, NETL, of the Department of Energy, DOE/ listed 36,161 MW of proposed /coal/ capacity by the year 2007 when actually only 4,478 MW (12%) were constructed.” Tracking New Coal-Fired Power Plants, NETL, Office of Systems Analyses and Planning, by Erik Shuster, Feb. 18, 2008, pg, 4, 5.

Housley Carr, writing in McGraw Hill’s Engineering News-Record, reported on the impending demise of “King Coal” Uncertainty Over Carbon has Coal Plants Stymied

with public, regulatory and lender concern growing, many proposed plants are being cancelled. Permits issued for others require offsets for their carbon emissions, while the ones that remain in permitting are being intensely challenged. The U. S. Envrionmental Protection Agency must regulate carbon-dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act, the Supreme Court ruled last year, but Congress has failed to give EPA guidelines for a national policy. Three investment banks last month announced guidelines they would use to assess the risks of investment in coal-fired generation in the absense of a national policy. Further, the largest electric utility in Kansas, citing “seismic shifts in the assumptions shaping our industry,” issued a strategic plan that knocks the crown from King Coal’s head.”