Science & Technology

Rave

The Death of Coal?

Posted 12 months ago|11 comments|430 views
Coal Mine Train
Written by
Altruist
Eugene, OR
Recently I have been inundated with TV ads advocating the use of coal – "America's Energy Source". These ads come from groups with misnomers like "The Clean Coal Council" (there is no such thing as clean coal), and they claim that if the mean old EPA forces utilities to stop killing people with pollution and mercury poisoning, then people will have to pay 70% more for their electricity.

The problem is that it ain't necessarily true. It isn't burdensome regulation that is killing Coal, it is economics. Coal is no longer the cheapest energy source. Natural gas is cheaper and puts out no mercury, hardly any particulates, and half the greenhouse gases as coal. Four years ago coal produced 50% of the electricity in the country, now it only produces 40%, by 2020 there will probably be more electricity produced by renewable energy than by coal (if the Republicans don't take total control). http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/12/28...

Those Fossil fuel ads say that there is risk with all energy production. We saw some of the risk at Fukushima and now we have to worry about radioactive fish. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...

Plutonium is the most toxic element in the world. One pound if evenly distributed to all of the people in the world would give everyone cancer. The number 3 reactor at Fukashima has MOX fuel which is a mix of Uranium and plutonium. The spent fuel storage pools are a hundred feet above the ground, and damaged. Another quake could be disastrous. http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-200428...
http://blog.imva.info/world-affairs/seis...

But coal is even worse. Coal kills 4000 people for every one that nuclear kills for the same amount of energy, and that doesn't even consider the potential deaths due to global warming. http://www.disinfo.com/2011/04/nuclear-a...

There is no such thing as clean coal. It destroys the earth to dig it up. By listening to the coal folks you would think that coal equals jobs and that the locals support it, but the coal companies by going to mountaintop removal and huge machines, provide about one tenth the jobs of underground mining which doesn't totally destroy the land but is much more dangerous. The Appalachian people strongly oppose mountaintop removal. For some reason they love those mountains they live in. http://ilovemountains.org/

There is no such thing as clean coal. Coal produces 40% of America's Global Warming causing CO2. http://www.radioopensource.org/global-wa...

There is no such thing as clean coal. Even pollution controls, produce toxic ash that is filling up valleys and ponds. In 2008 one such tailing dam burst flooding the valley with 5.4 million cubic yards of toxic sludge that contains arsenic, lead and selenium. This was enough to flood 3000 acres one foot deep.

So the fact that we are weaning ourselves from coal is a good thing right? Not if they just ship all of the coal to China. In China 75% of the electricity is produced by coal, and we are the Saudi Arabia of coal. They are willing to pay coal producers several times as much money as our power plants are, for the coal. Huge coal trains a mile long are scheduled to go through our towns and cities in the North West with 500 pounds of coal dust being blown from each car along the way. This means even more pollution since the extra pollution of the trains and ships will add to global warming and then the pollution will be blown across the ocean to America anyway. http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2012/06/co...

There is risk with any energy production? Yes we should develop natural gas but do we need to pump toxic chemicals into our aquifers with fracking to get it? Do we need to kill all the sea life in the gulf and in the arctic to get the oil? In Washington last year they produced so much hydro and wind power that they had to shut the windmills down for a while. http://greeneconomypost.com/wind-turbine...

The biggest problem with renewable energy is that we are lacking a smart grid to get the power to where it is most needed. That risk can be easily remedied.


EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
12 months ago: "Coal kills 4000 people"?!?!?

Why don't you dang liberals just make everybody wear a helmet then............ for crying out loud Al!

Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
12 months ago: You ought to read the sentence Red. Coal kills 4000 times as many people as nuclear power does. The particulates alone will kill 30,000 people just in the US. http://www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/cle...

That doesn't include the effects of mercury poison. 630,00 babies are born each year at risk from neurological damage from mercury. Power plants pump 98,000 pounds of mercury into our lakes and streams which gets into all of the fish. http://www.earth-policy.org/index.php?/p...

That also doesn't include the damage due to acid rain from the high sulfur coal. or the heat, forest fire, flood, or other weather related deaths from global warming. 34% of the CO2 is from coal plants in this country. http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/coals-****...

Nor does it include the damage due to global warming from the CO2
12 months ago: another consensus huh?

Content Removed by redstateguy
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
Content Removed by Altruist
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
12 months ago: Take the coal, make carbon fiber space tethers and stream copper/ceramic streamers into the magnetic field of the Earth. That would supply many times more power than the planet could ever use, and it is totally renewable without having to convert any matter or sunlight.
12 months ago: Please provide proof that fracking is polluting our aquifers. No guesstimates, no theories, no tales from the toothless that the "frackers" ruined Papa's 90 year old water well by causing it to get muddy and taste like oil.

I would like to read the peer reviewed, scientific report that states with measured examples of the who, what, where and when fracking polluted such and such aquifer.

A little hint, there had better not be a single dry well used by unscrupulous dumpers to dispose of industrial waste from ANY industrial process within a mile of the aquifers drainage basin.

I'm not saying it couldn't happen, just have trouble with things flowing uphill once the pressure is removed AND it is real hard to detect a few hundred gallons of most chemicals when mixed with a few hundred million gallons of water in an aquifer.

Is coal dust toxic?
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
12 months ago: There have been studies indicating natural gas in well water being 17 times higher than allowed near fracking sites. http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/201...

Another problem is that studies indicate the fracking causes earthquakes.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/...

Yes coal dust is toxic. " Elements such as arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium, selenium, nickel, vanadium and copper are accumulated and concentrated within coal and associated strata. For example, coal seams can have 6 x as much arsenic, 5 x as much uranium, 4 x as much mercury, 3 x as much lead compared to a typical basalt (hard igneous rock). " http://nonewcoal.greens.org.au/coal/toxi...
12 months ago: Is that another one of your cotton picking consensus? or is it a consensi?

For crying out loud Al!
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
12 months ago: Congressmen have introduced H.R. 5959, The Appalachian Communities Health Emergency (ACHE) Act. The historic bill places "a moratorium on permitting for mountaintop removal coal mining until health studies are conducted by the Department of Health and Human Services.

"More than 20 peer-reviewed studies have suggested higher risks and links between reckless strip mining and devastating health impacts, including birth defects, cancer and chronic heart, lung, and kidney disease. (A report released last week noted that strip miners are even subjected to unacceptable levels of black lung disease.)" http://www.commondreams.org/headline/201...
12 months ago: I wish they'd pass a moratorium on liberals opening their mouths until after a study could be done on the harm caused by liberals opening their mouths.


For crying out loud Al.
Content Removed by redstateguy
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
12 months ago: For Six: Here is a great article on injection wells. Failure is quite common (1 in 3, or 1 in 7 depending on type) often resulting in contaminated aquifers. http://www.commondreams.org/headline/201...

Red, if liberals didn't spill the beans on all of the damage done by the corporations, Cancer rates would be double the obscene rate they are now.
12 months ago: Injection wells are not comparable to fracking. Yes there are some hazards to fracking but no proof has yet to be produced that does not reflect directly on the failure of the humans doing the work to do their jobs correctly.

Most telling statement from your reference:
"Records also show wells are frequently operated in violation of safety regulations and under conditions that greatly increase the risk of fluid leakage and the threat of water contamination."

You fail to lay blame where blame should be. Two organizations are at fault, not the process for either fracing or injection wells, the injectors and the government, one for cutting corners in the name of greed and the other for not punishing the former to the fullest extent of the law.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.