Dirty Energy

brianlux

There must be a better way.

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campai ... oud/apple/

riotgrl

I didn't know about this so thanks for posting. As someone from KY, I know first hand how dirty coal is AND how horrible mountaintop removal is in this state. Thanks for the share!

brianlux

riotgrl wrote:

I didn't know about this so thanks for posting. As someone from KY, I know first hand how dirty coal is AND how horrible mountaintop removal is in this state. Thanks for the share!

I believe it, riotgil. Here's an excellent but often heartbreaking book on the sunbect- Erik Reece, Lost Mountain, A Year in the Vanishing Wilderness (Radical Strip Mining and the Devastation of Appalachia):

Last-12-Exit

As someone who works at a coal fired power plant, I would like to say that until the US runs out of coal, we will continue to burn it. Government can regulate it as much as they want (which causes a heavy increase in rates), but the fact is is that its cheaper. The bottom line is the bottom line. Yes, its not good for the ozone. No, there's no such thing as clean coal. It is what it is.
If north and south America stopped burning coal tomorrow, we would still have excess amounts of CO2 cuz China regulates nothing. Most plants don't use the scrubbers that they have and the others don't have them at all.

markin ball

Last-12-Exit wrote:

As someone who works at a coal fired power plant, I would like to say that until the US runs out of coal, we will continue to burn it. Government can regulate it as much as they want (which causes a heavy increase in rates), but the fact is is that its cheaper. The bottom line is the bottom line. Yes, its not good for the ozone. No, there's no such thing as clean coal. It is what it is.
If north and south America stopped burning coal tomorrow, we would still have excess amounts of CO2 cuz China regulates nothing. Most plants don't use the scrubbers that they have and the others don't have them at all.

Well I, for one, want better, and I will vote that way, both in the polls and with my wallet. Who's with me?

Last-12-Exit

Thanks for voting me out of a job...

Last-12-Exit

Plus, who wants a nuclear plant in their backyard?

brianlux

Last-12-Exit wrote:

Plus, who wants a nuclear plant in their backyard?

That's for danged sure! So if we can't (or don't want to) stop coal burning plants form operating, what about improving scrubbers? I realize there is a cost involved but that could be offset by reduction in health care related and long-term costs. Last-12-Exit, can we make these plants cleaner? How so and to whom should we write to encourage cleaner running plants?

Last-12-Exit

I'm not an engineer. That.being said, I don't think every pollutant can be scrubbed out. The plant I work at has 2 relatively new unit with up to date scrubbers and two 25-30 year old units with out of date scrubbers. They will be updating them within the next few years.

With anything, write your congressman. Plants won't change unless they are forced by government regulations. My company has shut one plant down and will be shutting another down by 2013 because of harsher carbon emission regulation.

The concept of a "cleaner running plant" does not exist.

usamamasan1

We just sell coal to China if we don't burn it here.
Still gets a good burn on.

redrock

Coal is cheap and plentiful and power companies/plants/etc will continue to use this in order to maximise their profit, regardless of damage done. There are various 'clean coal' technologies that can help reduce the impact of the pollutants but these improvements/changes are expensive and hit the companies where it hurts - their pockets. One of the cleanest technologies out there is the gasification of coal - takes out almost all the impurities. I'm thinking this is the only way forward for those industries who wish to continue to use this natural resource while the earth 'has stock'. But I believe it's a pricey process and some may not see this as a commercially viable solution - don't know. Certainly we cannot continue as we do now.

Jeanwah

Last-12-Exit wrote:

Thanks for voting me out of a job...

Ever hear of black lung? Coal mines polluting and poisoning an entire community? If I were you, I'd do whatever it took to take care of your health, because the CEOs of coal mines certainly don't care about your health. Too many workers do what they have to, to keep a job - and even defend it, even if it's killing them. This is the wrong mind frame. You're right, there is no such thing as clean coal, so research the health effects of that job you have in the mine. Then decide if it's worth it.

riotgrl

brianlux wrote:

riotgrl wrote:

I didn't know about this so thanks for posting. As someone from KY, I know first hand how dirty coal is AND how horrible mountaintop removal is in this state. Thanks for the share!

I believe it, riotgil. Here's an excellent but often heartbreaking book on the sunbect- Erik Reece, Lost Mountain, A Year in the Vanishing Wilderness (Radical Strip Mining and the Devastation of Appalachia):

Thanks for the book recommendation - I am compiling my list of summer to read books and this will definitely be added!

Last-12-Exit

Jeanwah wrote:

Last-12-Exit wrote:

Thanks for voting me out of a job...

Ever hear of black lung? Coal mines polluting and poisoning an entire community? If I were you, I'd do whatever it took to take care of your health, because the CEOs of coal mines certainly don't care about your health. Too many workers do what they have to, to keep a job - and even defend it, even if it's killing them. This is the wrong mind frame. You're right, there is no such thing as clean coal, so research the health effects of that job you have in the mine. Then decide if it's worth it.

Yes, I have heard of black lung. That is more prevalent at the coal mines. Not the plants that burn coal.

But here's the deal: we will all die someday. If I die at 78 instead 88 or 68 instead of 78 because I worked at a coal fire plant, I'm ok with that because I make a very good living and can easily provide for my wife and 3 kids.
That is definitely not the wrong mind set.

brianlux

Last-12-Exit wrote:

I'm not an engineer. That.being said, I don't think every pollutant can be scrubbed out. The plant I work at has 2 relatively new unit with up to date scrubbers and two 25-30 year old units with out of date scrubbers. They will be updating them within the next few years.

With anything, write your congressman. Plants won't change unless they are forced by government regulations. My company has shut one plant down and will be shutting another down by 2013 because of harsher carbon emission regulation.

The concept of a "cleaner running plant" does not exist.

In that case let's go with "use less".

Last-12-Exit

brianlux wrote:

Last-12-Exit wrote:

I'm not an engineer. That.being said, I don't think every pollutant can be scrubbed out. The plant I work at has 2 relatively new unit with up to date scrubbers and two 25-30 year old units with out of date scrubbers. They will be updating them within the next few years.

With anything, write your congressman. Plants won't change unless they are forced by government regulations. My company has shut one plant down and will be shutting another down by 2013 because of harsher carbon emission regulation.

The concept of a "cleaner running plant" does not exist.

In that case let's go with "use less".

I agree 100%. It starts with homeowners turning off appliances, lights, tvs, computers when they are not needed. But with industry, its not that easy. My plant feeds power to a nucor steel, alcoa aluminum, and several other smaller plants. Nucor uses 2 electric arc furnaces. Same at alcoa.
The question is how do they use less? I can't answer that

brianlux

Last-12-Exit wrote:

brianlux wrote:

Last-12-Exit wrote:

I'm not an engineer. That.being said, I don't think every pollutant can be scrubbed out. The plant I work at has 2 relatively new unit with up to date scrubbers and two 25-30 year old units with out of date scrubbers. They will be updating them within the next few years.

With anything, write your congressman. Plants won't change unless they are forced by government regulations. My company has shut one plant down and will be shutting another down by 2013 because of harsher carbon emission regulation.

The concept of a "cleaner running plant" does not exist.

In that case let's go with "use less".

I agree 100%. It starts with homeowners turning off appliances, lights, tvs, computers when they are not needed. But with industry, its not that easy. My plant feeds power to a nucor steel, alcoa aluminum, and several other smaller plants. Nucor uses 2 electric arc furnaces. Same at alcoa.
The question is how do they use less? I can't answer that

Good question. That's definitely out of my league!

What about ocean current turbines? Anyone here keeping up on that? I haven't heard anything about them in a while.

Last-12-Exit

We have them off the coast of south Carolina. But you would need several hundred of them to compete with just one power plant.

markin ball

Last-12-Exit wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Last-12-Exit wrote:

Thanks for voting me out of a job...

Ever hear of black lung? Coal mines polluting and poisoning an entire community? If I were you, I'd do whatever it took to take care of your health, because the CEOs of coal mines certainly don't care about your health. Too many workers do what they have to, to keep a job - and even defend it, even if it's killing them. This is the wrong mind frame. You're right, there is no such thing as clean coal, so research the health effects of that job you have in the mine. Then decide if it's worth it.

Yes, I have heard of black lung. That is more prevalent at the coal mines. Not the plants that burn coal.

But here's the deal: we will all die someday. If I die at 78 instead 88 or 68 instead of 78 because I worked at a coal fire plant, I'm ok with that because I make a very good living and can easily provide for my wife and 3 kids.
That is definitely not the wrong mind set.

Why should you have to make that sacrifice? Let's find a better way for you and everyone else that is impacted by burning fossil fuels.