-
-
Federal appeals court rejects EPA water rules for coal plant discharges
A federal appeals court yesterday rejected a Kentucky regulation for coal-mining discharges into waterways and ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to re-evaluate the rule.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit also rejected the EPA's approval of five other water pollution regulations. They included a rule dealing with how much pollution from a concentrated animal feeding operation may be discharged into some lakes, streams and rivers.
The decision sends the regulations back to the EPA to be rewritten.
The decision came as a result of a lawsuit filed in 2004 by the Kentucky Waterways Alliance, an environmental group. The alliance sued the EPA during the decade-long dispute over the Clean Water Act, saying the agency approved rules for Kentucky that had so many exemptions that they were practically useless.
The court is requiring the EPA to reconsider Kentucky's exemption for coal-mining discharges. The exemption allows coal mines to dump in areas with good water quality if the state finds a social and economic need for the dumping.
Kentucky's regulations also exempted a variety of pollution discharges into waters in which fish, shellfish and wildlife live.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Russell upheld the regulations in 2006.
The appeals court found that the EPA, in approving the exemptions, failed to explain why their effect would be insignificant.
The appeals court did uphold the EPA's approval of the method Kentucky uses to select waterways meriting special protection.
Judge Deborah Cook wrote for the majority of the three-judge panel that the state gave the EPA a letter saying how it planned to interpret the clean water regulations, a move that doesn't meet the requirements of the federal Administrative Procedures Act.
"This securing an informal commitment from a state agency rather than requiring the state to amend its regulations violates the federal approval procedure," Cook wrote.
Senior Judge Eugene Siler joined Cook in ordering the EPA to rework the regulations.
***********
The EPA is supposed to stand for Environmental Protection Agency. I think it should be changed to Environmental Plundering Agency.
"The appeals court found that the EPA, in approving the exemptions, failed to explain why their effect would be insignificant."
How convenient. Good to see courts standing up to this blatant disregard for our environment. A federal appeals court yesterday rejected a Kentucky regulation for coal-mining discharges into waterways and ordered the Environment... more -
Robert Redford hopes coal movie inspires citizen groups
Robert Redford was so struck by a story of Texas mayors, ranchers and other citizens who stood up against plans for a batch of new coal-fired power plants that he narrated a film about it.
The actor and founder of the Sundance Film Festival is lending his voice to a 34-minute documentary called "Fighting Goliath: Texas Coal Wars." The film is being shown in seven cities in Utah and Nevada next week.
Redford's hoping the story inspires others to face off against the "mythology" of nonrenewable resources and consider renewable energy alternatives.
"It makes no sense going in a direction that represents yesterday," Redford said in an interview with The Associated Press this week.
The story centers on a fight that started in 2006 over 19 proposed coal-fired power plants in central and east Texas. The plans galvanized a diverse group of citizens who might otherwise have divergent political viewpoints: ranchers, environmentalists, business leaders, legislators, lawyers and more than a dozen local mayors.
Redford, who has been involved with environmental causes for decades, said he was inspired by the group's unifying interests around clean air and a healthy environment. The coalition opposing the plans grew to include 36 cities, counties and school districts.
"To me, that was a sign of changing times," said Redford, who spends about six months a year in Utah.
Eventually, the company that proposed 11 of the new plants agreed to build only three.
The film, produced by The Redford Center at the Sundance Preserve and Austin, Texas-based Alpheus Media, has already been shown in Texas. Supporters are bringing it to Utah and Nevada where several new coal-fired plants are being proposed.
"It's very relevant to what's going on not only in Utah but the rest of the country," said Tim Wagner, director of the Utah Smart Energy Campaign. "We want people to understand when they see this film that they can get involved, they too can make a difference."
Redford said he sees what happened in Texas as an indication that a tipping point has been reached in how the public perceives coal-fired plants.
"That's breaking apart now because the reality is seeping through like grass coming through the sidewalk," he said.
The screenings next week will be followed by panel discussions about pollution, global warming, renewable energy in the West, ways to minimize energy use and "economic opportunities of the clean energy economy."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Robert Redford is an environmental icon whose work has brought great change in understanding and in perceiving the problems we face regarding it. Lending his voice to this movie will hopefully inspire other citizen groups to do what politicians will not: stand up to dirty big coal. That is where we will see the most change... right out here, bringing it there. Robert Redford was so struck by a story of Texas mayors, ranchers and other citizens who stood up against plans for a batch of new coa... more -
Coal plans go up in smoke
Environmentalists in the US have halted a huge new wave of coal-fired power stations. What lessons can Europe learn from them?
One day, historians might speculate that it was the ambition of the companies that sought to profit by building coal-fired power stations that triggered the beginning of the end for humans' most polluting habit.
Four years ago, campaigners in the US raised concerns over plans to build 150 coal-fired power stations nationwide. Today, nearly half those plans have been defeated in the courts or abandoned, while half of the remaining proposals are being actively opposed. Just 14 of the 150 plants are being developed, and environmental lawyers are all still pursuing them.
"The enormity of what they were proposing to do provided a platform to have that whole debate about pollution, including global-warming pollution, " says Bruce Nilles , director of the national coal campaign for the Sierra Club, America's biggest grassroots environment group.
Firmer action
In a few years, the backlash against coal power in America has become the country's biggest-ever environmental campaign, transforming the nation's awareness of climate change and inspiring political leaders to take firmer action after years of doubt and delay. Plants have been defeated in at least 30 of the 50 states, uniting those with already strong environmental records, such as California, with more conservative areas, such as the southern and central states.
The success of the US campaign is also now inspiring a global wave of protests, many in Europe, against similar schemes that plan to build coal-fired generators before carbon capture technology exists. If the European protesters succeed, Nilles believes US legislators will be likely to support presidential candidates' promises to join international efforts to cut emissions. By implication, though, if the protesters fail in Europe, the impact on a US or international deal would be disastrous.
The US anti-coal campaign is being linked to protests against similar plans in Australia, Germany, Italy and the UK, where there are demonstrations at almost every public appearance by E.ON, the company that plans to build Britain's first new first new coal power station for two decades in Kingsnorth, Kent, where protesters set up a protest camp against the new development in August.
US campaigners say they are concerned that if the UK and other European countries go ahead with new coal plants, the momentum to tackle climate change will be lost. " The rest of the world has been leading on this, particularly Europe," says Nilles. "Building new coal makes it increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to meet [emissions] targets, so it's critical the European community countries do not fail."
Continues... Environmentalists in the US have halted a huge new wave of coal-fired power stations. What lessons can Europe learn from them? ... more -
Appalachian Voices: Follow the coal money
Want to know how much money your elected representative in Washington, D.C., received from the coal industry? A North Carolina environmental group is pledging to put that information right at your fingertips.
A new Web site tracks and lists the amount of donations that federal politicians receive from coal interests. Follow the Coal Money, at www.followthecoalmoney.org, is the latest salvo in what is turning out to be an increasingly heated battle over the future of coal in the nation's energy policy.
I'm not saying it is a big corporate conspiracy, but what (the money) is being spent for, it is being spent for a good reason, said Matt Wasson, director of programs for Appalachian Voices, which runs the site.
Coal is once again front and center as the nation's top leaders debate energy policy. Both presidential candidates have pledged to take actions to curb global warming, yet at the same time energy use is on the rise, thanks in part to new technology. For example, one Australian study found that a Playstation 3 uses five times the amount of energy as a five-foot high refrigerator.
Coal remains among the cheapest and most abundant energy-producing natural resource. Yet concerns over its environmental impacts have helped stop plans for new coal-burning power plants across the nation.
The coal industry is fighting back by ramping up its public relations efforts. Over the past year it has quadrupled its budget for its primary political campaign, called the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, according to news reports The campaign has run advertisements on TV touting the benefits of coal and maintains its own Web site at www.americaspower.org.
Follow the Coal Money is partly a response to that campaign. Its mission is touted on the front page: As Congress debates how to address two of coal's biggest problems mountaintop removal and global warming you can find out how polluters are influencing lawmakers with their dirty coal money.
**************
I believe it is simply a given that politicians are too devoid of true moral insight as to understand the amount of damage this form of energy continues to do to the planet and the health and safety of human beings. This is why I have little faith that any sort of comprehensive climate bill will pass in Congress regardless of who sits in the White House. In order for that to happen they would have to have a moral epiphany... or, see that the people have taken it upon themselves to bring the alternate energies we need to sustain ourselves and this planet to market. Solar and wind are booming now, but you won't hear that from the corrupt Congress that continues to collect the money of the coal and nuclear industries while touting how much they are for the environment... even as they work to kill tax incentives for those very alternate energy sources they claim we need.
The site Appalachian Voices put together now allows you to follow the members of Congress who talk out of both sides of their mouths to see how much they are taking from coal and to hold them accountable for it as they are accomplices in the continued erosion of our environment. Hopefully louder voices will be heard on the part of the people knowing they have the power to then tell these representatives that if they continue to side with the destruction of our planet in the form of pollution and it's contribution to climate change that we the people have the power to see to it that they do not serve us any longer. It has to begin with us, because it sure isn't going to begin with them. Want to know how much money your elected representative in Washington, D.C., received from the coal industry? A North Carolina environ... more -
Xcel to Disclose Global Warming Risks
One of the country’s largest builders of coal-fired power plants will give investors detailed warnings about the risks that global warming poses to its business under a deal with New York’s attorney general.
The agreement Wednesday between the attorney general, Andrew M. Cuomo, and the company, Xcel Energy of Minneapolis, is the first of its kind in the country. It could open a broad new front in efforts by environmental groups to pressure the energy industry into reducing emissions of the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming.
Until now, advocates have largely relied on shareholder resolutions as a way of pushing the companies to reduce their carbon dioxide output and invest more aggressively in renewable energy sources like wind or solar power.
That effort has picked up pace, according to Ceres, a coalition of investors and environmental groups, with dozens of shareholder resolutions filed during the 2008 financial reporting season.
“This really takes it another step, by making it a settlement agreement that should have an impact across the industry,” said Dan Bakal, the director of electric power programs at Ceres.
Mr. Cuomo subpoenaed Xcel and four other companies last September, seeking to determine whether their efforts to build new coal-fired power plants posed risks not disclosed to investors, like future lawsuits or higher costs to comply with possible regulations restricting carbon emissions.
The attorney general’s office is still negotiating with the four other companies — the AES Corporation, Dominion, Dynegy and Peabody Energy. But Mr. Cuomo hopes that the agreement will help persuade other companies to follow in the footsteps of Xcel, which supplies natural gas and electricity to customers in eight states. Among utilities, Xcel is one of the nation’s largest producers of greenhouse gases and a major provider of wind energy.
Many coal-fired power plants have been proposed or are under construction across the country and environmental advocates have made it a priority to reduce their impact.
“This landmark agreement sets a new industrywide precedent that will force companies to disclose the true financial risks that climate change poses to their investors,” Mr. Cuomo said in a statement. “Coal-fired power plants can significantly contribute to global warming, and investors have the right to know all the associated risks.”
The agreement represents another novel use by Mr. Cuomo of the Martin Act, a powerful tool that allows the attorney general to bring criminal as well as civil charges. Mr. Cuomo’s predecessor, Eliot Spitzer, used the law to vastly expand the office’s investigations of suspected Wall Street malfeasance.
Now Mr. Cuomo has turned it into a de facto form of environmental enforcement, too. For energy companies, including those based far from New York, he is able to claim jurisdiction because they issue securities on Wall Street.
The agreement with Xcel requires the company to analyze the likely effects on its business of current and future legislation or regulations in the states and countries where it operates and to disclose that information in its investor filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Congress and many states are considering global warming legislation. Ten states stretching from Maryland to Maine, including New Jersey, New York and Connecticut, have struck a deal to cap emissions and allow trading of pollution allotments among producers.
For the rest of the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/28/business/28energy.htm... One of the country’s largest builders of coal-fired power plants will give investors detailed warnings about the risks that global war... more -
Who will face up to the climate change crisis?
Obama and McCain both say global warming a problem, but are their proposals enough to make a difference?
The Democratic and Republican presidential hopefuls put forward their respective energy and environmental platforms last week, addressing offshore drilling, coal, nuclear energy and fuel efficiency. Both John McCain and Barack Obama have said that Global warming is a problem and would make it a top priority. But would they go as far as NASA's Dr. James Hansen says is necessary before reaching what he calls the tipping point? The Real News spoke with Ben Wikler of Avaaz.org and Professor Catherine Gautier about the promises and shortfalls of the candidates' plans.
Ben Wikler is a campaign director for Avaaz.org, a global version of MoveOn.org, where he oversees efforts on climate change, global health, and other issues. Previously, he worked as press secretary for Congressman Sherrod Brown's US Senate campaign in Ohio, and was a founding producer of The Al Franken Show on Air America Radio.
Catherine Gautier is involved in educational aspects of climate change science and policy. Originally from Paris, France, Gautier directs the Institute for Computational Earth Systems Science at the University of California Santa Barbara. the book 'Facing Climate Change Together' was compiled and edited by Catherine Gautier and Jean-Louis Fellous. Obama and McCain both say global warming a problem, but are their proposals enough to make a difference? ... more -
Xcel energy takes steps to shut down coal plants
State regulators have approved a plan by Xcel Energy Inc. to shut down two coal-fired power plants in Colorado, citing benefits to public health and concerns about carbon-dioxide emissions.
It's the first time in the nation a utility has volunteered, and regulators have approved, a plan to shut down power plants because of CO2 emissions, which are linked to global warming.
The Colorado Public Utilities Commission spent Monday and Tuesday discussing a plan from Xcel Energy Inc. (NYSE: XEL) to meet its customers power demands for the next several years. A written order offering specific details of the decision is expected in a few weeks.
The closures are two to four years away, and Xcel has proposed using natural gas to make up for the lost power supplies.
In reaching the decision the commission was trying to move Xcel Energy toward carbon reduction goals that Gov. [Bill] Ritter has outlined in his climate action plan, PUC spokesman Terry Bote said Wednesday.
Also, they were adding renewable-energy resources in a cost-effective, technically feasible manner, ensuring an adequate supply of electricity in the future and being respectful of the cost that consumers have to bear, he said.
Xcel, based in Minneapolis, is Colorado's largest utility, serving about 70 percent of the population with natural gas and electricity.
When Xcel filed its plan in late 2007, the utility proposed shutting down the coal units at the Arapahoe power plant in Denver, near Santa Fe Drive and Evans Avenue, and the Cameo plant in Grand Junction.
We are pleased that the commission has agreed with our proposal to close two of our power plants, as we continually move toward reducing our carbon dioxide emissions in Colorado, said Xcel spokesman Mark Stutz.
Gov. Ritter last year called for a 20 percent reduction in carbon-dioxide emission by 2020. These closures will reduce our emissions by 1.4 million tons a year and put us well on the way toward meeting the governor's goal, Stutz said.
The plants together can generate a total of 229 megawatts of electricity. Xcel proposed replacing the coal-fired generators at Denver Arapahoe power plant with ones that use natural gas and can generate 480 megawatts of power, but a decision on that plan has been postponed.
With the commissioners approval, the Cameo plant near Grand Junction is scheduled to close by December 2010. The Arapahoe station in Denver is slated for closure by December 2012, Stutz said.
The Colorado Public Utilities Commission has set a clear path for Colorado's energy future, said Keith Hay, energy advocate for Environment Colorado, an advocacy group. Colorado will be a leader in clean, renewable energy, and we'll close down coal-fired power plants and replace that energy with renewable resources.
We need to look at renewable resources first, and we need to get off of expensive and environmentally costly fossil-fuel resources. Solar is a better investment today and will be a better investment for tomorrow to supply energy for Colorado, Hay said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now this is the direction we need to go in! State regulators have approved a plan by Xcel Energy Inc. to shut down two coal-fired power plants in Colorado, citing benefits to pub... more -
Do you remember the Olympic torch? Your atmosphere does.
That was back in April. who cares?
The 5,500 tons of carbon dioxide pollution that the worldwide torch relay emitted is anything but a memory.
To put 5,500 tons into perspective:
A round trip flight between New York and Los Angeles produces 2.4 tons of C02,
driving 12,000 miles in a 2006 Ford Explorer, 7.83 tons.
The British Virgin Islands emit 84,000 tons of C02 per year,
the European Union emits 3.1 billion per year
and the United States 6 billion per year.
A 250-guest wedding, assuming that 125 attendees spend the night at a high-end hotel, will produce 9 tons of C02.
see link to know how 5,500 tons was emitted.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
it's the beginning of the 21st century. the time for frivolousness must end. That was back in April. who cares? ... more -
Coal fired power plants rated worldwide - lots of useful info
repost this link with more creativity if you wish.
-
New 1.8 billion dollar coal plant breaks ground
If you drive your car to work and know its bad the people of rual south west Virgina will go to work on a coal plant knowing its bad.
-
An End To Mountaintop Removal Mining?
Mountaintop removal could be ended by as early as next year, said a leader in an environmental group working to halt the destructive mining practices.
“Now there is an increasingly powerful and vocal national movement to stop mountaintop removal,” said Matt Wasson, an ecologist and director of programs for Appalachian Voices. “I’m saying we’re going to have it stopped by the end of next year … the end of 2009.”
“Mountaintop removal” is, to some, a controversial term. It refers to the blasting away of mountain ridges to get to the coal underneath, a process that evolved with technological advancements over the decades from traditional contour mining.
What makes this type of mining cost-effective is a valley-fill permit, which allows the overburden - dirt and rock removed to expose the coal - to be dumped into adjacent valleys.
The practice has been criticized as degrading to the environment and hazardous to nearby residents, who must endure the noise, dust and danger of blasting on the mountains above their homes, as well as flooding when stream courses are changed.
“Mountaintop removal mining is a national disgrace,” said Aaron Isherwood, staff attorney for the Sierra Club. “If the American people knew what was happening in Appalachia, I feel certain that they would demand an end to this practice.”
Coal producers argue that their industry is one of the nation’s most regulated - and as long as they follow regulations, they should be allowed to extract the fuel that fires half of the nation’s electricity generation.
Wasson pins his hopes on two distinct possibilities - a pending U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on a West Virginia court case and the election of a new U.S. president who will take office in January.
Other activists agree that both have the potential to put a stop to the issuance of new permits for mountaintop removal mining.
“I think if we get a new president, It’ll be stopped, and I guess we’re going to get a new president by next year,” said Joe Lovett, director of the Appalachian Center for the Economy and the Environment.
Legal ramifications
With a long list of plaintiffs and defendants, the West Virginia lawsuit seeks to put a stop to valley-fill permits, which are issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Central to the issue is the question of whether the discard from mining should be considered waste under the 1977 Clean Water Act, which limits the release of pollutants into streams.
“I don’t know what will happen in the future,” Lovett said. “I can tell you we haven’t had any significant permits issued since March 2007 because the court found that the federal government was illegally issuing permits at that time.”
When a federal court in West Virginia issued an order rescinding permits in question, the permits were sent back to the Corps. The Corps of Engineers contested the ruling in the Richmond appellate court. The case also includes an issue related to sediment discharge.
Lovett said three different decisions on valley fills have been overturned by the 4th Circuit since 2000, “but we’re much more optimistic this time.”
He said if the appeals court upholds the decision, the federal government, which he said loosened its regulations during the current administration, would have to completely change its permitting processes.
“How can they approve the filling of hundreds and a couple thousand miles of mountain streams in this region and say that’s not significantly degrading the water?” Lovett said. “All I can say is the Corps hasn’t been doing its job up until now.”
He said in addition to the West Virginia case, which will also affect Virginia, legal action also is under way in Kentucky, and the proposed Ison Rock Ridge mining permit in Wise County, Va., is being watched closely as it moves through the regulatory process, as is the court ruling expected soon in a lawsuit over logging on the site.
**continues, please click link to read** Mountaintop removal could be ended by as early as next year, said a leader in an environmental group working to halt the destructive m... more -
First Solar: Quest for the $1 Watt
Within five years, this company's thin-film solar cells could compete with coal.
Before First Solar's manufacturing innovations, cadmium-telluride photovoltaic cells were the size of postage stamps; now the company makes them as big as window panes.
This is great news!
I can't wait to see large solar generation plants put into action.
It isn't the end solution to get off oil but it will help. Within five years, this company's thin-film solar cells could compete with coal. ... more -
Native Americans strike coal deal
An American Indian tribe has struck a 50-year deal with an Australian company to build a $7bn (£3.6bn) plant that would convert coal into liquid fuel.
The development between the Crow tribe of Montana and Australian-American Energy, will initially see up to 50,000 barrels of fuel produced. One of the first projects of its kind in the US, output at the Many Stars plant could hit 125,000 barrels daily. Various other coal-to-fuel projects are planned for US states, including Ohio.
Construction will begin in several years and will use coal from a mine that is yet to be developed on the Indians' reservation. The tribe has 12,000 members and the Crow will pocket up to 50% of the profits from the plant after investors make up their costs. It is estimated the tribe could receive up to $1bn a year - a major economic boost given its annual budget is currently $26m. The Crow's reservation is located above some of the US's largest coal reserves and some estimate there may be as much as 9bn tonnes underneath. To date, the area has remained largely free of mining.
Both the tribe and Australian-American Energy have anticipated opposition from environmental groups, and have said the Many Stars plant will be able to capture 95% of the carbon dioxide it emits. But Crow chairman Carl Venne said this was a chance for the community to escape poverty. "People have to realise this is one of the poorest counties in the whole nation," said Venne. "It means we will become self-sufficient as a tribe," he added.
The US is expected to see a number of similar coal-to-liquid plants in the coming years and many have been proposed or are still being considered. West Virginia and Wyoming, Ohio, are among the locations which could accommodate similar projects. Australia-American Energy is a subsidiary of Australian Energy. Australian Energy chief executive, Allan Blood, has already embarked on two similar projects in Australia including a $2bn plant to convert coal to liquid fertilizer, and another which was recently snapped up by Shell and Anglo American. An American Indian tribe has struck a 50-year deal with an Australian company to build a $7bn (£3.6bn) plant that would convert coal i... more -
Coal plants are worse than nuclear plants?
According to Climate Progress, "The fact that coal-fired power plants throughout the world are the major sources of radioactive materials released to the environment has several implications. It suggests that coal combustion is more hazardous to health than nuclear power and that it adds to the background radiation burden even more than does nuclear power. It also suggests that if radiation emissions from coal plants were regulated, their capital and operating costs would increase, making coal-fired power less economically competitive." According to Climate Progress, "The fact that coal-fired power plants throughout the world are the major sources of radioactive m... more
-
Abandoned mines pose big risks
WASHINGTON - The government has endangered the public's health and safety by failing to clean up abandoned mines on federal land in the West, according to a scathing audit released Friday.
The Interior Department's inspector general found dangerous levels of arsenic, lead and mercury, along with gaping cavities, at dilapidated hard-rock mining sites easily accessible to visitors and residents.
Bureau of Land Management supervisors told staff to ignore the problems, and employees who tried to report contaminated sites were threatened with retaliation, the audit said.
At least 12 people were killed in accidents at abandoned mine sites between 2004 and 2007, and "the potential for more deaths and injuries are ominous," it said.
BLM under fire
The mines are mostly in California, Nevada and Arizona. The California Department of Conservation estimates there are about 47,000 abandoned mines in California. Other surveys have estimated about 500,000 such sites nationwide, where gold, silver, copper, lead and other minerals were mined, often decades ago.
Environmentalists have estimated cleanup costs as high as $72 billion. But the inspector general's audit noted that simple precautions could be taken, such as fences and warning signs. So far, the audit indicates, the Bureau of Land Management has hardly been up to the job.
"BLM's abandoned mines program has long been undermined, neglected and marginalized by poor management practices and insufficient staffing and resources," said the report.
In response, BLM issued a statement defending its abandoned mine program as "highly effective." The statement did not address specific circumstances raised in the audit.
"The BLM has an active program in place to identify and address (abandoned mine land) hazards on its lands," said spokesman Matt Spangler. "The agency worked closely with the IG audit team over the last year in examining the abandoned mine site challenges that it faces. The BLM accepts the IG's recommendations and will work diligently to implement them."
'Quick call to action'
BLM is part of the Interior Department and administers 258 million acres of public land primarily in 12 Western states. The majority of abandoned mine sites within Interior Department jurisdiction are on BLM land.
Last year, 13-year-old Rikki Howard died and her younger sister was injured after they accidentally drove their all-terrain vehicle into an open 125-foot mine shaft near BLM's Windy Point Recreation Area in Kingman, Ariz.
The mine shaft is on a small piece of private property surrounded by BLM land. Only after the accident, BLM provided a fence and warning signs for the site. Yet when auditors visited the area, they found two other deep mine shafts nearby, one unfenced and one only partially fenced, and with no warning signs. WASHINGTON - The government has endangered the public's health and safety by failing to clean up abandoned mines on federal land ... more -
Great Documentary On Coal-Burning Power Plants In Texas!
A company called SnagFilms has made this also film called FIGHTING GOLIATH: TEXAS COAL WARS, a Robert Redford narrated documentary that tells the story of farmers, ranchers and Mayors fighting against the construction of 18 new coal-burning power plants in Texas. A company called SnagFilms has made this also film called FIGHTING GOLIATH: TEXAS COAL WARS, a Robert Redford narrated documentary tha... more
-
Coal War: Construction of New Coal-Fired Plant Stopped
"A Georgia court this week halted construction of a new 1,200-megawatt coal-fired power plant on the Chattahoochee River, dubbed Longleaf, because backers failed to provide a plan to limit climate change–causing carbon dioxide emissions from it.
The decision marks the first time that potential greenhouse gas pollution has been cited as a factor in denying permission to build a new coal-fired power plant; it is also the first that hinges on a Supreme Court ruling issued last year that found the Clean Air Act gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the power to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions." "A Georgia court this week halted construction of a new 1,200-megawatt coal-fired power plant on the Chattahoochee River, dubbed ... more -
U.S.coal company Brought to Trial in Canada
On Monday, July 7, 2008 the Ontario Court of Justice set a trial date in the prosecution of DTE Energy Company. The Michigan-based coal-fired power plant operator faces charges for polluting the St. Clair River. Judge Austin scheduled an ex parte trial after the accused declined to appear in Sarnia court on Monday. This is the first time that a U.S. company has faced prosecution in Canada for transboundary pollution.
Detroit Edison, a wholly owned subsidiary of DTE, operates the St. Clair/Belle River coal-fired power plant complex in eastern Michigan. Monitoring data show that these facilities emit hundreds of pounds of mercury each year, with more than half landing locally in Canada and the St. Clair watershed. In 2004 mercury reduction technologies that were installed at the St. Clair plant for a 30-day test period achieved a 94 percent reduction in emissions. At the end of the 30 days, the technology was removed and the company went back to emitting significant amounts of mercury.
When the mercury enters the St. Clair River, it spreads throughout the food chain, harmfully altering fish habitat and rendering fish unsafe for human consumption in violation of Canadian fisheries law. Mercury is a dangerous neurotoxin; a single gram of mercury per year is enough to contaminate a 25-acre lake to the point that fish are unsafe to eat. Both the state of Michigan and the province of Ontario have issued mercury fish advisories for the St. Clair River.
Scott Edwards, the Informant in Edwards v. DTE Energy, initiated the private prosecution in early 2007. Under Canadian law, citizens can use the criminal courts to prosecute individuals and corporations for violations of the Fisheries Act. The Fisheries Act is one of the country's most powerful environmental laws, making it an offence to deposit pollutants into waterways, harmfully impact fish habitat, or contaminate fish. Violators face potential fines and jail time if convicted. On Monday, July 7, 2008 the Ontario Court of Justice set a trial date in the prosecution of DTE Energy Company. The Michigan-based coa... more -
Coal ash is more radioactive than nuclear waste!
"Over the past few decades a series of studies has called stereotypes [about coal and nuclear energy] into question. Among the surprising conclusions: the waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, fly ash—a by-product from burning coal for power—contains up to 100 times more radiation than nuclear waste...
...Developing countries like India and China continue to unveil new coal-fired plants—at the rate of one every seven to 10 days in the latter nation. And the U.S. still draws around half of its electricity from coal. But coal plants have an additional strike against them: they emit harmful greenhouse gases...
With the world now focused on addressing climate change, nuclear power is gaining favor in some circles. China aims to quadruple nuclear capacity to 40,000 megawatts by 2020, and the U.S. may build as many as 30 new reactors in the next several decades. But, although the risk of a nuclear core meltdown is very low, the impact of such an event creates a stigma around the noncarbon power source.
The question boils down to the accumulating impacts of daily incremental pollution from burning coal or the small risk but catastrophic consequences of even one nuclear meltdown. "I suspect we'll hear more about this rivalry," Finkelman says. "More coal will be mined in the future. And those ignorant of the issues, or those who have a vested interest in other forms of energy, may be tempted to raise these issues again."
ARE WE F*CKED OR WHAT?!?
Who's side are you on in the Coal VS Nuclear Rivalry? Shall I print up TEAM COAL and TEAM NUCLEAR shirts? "Over the past few decades a series of studies has called stereotypes [about coal and nuclear energy] into question. Among the su... more -
How Clean Is Clean Coal? | American News Project
In a single year, less than one in 100,000 Americans contract a rare form of blood cancer. In Pennsylvania coal country, the rate is nearly five times higher. Many suspect "clean" coal is the cause. As the 2008 presidential candidates promote the potential of clean coal as an alternative fuel source, and as Congress prepares to debate energy legislation, ANP takes a look at the controversial practice of coal-ash dumping. An investigation brought to you in conjunction with our partner The Washington Independent. In a single year, less than one in 100,000 Americans contract a rare form of blood cancer. In Pennsylvania coal country, the rate is n... more
-
related topics
Coal
Contributors (390)
Coal
