Factories of Death

“Coal plants are factories of death,” declared NASA.”  So if you think we going to be going to other fuel sources soon, think again.  The fact is, they are here to stay for a long time.  Currently coal produces a little less the 50% of the United States electricity and you might think the coal days are numbered since it is not a renewable source of energy.  The health issues are also immense, but nevertheless the United States is projected to build about 75 new plants by 2030. This means we will be using our coal and the world‘s coal for a long time.  It is too cheap to get rid of and too expensive to replace from a financial stand point, and in that fact is where the game of mirrors is being played.

The International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2008 project believes by 2030 that approximately 80% of the worlds energy will be driven by coal.  This is a slightly different message than the cry for alternative power sources that we here from the media and our president.  In fact that is what the Obama administration is about, pushing for a healthier world with cleaner energy sources.  That might be the calling, but when you start dissecting this issue we might want to stick with a senator’s cry, “You Lie.”

John Holdren, Obama’s Science advisor has been quoted saying that he is in favor of using the worlds abundant coal resources.  He does note that it needs to be done, “without intolerable impacts on regional air quality, acid rain, and global climate.”  The administration’s solution to this is Carbon Capture Sequestration, CCS.  This is an expensive process.  It is so expensive that the Bush administration halted research on it when it came time to build an experimental plant.  The cost of building one of these plants is expensive but it is also expensive to run.  These expenses will then have to be passed on to the consumer making your energy bill increase.

According to Source Watch, the final component of the CCS is a long term storage facility for CO2.  Which is about 100,000 wells.  This is about a 1.5 trillion dollar cost.  http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carbon_capture_and_storage I would expect that number to go up.  It always does.  The Department of Energy, DOE, concluded in a study,

“Whether, when, and how much carbon dioxide sequestration will ever occur on a commercial scale remains in question, and to achieve it will be expensive and problematic. The proposition has yet to be properly addressed in either a real or a practical context.”

In addition in a 2008 report issued by the Internal Energy Agency they warned that the resources and money that were being invested into the CCS where far less than what were needed to meet energy solutions.  In other words, we are throwing small amounts into research that will go nowhere.   The same study concluded,

“nuclear, and coal with CCS are all dirty, inefficient and wasteful compared to wind, solar, geothermal and ocean energy, and that these cleaner energy sources could eliminate global warming gases, create energy security, and meet the world’s ongoing energy needs entirely.”^[16][17]

Even with all of the experts’ conclusions no one is altering course from building more coal plants.  When all the information is added up it appears that these new plants will most likely be without the pollution guards due to cost.  Not to mention, they are not sure of the consequences of the technology.  They are storing the poison in the ground.  Did they not do that with radiation and discovered it leaks?  The fact is that the technology will not be in the United States any time soon because we are not invested in it, but we are going to invest in coal plants.  Even if we did invest in the technology there are no studies that show for a fact that this is a great option.  CCS is all dirty, concluded by the DOE.    With that said, there are other issues other than just the CO2 pollutants.  Remember the Tennessee Valley Authority facility in Kingston, TN.

Remember that toxic flood of sludge.  Have there been any safety changes for the sludge reservoirs?  The EPA has released 44 “high hazard potentials” that were previously kept a secret by the United States.  Pressure by numerous groups enticed the government to hand over the list.  Once receiving the list and reading how the plants were rated it raised many questions.  One of the largest questions posed was why over a hundred other facilities were not listed as potential health or environmental risks.  One would have expected among the 44 that there would have been some TVA facilities, but not even one was listed.  Also, out of these 44 facilities the government hesitates to acknowledge which of these are immediate dangers to civilians after accessing them.   One can only agree with U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) when she says that, The Obama administration’s decision to withhold the information is concerning.   Take a few minutes a listen to her press conference.

As disturbing as all this is one never knows when one of these toxic poisons may be in their backyard.  Wait! What are you talking about, there is no coal factory near me.  Maybe not, but do not feel safe.  Even if you are one that not concerned about the greenhouse gases, do not feel comfortable because you will probably be concerned about this next issue.  It is nearly something out Batman, with the Joker putting his poisons in secret products throughout our market.  Except this time the Joker got the government backing to poison us.

The EPA does not have a clear mind on how they are handling this matter, nor do they have a united working plan within the agency to tackle the issue.  The fact is the EPA has become Two Face.  Flipping their coin on what side of the issue they are supporting when it comes to Coal Poison Control.  It is clear that parts of the agency is in conflict with others, leaving you and me not knowing if the EPA is our ally or enemy when dealing with this problem.

One of the programs the EPA has started is to market the combustible waste to consumers, agriculture, and industries in partnership with the Coal Industries.  This is because they have regulated this waste as non-toxic and in doing so there will be no warning of any potential risk.  This is according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, (PEER). http://www.peer.org/ One of the products that will be sold is fertilizer.  The EPA says coal ash can improve the texture and fertility of soil.  Environmental advocates have concerns about the toxicity within this ash which can include arsenic, lead and mercury.  http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/10/epa-usda-still-promoting-coal-ash-for-crops.html .

“The dangers of using Coal Combustion Waist, CCW, are illustrated by the Battlefield Golf Club in Chesapeake, Virginia where coal fly ash was applied to contour the course. In a March 30, 2009, report EPA’s consultant found that boron, lead, arsenic, barium and other heavy metals were in danger of leaching off the course and contaminating groundwater, including residential wells. The inspection report concluded that “future migration of metals contained in fly ash remains a potential risk to nearby wells.”  From the Public Employees of Environmental Responsibilities http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1260

Another arm of the EPA is now promoting coal ash and other combustion byproduct as hazardous waste, working directly against the above initiative.  While even another is trying to turn it into furniture and building materials for our houses.   Yes, we all should be concerned, very concerned.  The EPA seems to be trying to help the coal companies dump their reliability for a toxic substance onto others by selling it, and hiding it in a mixture of other products.  Perhaps none of these products will be toxic on their own, or maybe they will.  My guess is we could get saturated with enough of these products that we will be removing them like lead paint or asbestos creating another storage problem.  Not to mention an illegal dumping problem of these toxins on a scale that we never seen before because they will have be forced into the mass public, and the public will want them out of their houses.  Then they want to put these toxins in our food just like mercury in our fish.  Why should it be a concern to us?  Why should it be a concern to them?  We are just trying to live here.

I get a little sensitive when the government does not step forward and do the right thing after a disaster, especially when it is something that they should have prevented in the first place.  Back in the 1980s the government acknowledged that coal plants where nothing but pure poison, but was too expensive of a problem to solve.  So they have continued to put it on the next administration desk while entrenching our reliability on its use. We all know it is a problem, but we have a bigger problem, we cannot make the tough choices.  We chose to live with the poison versus solving the issues.  We know the poison existed since the 80s and it was too expensive to live without.  Well graves are too expensive when they come prematurely to one’s life due to neglect and greed.  My wife and I have suffered from three years of exposure of radiation that was contaminating the water supply were we once lived.  I thought I was moving to the country to live healthy.  The fact is it had already been contaminated.  As I reported in the beginning of this article the government has no intention of backing off on coal.  It appears they are only going to make some good reports and a few tests on cleaning it up.   If we choose to be apathetic on this matter this will be the largest environmental issue for us, our kids and our existence.  If you cannot get behind anything, start doing your research on this issue and see how the government is not putting anyone first with this issue.  They are just giving a decent magic act.

And That’s The Way I See It

© Jonathan S. Brooks

With acknowledgement to prior sources and ownership of to those portions of articles that are quoted as listed above.

Advertisement