"Santee Cooper nixes plan for coal plant"
J.P. Leous
Is this a sign of things to come? Is the clean energy revolution taking root even as Dirty Coal tries to scare the daylights out of us by spending millions on astroturfing and a fear campaign?
South Carolina utility, Santee Cooper, just nixed plans for a new coal plant in Florence County, S.C. — citing pending climate and energy legislation as playing a large role in their decision. Whether or not you enjoy recreating on the Great Pee Dee River (the primary source of water for this would-be plant), you’ll breathe a little easier now that the $2.2 billion facility won’t spew out millions of tons of carbon pollution, mercury, sulfur and other dangerous toxins that can wreak havoc on human health.
But there’s more work to be done. About a third of our nation’s carbon-dioxide emissions (a chief greenhouse gas) come from coal plants — and most of the electricity from coal is generated in old plants built before 1980. Long story short, we are getting far too much of our electricity from an outdated and unhealthy fuel that harms communities and wildlands at nearly every step of its lifecycle. And don’t think for a second that new coal plants will bring us the change we need.
Ripping coal from the ground by strip mining and mountain top removal destroys huge tracks of natural areas (think habitat). Slurry wastes directly contribute to pollution in ecosystems that people rely on. Moving coal from pit to plant and burning coal cause air and water pollution, not to mention the impacts on wildlife.
Like factoids? Here are two about the industry that emits more global warming pollution than any other human activity to share with friends at your next barbecue:
- The government estimates that at current extraction rates, mountain top removal will destroy over 1 million acres in Appalachia in the next 10 years. (NOT good news if you are of the many folks who enjoy this beautiful part of the country or rely on it for clean water.)
- Roughly 26% of our country’s energy-related methane emissions come from coal mining. Methane has more than 20 times the global warming impact as carbon dioxide.
So don’t buy the coal industry’s propaganda on “clean coal” because there’s no such thing!
This leaves me wondering, what would a $2.2 billion energy efficiency program look like? Less demand for dirty coal, new jobs ranging from construction to engineering, lower utility bills for home-owners and businesses, and better air and water quality? Seems like a good deal. Oh, AND significantly less global warming pollution. What’s not to like?
About J.P. Leous
J.P. joined The Wilderness Society in August of 2008 and covered a range of climate-related policy issues until his departure in November 2011.
He graduated Allegheny College cum laude in 2000 with a degree in... More about J.P. Leous
Legacy Comments
Factoids
Fact That $2 billion that will NOT be spend on American union jobs.
Fact Rising CO2 helps plants grow. Over the past 250 years CO2 increase also has increased plant growth approx. 30%.
Fact China will produce with coal the products America would have produced with coal, only, China makes money, America doesn't.
Fact $100 Trillion in unfunded obligations is what America has accrued. Shifting production overseas because our energy costs go up will make the deficit higher.
Fact 10 billion pounds of aerosols descend upon North America from East Asia every year (according to NASA), much of this from their "dirty" coal burning.
Fact coal mining doesn't destroy land, it alters it. True, its not so pretty, but it does help feed families.
Fact The environmental movement now is about income redistribution (according to Green Energy CzarVan Jones)
More facts
The fact is, mountaintop removal produces very few jobs, way fewer than traditional coal mining, and it does destroy the landscape. Putting the money into green energy production will produce many times the jobs, and who says green jobs can't be unionized? But most of all, if we continue to burn coal at this rate, global warming will go out of control, causing the collapse of the entire economy, at the very least. Then where will your jobs be? Gone, just like most living things.
Conversion to NAT GAS?
What's your view of converting existing coal fired power plants to natural gas where possible?
This is timely, and going to have a very high impact on the passage of the up-coming Legislation - the NAT GAS Act.
We need to know if this new method of underground high pressure water blasting of the shale, to release the NAT GAS is safe!
Where do they get the water? How much water does it take? What happens to the water?
(Water has been pumped into falling wells to bring up oil for years. I've been told that the water is than trapped in that void,
by the oil coating it.) (?).
Also, what quanity of the newly discovered reserves of NAT GAS would have to be produced using this method?
Is it already being widely used? If so, what's the data? How costly is it? If in fact it's found to be un-safe, can it be prohibited?
And what will the revised quanity of NAT GAS reserves be?
Keep Up the GOOD Work!
Kenn Drescher - Activist@ReformAutos.org