. . .
This is from Representative Pricey Harrison today:
Mountain Top Removal
"House Bill 340*, the bill I introduced to prohibit the use of mountain top removed coal in North Carolina power plants, was heard in the House Environment committee this week. NC is the second largest US consumer of mountain top removed coal, a barbaric practice that has lead to the destruction of more than 500 of the oldest mountains on the planet, burned and poisoned more than 1200 miles of streams, contaminated drinking water wells and caused other health problems for neighbors of the mines, and laid waste to dozens of Appalachian communities. The room was packed with coal and utility lobbyists. It was clear that they had effectively convinced members of the committee that increases in energy costs for consumers would ensue from a conversion from such coal, although the allegations were unsubstantiated. In fact, it may have an impact of about fifty cents ($.50) on a monthly homeowners’ power bill. We did not take a vote on the bill this week. Appalachian Voices, who has been working on this issue at the national and regional level and helping me with bill, and I are contemplating how to proceed."
Showing posts with label energy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label energy. Show all posts
What Money Cannot Buy
. . .
Will the money our generation saves by burning mountain-top, stripped-mined coal be enough to buy clean air, a healthy, bubbling stream or a beautiful mountain view for our children and grandchildren to enjoy?
We are not being good stewards of the natural resources that we are blessed to enjoy in America. The future depends on what we do now. Let's save the good earth.
Please contact some North Carolina legislators and ask them to protect the beauty of the states that are being polluted by this horrible, destruction of their beautiful mountains. Ask them not to fall for the line they are being handed by Progress Energy, Duke Power and other big energy companies.
There are places where this type of mining might possibly be acceptable for the short-term, but the mountains of the Eastern United States should be protected.
Let's compromise. There are abundant supplies of coal without tearing up the mountains in Eastern United States. If clean-burning coal is ever developed, we still have other ways of obtaining it.
Will the money our generation saves by burning mountain-top, stripped-mined coal be enough to buy clean air, a healthy, bubbling stream or a beautiful mountain view for our children and grandchildren to enjoy?
We are not being good stewards of the natural resources that we are blessed to enjoy in America. The future depends on what we do now. Let's save the good earth.
Please contact some North Carolina legislators and ask them to protect the beauty of the states that are being polluted by this horrible, destruction of their beautiful mountains. Ask them not to fall for the line they are being handed by Progress Energy, Duke Power and other big energy companies.
There are places where this type of mining might possibly be acceptable for the short-term, but the mountains of the Eastern United States should be protected.
Let's compromise. There are abundant supplies of coal without tearing up the mountains in Eastern United States. If clean-burning coal is ever developed, we still have other ways of obtaining it.
Do Not Remove Under Penalty of Law
Good news for the environment.
The EPA has halted some mountain top removal operations and put a hold on hundreds of mountaintop coal-mining permits on hold until it can evaluate their impact on our nation's streams and wetlands.
More details at CBS NEWS SITE
And a letter from the Environmental Protection Agency Site concerning the Highland Mining Company, Reylas Surface Mine.
The EPA has halted some mountain top removal operations and put a hold on hundreds of mountaintop coal-mining permits on hold until it can evaluate their impact on our nation's streams and wetlands.
More details at CBS NEWS SITE
And a letter from the Environmental Protection Agency Site concerning the Highland Mining Company, Reylas Surface Mine.
Bad News for Mountain Tops
_____
Looks like the Coal Industry wins again. It is hard for me to understand the logic of destroying beautiful mountains and polluting water from mountain springs when there are other, better ways to provide energy to Americans.
See article published in The Charleston Gazette
Published on Friday, February 13, 2009 by the Charleston Gazette (West Virginia)
Appeals Court Overturns Mountaintop Removal Ruling
by Ken Ward Jr.
CHARLESTON, W.Va. - A federal appeals court today overturned a judge's 2007 decision to require more thorough permit reviews of mountaintop removal mining operations.
____
I read somewhere that the so-called stimulus package (recently passed by the US Senate and US House of Rep.) contains money to fund research on clean-burning coal technology, but nothing to regulate where or how the coal is mined. In the meantime, how many mountains will be destroyed? How much will the environment be hurt? How many coal burning power plants will be built (some right here in NC) using dirty, mercury spewing, water polluting methods?
I don't know the status of a bill in the NC House that would try to stop mountain-top removal coal from being used in NC. It is a start and I hope our legislators will pass it.
Looks like the Coal Industry wins again. It is hard for me to understand the logic of destroying beautiful mountains and polluting water from mountain springs when there are other, better ways to provide energy to Americans.
See article published in The Charleston Gazette
Published on Friday, February 13, 2009 by the Charleston Gazette (West Virginia)
Appeals Court Overturns Mountaintop Removal Ruling
by Ken Ward Jr.
CHARLESTON, W.Va. - A federal appeals court today overturned a judge's 2007 decision to require more thorough permit reviews of mountaintop removal mining operations.
____
I read somewhere that the so-called stimulus package (recently passed by the US Senate and US House of Rep.) contains money to fund research on clean-burning coal technology, but nothing to regulate where or how the coal is mined. In the meantime, how many mountains will be destroyed? How much will the environment be hurt? How many coal burning power plants will be built (some right here in NC) using dirty, mercury spewing, water polluting methods?
I don't know the status of a bill in the NC House that would try to stop mountain-top removal coal from being used in NC. It is a start and I hope our legislators will pass it.
TALK TRASH to City Council Candidates
-
Does Greensboro/Guilford Couhty want to SAVE our garbage in huge mega dumps or USE it to generate energy ?
Does Greensboro, Guilford County and the State of North Carolina want to continue to destroy mountains, streams, and kill people and wildlife by using coal to generate energy in NC ?
Will Voters demand better options for trash disposal and energy production ?
Ask Candidates for Greensboro City Council if they want to continue to ship our household trash to a mega dump or if they want to use better, cleaner, enironmentally friendly ways to dispose of garbage.
I have written about this many times. To read more: click energy or trash talk under labels on the left side of my blog.
More Waste-to-Energy Options.
Check out this site for information about Geothermal Waste-to-Energy
Find questions and answers about Geothermal Bio Conversion.
This process was briefly investigated several years ago by the City of Greensboro. It was dismissed as being untested in real situations and still in the experimental stage. From the information that I have found lately, looks like progress has been made and this could be a viable option for our region. The amount of waste needed to make it a profitable or pay-for-itself option is in question for this area; but, I think it is worth exploring as another option to shipping Household Trash to a private dump in another county.
There are so many ways to dispose of trash without building huge dumps.
http://bioconversion.blogspot.com/2006/10/geoplasma-answers-trash-vaporization_14.html
http://www.geoplasma.com/
Does Greensboro/Guilford Couhty want to SAVE our garbage in huge mega dumps or USE it to generate energy ?
Does Greensboro, Guilford County and the State of North Carolina want to continue to destroy mountains, streams, and kill people and wildlife by using coal to generate energy in NC ?
Will Voters demand better options for trash disposal and energy production ?
Ask Candidates for Greensboro City Council if they want to continue to ship our household trash to a mega dump or if they want to use better, cleaner, enironmentally friendly ways to dispose of garbage.
I have written about this many times. To read more: click energy or trash talk under labels on the left side of my blog.
More Waste-to-Energy Options.
Check out this site for information about Geothermal Waste-to-Energy
Find questions and answers about Geothermal Bio Conversion.
This process was briefly investigated several years ago by the City of Greensboro. It was dismissed as being untested in real situations and still in the experimental stage. From the information that I have found lately, looks like progress has been made and this could be a viable option for our region. The amount of waste needed to make it a profitable or pay-for-itself option is in question for this area; but, I think it is worth exploring as another option to shipping Household Trash to a private dump in another county.
There are so many ways to dispose of trash without building huge dumps.
http://bioconversion.blogspot.com/2006/10/geoplasma-answers-trash-vaporization_14.html
http://www.geoplasma.com/
To read older posts click on: energy and trash talk under labels.
Provide Jobs, Water, Trash Disposal, Energy
-
If Greensboro/Guilford County had ordered a WTE Modular Plant when they closed the White Street Dump to household trash, there would have been no need to raise taxes. The manufacturer claims that they can have a plant up and running in less than 2 years and a module lasts about 75 years, with proper maintenance. Swedish technology created a system that can take care of waste disposal, create energy and clean water and pay off the initial investment in about 5 years and continue to operate for many years. What a deal.
Naanovo Energy, Inc. claims that its Waste to Energy (WTE) technology allows, each of their modules to cleanly combust one hundred eighty tons of municipal solid waste per day while it produces energy and clean water.
Please ask every candidate for Greensboro City Council if he/she is in favor of the high cost to our environment and our pocketbooks of shipping our garbage out of the area on large gas-guzzling trucks to be piled into a landfill.
Ask them if they had rather control costs, and dispose of trash in a less expensive, more environmentally friendly way.
Ask them if they will consider a regional Waste-to-Energy plant.
WTE: Waste to Energy: 180 tons of municipal solid waste yields 6 megawatts per hour of electricity and thousand of gallons of water and meets clean air standards and provides jobs.
A Waste-to-energy module developed by Naanovo can reduce 180 tons of municipal solid waste a day down to 10% of its raw volume and down to 20% of its original weight. This process will generate a minimum of six megawatts per hour of electricity and a natural byproduct of each WTE module is 145,920 gallons per day of distilled water.
I repeat: WTE : Waste to Energy: One module using 180 tons of municipal solid waste yields 6 megawatts per hour of electricity and thousand of gallons of water and meets clean air standards. And this is just one of the options available for waste-to-energy.
If Greensboro/Guilford County had ordered a WTE Modular Plant when they closed the White Street Dump to household trash, there would have been no need to raise taxes. The manufacturer claims that they can have a plant up and running in less than 2 years and a module lasts about 75 years, with proper maintenance. Swedish technology created a system that can take care of waste disposal, create energy and clean water and pay off the initial investment in about 5 years and continue to operate for many years. What a deal.
Naanovo Energy, Inc. claims that its Waste to Energy (WTE) technology allows, each of their modules to cleanly combust one hundred eighty tons of municipal solid waste per day while it produces energy and clean water.
Please ask every candidate for Greensboro City Council if he/she is in favor of the high cost to our environment and our pocketbooks of shipping our garbage out of the area on large gas-guzzling trucks to be piled into a landfill.
Ask them if they had rather control costs, and dispose of trash in a less expensive, more environmentally friendly way.
Ask them if they will consider a regional Waste-to-Energy plant.
WTE: Waste to Energy: 180 tons of municipal solid waste yields 6 megawatts per hour of electricity and thousand of gallons of water and meets clean air standards and provides jobs.
A Waste-to-energy module developed by Naanovo can reduce 180 tons of municipal solid waste a day down to 10% of its raw volume and down to 20% of its original weight. This process will generate a minimum of six megawatts per hour of electricity and a natural byproduct of each WTE module is 145,920 gallons per day of distilled water.
I repeat: WTE : Waste to Energy: One module using 180 tons of municipal solid waste yields 6 megawatts per hour of electricity and thousand of gallons of water and meets clean air standards. And this is just one of the options available for waste-to-energy.
TOO HOT TO HANDLE
-----
The July Guilford Solar Program will feature a screening of the documentary Too Hot Not To Handle.
A primer on global warming, TOO HOT NOT TO HANDLE features contributions from leading scientists in the field. In addition to in-depth discussions of such subjects as the greenhouse effect, hurricanes, snowpack, hybrid vehicles, and alternative power sources, the film shows how businesses, local governments, and citizens are taking positive actions to reduce global warming emissions.
Catch it if you can 10 AM,
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Barn Kitchen Meeting Room
Guilford County Agricultural Center
3309 Burlington Road, Greensboro.
For more information, email ottosolar@aol.com,
pkauber@triad.rr.com, or brenda_morris@ncsu.edu.
The July Guilford Solar Program will feature a screening of the documentary Too Hot Not To Handle.
A primer on global warming, TOO HOT NOT TO HANDLE features contributions from leading scientists in the field. In addition to in-depth discussions of such subjects as the greenhouse effect, hurricanes, snowpack, hybrid vehicles, and alternative power sources, the film shows how businesses, local governments, and citizens are taking positive actions to reduce global warming emissions.
Catch it if you can 10 AM,
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Barn Kitchen Meeting Room
Guilford County Agricultural Center
3309 Burlington Road, Greensboro.
For more information, email ottosolar@aol.com,
pkauber@triad.rr.com, or brenda_morris@ncsu.edu.
Sticking it to Energy Consumers
----
The NC Senate approved Senate Bill 3, Renewable Energy/Baseload Provisions on second reading. This bill started out similar to House Bill 77, Promote Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, sponsored by Representatives Martin, Harrell, Justice, and Harrison (Guilford). After months of negotiations, the Senate bill was loaded up with provisions to get buy-in from a variety of interest groups, from Wal-mart to homebuilders to chemical companies, and especially the utilities. As a result, there are many troubling provisions in the bill, which hopefully will be fixed in the House version.
One bad provision relates to financing new nuclear and coal fired power plants. It would shift the risk from the investors to the rate payers. This fight was fought in the early 1980s, and the consumers prevailed, but not this time around in the Senate bill.
Another bad provision encourages energy production from hog farms that use outdated lagoon-and-sprayfield technologies. This will have the unintended consequence of prolonging the life of dirty hog-waste pools that do not meet environmental performance standards and threaten the health of citizens near them. The original bill helps hog farmers convert to better ways of disposing of waste products.
It is important that the NC House fix this bill and pass a renewable energy bill without provisions making it easier to build new coal and nuclear plants and with provisions to help get rid of lagoons filled with smelly hog excrement.
Read Sticking it to utility ratepayers
by Rick Martinez in the Raleigh N&R.
Send a message to members of the NC House. Ask them to fix this bill.
#
The NC Senate approved Senate Bill 3, Renewable Energy/Baseload Provisions on second reading. This bill started out similar to House Bill 77, Promote Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, sponsored by Representatives Martin, Harrell, Justice, and Harrison (Guilford). After months of negotiations, the Senate bill was loaded up with provisions to get buy-in from a variety of interest groups, from Wal-mart to homebuilders to chemical companies, and especially the utilities. As a result, there are many troubling provisions in the bill, which hopefully will be fixed in the House version.
One bad provision relates to financing new nuclear and coal fired power plants. It would shift the risk from the investors to the rate payers. This fight was fought in the early 1980s, and the consumers prevailed, but not this time around in the Senate bill.
Another bad provision encourages energy production from hog farms that use outdated lagoon-and-sprayfield technologies. This will have the unintended consequence of prolonging the life of dirty hog-waste pools that do not meet environmental performance standards and threaten the health of citizens near them. The original bill helps hog farmers convert to better ways of disposing of waste products.
It is important that the NC House fix this bill and pass a renewable energy bill without provisions making it easier to build new coal and nuclear plants and with provisions to help get rid of lagoons filled with smelly hog excrement.
Read Sticking it to utility ratepayers
by Rick Martinez in the Raleigh N&R.
Send a message to members of the NC House. Ask them to fix this bill.
#
Are You in Hot Water ? ? ?
-----
After reading the local news about the BAD AIR in Greensboro, I thought a little information about how we can use solar energy instead of coal-fired power plant energy in our homes might be helpful.
The Solar Communities Group will present a program Saturday, May 5 at the Guilford Agricultural Center.
RESIDENTIAL SOLAR WATER HEATING SOLUTIONS
for new homes and retrofits for existing homes
Barn Kitchen & Meeting Room
Guilford County Agricultural Center
3309 Burlington Road, Greensboro, NC 27405.
The program will begin at 10am.
For more information, contact Otto Afanador, at 336-586-0814.
After reading the local news about the BAD AIR in Greensboro, I thought a little information about how we can use solar energy instead of coal-fired power plant energy in our homes might be helpful.
The Solar Communities Group will present a program Saturday, May 5 at the Guilford Agricultural Center.
RESIDENTIAL SOLAR WATER HEATING SOLUTIONS
for new homes and retrofits for existing homes
Barn Kitchen & Meeting Room
Guilford County Agricultural Center
3309 Burlington Road, Greensboro, NC 27405.
The program will begin at 10am.
For more information, contact Otto Afanador, at 336-586-0814.
Bad Air in North Carolina
-----
The Business Journal reports that CO2 from coal-fired power plants in North Carolina increased by 52 per cent between 1990 and 2004. This was in a report from U.S. Public Interest Research Group that used data provided by the U.S. Department of Energy.
And from Raleigh news that another coal-fired power plant has been approved for North Carolina. The Raleigh N&O reports that one of the two coal-powered plants requested by Duke power has been approved.
The article also says that North Carolina is among about 30 states that have no policy mandating environmentally friendly energy use. But several bills have been introduced that would mandate reductions in emissions over the next 10 years or more.
And all this bad news as we celebrate "Earth Day" in Greensboro.
What are we thinking ? ? ?
The Business Journal reports that CO2 from coal-fired power plants in North Carolina increased by 52 per cent between 1990 and 2004. This was in a report from U.S. Public Interest Research Group that used data provided by the U.S. Department of Energy.
And from Raleigh news that another coal-fired power plant has been approved for North Carolina. The Raleigh N&O reports that one of the two coal-powered plants requested by Duke power has been approved.
The article also says that North Carolina is among about 30 states that have no policy mandating environmentally friendly energy use. But several bills have been introduced that would mandate reductions in emissions over the next 10 years or more.
And all this bad news as we celebrate "Earth Day" in Greensboro.
What are we thinking ? ? ?
Supreme Court Ruled 9 to 0 Against Duke Energy Pollution
----
A victory for the environment! ! !
The United States and Environmental Defense filed suit against Duke Energy for violating Clear Air Act rules when it renovated its plants in North Carolina and South Carolina. The US Supreme Court agreed.
From The New York Times reort today:
The Supreme Court gave a boost Monday to a federal clean air initiative aimed at forcing utilities to install pollution control equipment on aging coal-fired power plants.
From the Environment Defense web site.
The suit against Duke Energy, the country's third-largest power company, centered on its costly renovations to 30 coal-fired electric generating units at eight power plants in North Carolina and South Carolina. Many of these facilities had been operated sporadically or not at all and were due to be retired and replaced. Instead, Duke Energy extensively rebuilt them resulting in significant increases in particulate- and smog-forming pollution, but did not obtain permits nor install pollution control equipment as required by law.
A victory for the environment! ! !
The United States and Environmental Defense filed suit against Duke Energy for violating Clear Air Act rules when it renovated its plants in North Carolina and South Carolina. The US Supreme Court agreed.
From The New York Times reort today:
The Supreme Court gave a boost Monday to a federal clean air initiative aimed at forcing utilities to install pollution control equipment on aging coal-fired power plants.
From the Environment Defense web site.
The suit against Duke Energy, the country's third-largest power company, centered on its costly renovations to 30 coal-fired electric generating units at eight power plants in North Carolina and South Carolina. Many of these facilities had been operated sporadically or not at all and were due to be retired and replaced. Instead, Duke Energy extensively rebuilt them resulting in significant increases in particulate- and smog-forming pollution, but did not obtain permits nor install pollution control equipment as required by law.
Solar could help pay maintenance in greensboro
-----
Now might be the time for a REAL CHANGE in the way city-owned property is maintained in Greensboro and Guilford County.
If the city produces some of the energy used by publicly-owned buildings, the money saved could be used to maintain those very buildings.
Diane G. Davis
905 Fairmont Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
(336) 378-4457
September 4, 2006
Letters to the Editor
The News & Record
edpage@news-record.com
Please consider this letter for publication. Thank you.
Now is the time for a REAL CHANGE in the way we pay for maintenance of city-owned property in Greensboro.
.
The city can produce energy by using the roofs of publicly-owned facilities. This energy can be sold or used within the building. The money saved can be used to help defray maintenance costs of those very buildings.
As roofs are replaced or repaired on existing city-owned buildings or installed on new facilities, they can be fitted with energy producing solar units. The project would cost less if done as roof repair or replacement is done. Solar Power helps reduce pollution by reducing the need for more coal-burning or nuclear-powered energy plants. Clean solar power pays for itself.
City Manager Mitch Johnson told me that Solar Power is not economical and not a good option for city buildings in Greensboro. He did say that the Melvin Building has passive solar because there is a sky light into the plaza area.
I urge citizens of Greensboro and Guilford County to write, call, e-mail or speak to elected officials at meetings. Suggest that Solar Energy be explored. It is being used in other cities in the US and around the world. It just makes sense.
Thank you,
Diane Davis
Now might be the time for a REAL CHANGE in the way city-owned property is maintained in Greensboro and Guilford County.
If the city produces some of the energy used by publicly-owned buildings, the money saved could be used to maintain those very buildings.
Diane G. Davis
905 Fairmont Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
(336) 378-4457
September 4, 2006
Letters to the Editor
The News & Record
edpage@news-record.com
Please consider this letter for publication. Thank you.
Now is the time for a REAL CHANGE in the way we pay for maintenance of city-owned property in Greensboro.
.
The city can produce energy by using the roofs of publicly-owned facilities. This energy can be sold or used within the building. The money saved can be used to help defray maintenance costs of those very buildings.
As roofs are replaced or repaired on existing city-owned buildings or installed on new facilities, they can be fitted with energy producing solar units. The project would cost less if done as roof repair or replacement is done. Solar Power helps reduce pollution by reducing the need for more coal-burning or nuclear-powered energy plants. Clean solar power pays for itself.
City Manager Mitch Johnson told me that Solar Power is not economical and not a good option for city buildings in Greensboro. He did say that the Melvin Building has passive solar because there is a sky light into the plaza area.
I urge citizens of Greensboro and Guilford County to write, call, e-mail or speak to elected officials at meetings. Suggest that Solar Energy be explored. It is being used in other cities in the US and around the world. It just makes sense.
Thank you,
Diane Davis
Don't Ignore Mercury Pollution
-----
Mercury pollution is a serious problem in NC.
Mercury is polluting our air and our water and getting into human food sources. News reports have informed us for years about this hazard to our health. The number one source of mercury emissions is coal-fired power plants. These emissions can be reduced at the source. Other states are taking measures to reduce mercury poison in the environment. NC should pass legislation to drastically reduce this hazard.
The NC Environmental Management Commission is holding a public comment period which started May 30 and will end June 30th, on whether or not NC needs stronger and faster action to reduce its mercury pollution. Time is short. Let the commission know how you feel about Mercury Pollution in NC.
Twenty-two species of fish in North Carolina are unsafe for children and women of childbearing age to eat.
Mercury can cause brain damage and developmental disabilities in unborn children.
Emissions are damaging our forests and wildlife habitats.
The number one source of mercury emissions is coal-fired power plants.
You can make your voice heard. Go to the NC Conservation Network site and Send a Message
http://ncconservationnetwork1.org/campaign/mercury_public_comment/kbe8874q535jwd?
Mercury pollution is a serious problem in NC.
Mercury is polluting our air and our water and getting into human food sources. News reports have informed us for years about this hazard to our health. The number one source of mercury emissions is coal-fired power plants. These emissions can be reduced at the source. Other states are taking measures to reduce mercury poison in the environment. NC should pass legislation to drastically reduce this hazard.
The NC Environmental Management Commission is holding a public comment period which started May 30 and will end June 30th, on whether or not NC needs stronger and faster action to reduce its mercury pollution. Time is short. Let the commission know how you feel about Mercury Pollution in NC.
Twenty-two species of fish in North Carolina are unsafe for children and women of childbearing age to eat.
Mercury can cause brain damage and developmental disabilities in unborn children.
Emissions are damaging our forests and wildlife habitats.
The number one source of mercury emissions is coal-fired power plants.
You can make your voice heard. Go to the NC Conservation Network site and Send a Message
http://ncconservationnetwork1.org/campaign/mercury_public_comment/kbe8874q535jwd?
Waste to Energy in Florida
---------
From the City of Tampa's web site. Florida's Renewable Energy Source
By Nancy McCann
Converting waste into energy is a worldwide industry. In the United States alone, 89 waste-to-energy facilities process nearly 100,000 tons of municipal solid waste – everyday household and commercial garbage and trash – each day. As a result, these facilities generate enough electricity to meet the needs of more than two million homes.
In Florida, 12 waste-to-energy facilities from Miami to Panama City process nearly 20,000 tons of municipal solid waste each day – enough to fill a football stadium – while continuously producing over 500 megawatts of clean, renewable power. The Tampa Bay area is home to four waste-to-energy facilities, located in the City of Tampa and in the counties of Hillsborough, Pinellas and Pasco. Without these facilities, local governments would be faced with the daunting task of siting large landfills near our rapidly growing residential communities.
Florida's waste-to-energy facilities eliminate 90% of the waste that once would have been landfilled. Even so, landfills throughout the state are reaching capacity faster than anticipated. It is becoming increasingly difficult to expand landfills or open new ones as residential development encroaches on once-remote landfill sites. Florida's current population of over 17 million is expected to reach almost 23 million by the year 2020, bringing even more challenges to managing municipal solid waste. . . .
. . . . . In keeping with the Clean Air Act, waste-to-energy facilities in Florida and throughout the United States have recently been retrofitted with state-of-the-art air emission control technology. As a result, these facilities are among the cleanest sources of renewable power in the world. Waste-to-energy facilities reduce our dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels, significantly reduce the amount of waste that needs to be landfilled, and are good partners to recycling in our local communities' waste management programs.
Read the whole articlehere
From the City of Tampa's web site. Florida's Renewable Energy Source
By Nancy McCann
Converting waste into energy is a worldwide industry. In the United States alone, 89 waste-to-energy facilities process nearly 100,000 tons of municipal solid waste – everyday household and commercial garbage and trash – each day. As a result, these facilities generate enough electricity to meet the needs of more than two million homes.
In Florida, 12 waste-to-energy facilities from Miami to Panama City process nearly 20,000 tons of municipal solid waste each day – enough to fill a football stadium – while continuously producing over 500 megawatts of clean, renewable power. The Tampa Bay area is home to four waste-to-energy facilities, located in the City of Tampa and in the counties of Hillsborough, Pinellas and Pasco. Without these facilities, local governments would be faced with the daunting task of siting large landfills near our rapidly growing residential communities.
Florida's waste-to-energy facilities eliminate 90% of the waste that once would have been landfilled. Even so, landfills throughout the state are reaching capacity faster than anticipated. It is becoming increasingly difficult to expand landfills or open new ones as residential development encroaches on once-remote landfill sites. Florida's current population of over 17 million is expected to reach almost 23 million by the year 2020, bringing even more challenges to managing municipal solid waste. . . .
. . . . . In keeping with the Clean Air Act, waste-to-energy facilities in Florida and throughout the United States have recently been retrofitted with state-of-the-art air emission control technology. As a result, these facilities are among the cleanest sources of renewable power in the world. Waste-to-energy facilities reduce our dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels, significantly reduce the amount of waste that needs to be landfilled, and are good partners to recycling in our local communities' waste management programs.
Read the whole articlehere
Nuclear Power Boom
-----
The Greensboro News-Record reported on 3/23/06, on page B4, that The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has expanded an investigation into allegations of poor security at the Shearon Harris nuclear plant owned by Progress Energy.
This is an investigation that started in January initiated by complaints by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the NC Waste Awareness and Reduction Network. See this from the Raleigh Independent report DECEMBER 14, 2005, "Guards sound alarm over security at Shearon Harris nuclear plant"
More on Progress Energy,
who has plans to built another nuclear power plant near Raleigh.
And more. or <here.
I hope these links are ok. I think I fixed them from the first try of this post.
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/tm.site/news/BREAKING%20NEWS/201253/
The Greensboro News-Record reported on 3/23/06, on page B4, that The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has expanded an investigation into allegations of poor security at the Shearon Harris nuclear plant owned by Progress Energy.
This is an investigation that started in January initiated by complaints by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the NC Waste Awareness and Reduction Network. See this from the Raleigh Independent report DECEMBER 14, 2005, "Guards sound alarm over security at Shearon Harris nuclear plant"
More on Progress Energy,
who has plans to built another nuclear power plant near Raleigh.
And more. or <here.
I hope these links are ok. I think I fixed them from the first try of this post.
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/tm.site/news/BREAKING%20NEWS/201253/
The Nukes are Coming ! ! !
-----
Duke Power Company is considering a large tract of land in Davie County as the site of a new nuclear power plant.
Duke has more than 2 million customers in North Carolina and South Carolina and already operates 3 nuclear-generating stations. The company has indicated that several new power plants are needed to serve the needs of its customers.
Another site being considered for a nuclear plant is the Blews Creek station near Winston-Salem, one of Duke's 8 coal-fired stations. Nuclear reactors use large amounts of water and power stations need access to roads, rail service and power lines.
According to The Business Journal Duke Power Company announced this week that a site near Gaffney, SC has been chosen for the site of one of it's proposed $6 billion nuclear plants.
Several other utility companies are considering nuclear power expansion in the Carolinas, including Progress Energy Corp. (NYSE: PGN) of Raleigh and Scana Corp. (NYSE: SCG) of Columbia, S.C.
Previous Post about Nuclear Waste Disposal
There are other options for producing electricity. What do you think?
Duke Power Company is considering a large tract of land in Davie County as the site of a new nuclear power plant.
Duke has more than 2 million customers in North Carolina and South Carolina and already operates 3 nuclear-generating stations. The company has indicated that several new power plants are needed to serve the needs of its customers.
Another site being considered for a nuclear plant is the Blews Creek station near Winston-Salem, one of Duke's 8 coal-fired stations. Nuclear reactors use large amounts of water and power stations need access to roads, rail service and power lines.
According to The Business Journal Duke Power Company announced this week that a site near Gaffney, SC has been chosen for the site of one of it's proposed $6 billion nuclear plants.
Several other utility companies are considering nuclear power expansion in the Carolinas, including Progress Energy Corp. (NYSE: PGN) of Raleigh and Scana Corp. (NYSE: SCG) of Columbia, S.C.
Previous Post about Nuclear Waste Disposal
There are other options for producing electricity. What do you think?
I have suggested a regional waste-to-energy program to our own city council members and county commission members for years. One of the excuses that I have received for not considering this option for garbage disposal is that there is just not enough trash to make it economically feasible.
The Raleigh N&O reports that Chatham County, NC, which does not own a landfill, charges county residents a solid waste fee that is included in their property tax bill. The county owns and operates trucks that take trash from collection centers to privately owned transfer stations in Siler City and Lee County. The trash is then hauled to a Sampson County landfill, which is more than 80 miles away.
Siler City is about 40 miles from Greensboro. What are we thinking?
Please read this post from Feb. 3, 2005about trash-energy-water-jobs
And this about traveling trash
And this about our own trash problem
And this information
The Raleigh N&O reports that Chatham County, NC, which does not own a landfill, charges county residents a solid waste fee that is included in their property tax bill. The county owns and operates trucks that take trash from collection centers to privately owned transfer stations in Siler City and Lee County. The trash is then hauled to a Sampson County landfill, which is more than 80 miles away.
Siler City is about 40 miles from Greensboro. What are we thinking?
Please read this post from Feb. 3, 2005about trash-energy-water-jobs
And this about traveling trash
And this about our own trash problem
And this information
Solar Energy Agreement Could Save Millions
--
From Renewable Energy Access newsletter
February 2, 2006
San Diego, California - Renewable Energy Access Council member Donna Frye announced a proposed solar energy agreement between the City of San Diego and Sun Edison SD LLC to provide approximately 5 MW of photovoltaic (PV) systems at city-owned facilities. The PV systems, to be installed, owned, operated and maintained by Sun Edison SD LLC, will save the city millions of dollars in capital costs.
more at
http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=42814
or: RenewableEnergyAccess.com
From Renewable Energy Access newsletter
February 2, 2006
San Diego, California - Renewable Energy Access Council member Donna Frye announced a proposed solar energy agreement between the City of San Diego and Sun Edison SD LLC to provide approximately 5 MW of photovoltaic (PV) systems at city-owned facilities. The PV systems, to be installed, owned, operated and maintained by Sun Edison SD LLC, will save the city millions of dollars in capital costs.
more at
http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=42814
or: RenewableEnergyAccess.com
Trash Disposal, Energy, Clean Water
--
WTE : Waste to Energy: 180 tons of municipal solid waste yields 6 megawatts per hour of electricity and thousand of gallons of water and meets clean air standards. And this is just one of the options available for waste-to-energy.
Naanovo Energy, Inc. claims that its Waste to Energy (WTE) technology allows, each of their modules to cleanly combust one hundred eighty tons of municipal solid waste per day while it produces energy and clean water.
A Waste-to-energy module developed by Naanovo can reduce 180 tons of municipal solid waste a day down to 10% of its raw volume and down to 20% of its original weight. This process will generate a minimum of six megawatts per hour of electricity and a natural byproduct of each WTE module is 145,920 gallons per day of distilled water.
I repeat: WTE : Waste to Energy: 180 tons of municipal solid waste yields 6 megawatts per hour of electricity and thousand of gallons of water and meets clean air standards. And this is just one of the options available for waste-to-energy.
Ask your city council members to find out more about WTE technology. The city did a little investigating about alternative ways to dispose of garbage several years ago, but have never gotten serious about it. They need a nudge. Do it carefully. They don't like change.
You can e-mail the entire City Council or just your favorite councilperson here or here: http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/CityGovernment/council/emailcouncil.htm
Also get in touch with your County Commissioners. This is a regional problem.
You can e-mail your County Commissionershere, or here: http://gcms0004.co.guilford.nc.us/commissioners/index.php
WTE : Waste to Energy: 180 tons of municipal solid waste yields 6 megawatts per hour of electricity and thousand of gallons of water and meets clean air standards. And this is just one of the options available for waste-to-energy.
Naanovo Energy, Inc. claims that its Waste to Energy (WTE) technology allows, each of their modules to cleanly combust one hundred eighty tons of municipal solid waste per day while it produces energy and clean water.
A Waste-to-energy module developed by Naanovo can reduce 180 tons of municipal solid waste a day down to 10% of its raw volume and down to 20% of its original weight. This process will generate a minimum of six megawatts per hour of electricity and a natural byproduct of each WTE module is 145,920 gallons per day of distilled water.
I repeat: WTE : Waste to Energy: 180 tons of municipal solid waste yields 6 megawatts per hour of electricity and thousand of gallons of water and meets clean air standards. And this is just one of the options available for waste-to-energy.
Ask your city council members to find out more about WTE technology. The city did a little investigating about alternative ways to dispose of garbage several years ago, but have never gotten serious about it. They need a nudge. Do it carefully. They don't like change.
You can e-mail the entire City Council or just your favorite councilperson here or here: http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/CityGovernment/council/emailcouncil.htm
Also get in touch with your County Commissioners. This is a regional problem.
You can e-mail your County Commissionershere, or here: http://gcms0004.co.guilford.nc.us/commissioners/index.php
More Nukes in North Carolina ??
Users of energy in North Carolina use about twice as much energy produced by nuclear power as the national average. More nuclear reactors may be coming to our state. The Raleigh N&O reports that "Progress Energy announced last week it would seek a license to build up to two new reactors at Shearon Harris in southwestern Wake County . . . . . . Progress Energy's announcement follows a similar decision by Duke Power in October to seek a license for two reactors."
There are several reasons for the requests for more nuclear reactors in NC. The population is increasing and the demand for energy is increasing. Regulations requiring less carbon in the air mean changes must be made in the way energy is produced. Nuclear reactors do not release carbon into the air. Federal incentives for nuclear power last year make it more cost-effective for the power producing companies than redoing old coal-burning facilities or building new gas burning ones. And, of course, the rising cost of gas is certainly a consideration.
The N&O reports that about 45 percent of electricity used in NC and SC comes from nuclear plants owned by Progress Energy and Duke Power. Both are planning to build more in the area.
previous post
Can nuclear ever be safe?Can nuclear ever be safe?
Solve 2 problems with one good idea
There are several reasons for the requests for more nuclear reactors in NC. The population is increasing and the demand for energy is increasing. Regulations requiring less carbon in the air mean changes must be made in the way energy is produced. Nuclear reactors do not release carbon into the air. Federal incentives for nuclear power last year make it more cost-effective for the power producing companies than redoing old coal-burning facilities or building new gas burning ones. And, of course, the rising cost of gas is certainly a consideration.
The N&O reports that about 45 percent of electricity used in NC and SC comes from nuclear plants owned by Progress Energy and Duke Power. Both are planning to build more in the area.
previous post
Can nuclear ever be safe?Can nuclear ever be safe?
Solve 2 problems with one good idea
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
