It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In what would likely be a devastating blow to the local economy and everyone's electric bill, AEP says it would have to shut down 5 plants in our area and make cutbacks at six others to comply with new federal rules proposed for coal-fired power plants.
The plan being considered by the EPA would lead to a net loss of 600 jobs at the plants, three of which are in West Virginia-- in Glasgow, New Haven, and Moundsville.
The EPA wants to see these plants phased out by the end of 2014. A timeframe that AEP spokesman Phil Moye says unfairly puts a burden on not just employees but consumers. Rates are expected to shoot up when these plants close. West Virginians would see an increase of 10 to 15 percent , consumers in Kentucky could see up to a 35 percent increase. Employees are hoping the EPA will extend the deadline for a complete shutdown.
The EPA plan also calls for the upgrading or installation of new advanced emissions reduction equipment, and the transfer of coal-fueled generation into natural gas capacity. The deadline imposed by the EPA is December 31st, 2014. AEP is hoping that deadline is extended until at least 2018 possibly 2020.
I wish the coal companies would release their strangle hold on West Virginia and let us take advantage of clean energy like this:
West Virginia is a Geothermal Hot Spot
West Virginia Geothermal
Coal is not the only answer. We have many industries that could flourisher here, but this state is in the back pocket of "Big Coal". Believe it.
Coal mining and production is a significant resource extraction and manufacturing industry and is a major source of fossil fuel energy in the world economy.
Originally posted by drwizardphd
It's sad to see the jobs go...
But coal is a dead form of energy. It's disgustingly inefficient, the environmental impact of harvesting it is astronomical, and it wouldn't even be economically sustainable without the massive government subsidies it gets.
Yes, coal was an important building block in our nation's history. However, time has passed and we need to look forward and embrace newer forms of energy that do not cause such ridiculous damage to our environment.
Originally posted by spyder550
I don't understand the article -- there is the sky is falling part that says the coal burning plants are to be phase out (shutdown) then there is the other part of the article that states that they are being required to get there act together and bring their scrubbers up to snuff and convert to Nat Gas - which we have a lot of.
So are they being shut down (sky is falling) or made to bring their effluents in line with modern standards, standards (poor me I have to be forced to admit that the air is shared). Standards that have made a remarkable difference in the quality of the air since I have been alive.
The free market deregulated industry ALWAYS takes the high road.... right.. you know does the right thing.
Originally posted by neo96the idea is to destroy the energy industries create the crisis to impliment green technology that is all made somewhere in the rest of the world.
You're totally right! Everyone is connected to coal. If you live in the USA, you are connected to "Big Coal". The point is, as far as energy goes, coal is fighting a up hill battle. Its dirty, its destructive, and its hazardous to mine. People are starting to realize its the 21st century. There must be a better way.
* Coal is one of the most abundant sources of energy, more so than oil and natural gas
* Coal is inexpensive when compared to other fossil fuels (or alternative energy sources)
* Coal is versatile enough to be used for recreational activities such as BBQ’s or simply for home fires
* Burning coal can produce useful by-products that can be used for other industries or products
* Electricity produced from coal is reliable
* Coal can be safely stored and can be drawn upon to create energy in time of emergency
* Coal based power is not dependent on weather which cannot be said for alternative forms of renewable energy such as wind or solar power
* Transporting coal does not require the upkeep of high-pressure pipelines and there is no requirement for extra security when transporting coal
* Using coal reduces the dependence on using oil, which is often found in nations where there is
Your negative attitude toward geothermal just highlights peoples unwillingness to change. I mean, face the facts, we are going to have to change our engry policy. Better to start now than later.
Using geothermal energy to generate electricity has more negative environmental effects. Heat and fluid extraction from
geothermal reservoirs can deplete the existence of geysers and surface hot springs, thereby hindering ecosystems that depend
on the unique characteristics of these for survival. Subterraneous extraction of heat and fluid can also cause land subsidence,
much like the extraction of groundwater. Certain natural substances, such as arsenic, boron, and mercury, are sometimes present
in the water released from geothermal cooling towers. Additionally, carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, is released from geothermal
cooling towers. However, this release of carbon dioxide is less than one-tenth the amount that would be released from a fossil fuel
electrical generation facility of similar capacity.