UPDATE: Disasterous TVA Plant Has History of Spills
Many of you are probably already aware of the recent massive and devastating coal ash spill at the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) power plant in eastern Tennessee. That spill, which poured some five million cubic yards of toxic coal ash out, flooding the nearby area and spreading into the nearby river, is considered the largest ecological disaster of its kind. The flood of toxic sludge destroyed three homes and damaged several dozen properties. There were no immediate injuries or deaths, but at least one nearby resident is complaining of headaches and chronic sore throat.
Last week Tom Kilgore, CEO of the TVA, admitted to the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee that the plant had suffered two less severe leaks over the past five years, but that the breaches had not been properly or adequately repaired. The confession was made to the Senate’s Environment & Public Works Committee, and was referred to as “noticeable seepage”. Those events occurred in 2003 and 2005, making the problem appear to be regular and cyclic.
Mr. Kilgore begged off that heavy rains and freezing temperatures had probably contributed to the breach. The explanation offered does nothing to explain or justify why such conditions weren’t anticipated and provided for. The TVA plant’s holding ponds are not lined either. While this is not illegal (yet,) it is unwise, takes an unhealthy risk. Concerns remain as to what affect the ash will have once the water dries out, leaving the toxic substances to become airborne where it will be breathed and settle in people’s homes.
Committee chairwoman, Senator Barbara Boxer (D, CA,) was outspokenly critical of the Environmental Protection Agency for failing to declare coal ash a hazardous waste and for refusing to set national standards for its storage and disposal. She cites this disaster as proof of a need for closer oversight and better precautions regarding such toxic wastes. Senator Boxer also claimed to a portion of responsibility for the spill, admiting that she had been chairwoman of the environment panel since 2007 but had paid no attention to the T.V.A.’s hazardous byproducts.
Senator Boxer and other members of the Environment and Public Works Committee said they would press for new coal ash regulations, including a requirement that it be stored in lined pits and dried, rather than just being dropped into the waste pond, to prevent the toxic substances from pouring into towns and rivers as it did in December of 2008.
There are over thirteen-hundred waste ponds in the U.S., amounting to billions of gallons of fly ash. This byproduct of coal-generated electricity contains heavy metals including arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead and mercury. which are known to cause cancer, respiratory disease, crippling nervous system disorders and reproductive problems.
All of this serves as further proof that we MUST put aside fossil-fuel based energy technologies and embrace alternative energy sources — the sooner, the better.
Russia Cuts NG Pipeline, Leaving Millions To Freeze
About 60 percent of Russia’s budget comes from exporting natural gas westward, through the Ukraine and on to Western Europe. The pipeline has long been a risk, protected only by the potential of Russia to retaliate, and by Russia’s ability to turn the gas off at its source. Earlier today, Russia reduced the flow by about 90 million cubic meters, which is the allocation for the Ukraine’s 46 million people. The issue? Money, of course. Money and control.
Preface: Ukraine ceased importing electricity from Russia on December 1, 2008, after repairs to one of Ukraine’s nuclear reactors were completed.
The Ukraine delivered 1.5 billion dollars on Tuesday, Dec. 30, 2008, and considered their bill settled. Russia’s Gazprom now claims that Ukraine must also pay $600 million in late fees before they will restore the flow of natural gas to the nation, which is in the midst of their coldest months of winter now.
Furthermore, Gazprom is demanding that Ukraine pay $250 $450 per 1,000 cubic meters in 2009, 40% 250 percent (2.5 times as much) more than the $179 price paid in 2008.* Ukraine says they cannot pay that price unless Russia offsets the increase by paying Ukraine that same amount more for exporting Russia’s gas through their country on to Europe. Russia has promised that they will continue to export gas to Europe without interruption. Russia’s Prime Minister, Vladamir Putin, said that any interference with Russia’s gas exports to Europe would carry “serious consequences for the transit country itself.”
Russia is putting the Ukraine, a former Soviet Union country which has angered Russia by applying for membership in NATO, in the cruel position of having to surrender to the 40% increase or continue to pump gas on through their country to Europe, while they themselves are freezing but taking none of that gas for themselves.
This isn’t the first time Russia has acted against the Ukraine in this fashion. In 2006, Russia halted supplies to Ukraine for three days, in a similar disagreement over prices. When the pressure in the pipeline dropped by that allotment, the decrease was felt all the way to Italy, because the Ukraine continued to draw gas from the pipeline for their winter needs. Apparently they learned from the experience. Ukrainian authorities say they have stockpiled enough gas to hold out for three months, if the weather holds as anticipated.
Russia has perpetual negotiations with nations they supply energy to. Serbia was also in negotiations earlier this year, and Finland managed a stay of prices on wood purchased from Russia, but only after last year’s increases in Russian Export Tariffs caused Finland to reduce their demand by more than half. At the same time, Russia claims they would like to work with NATO (disagreements aside, of course.) It’s hard to avoid comparisons to a national mafia, friendly with speech, brutal and murderous in dealings with those who defy them.
Threatening millions of people in this fashion demonstrates that Russia cannot be trusted. In a time of global financial crisis, to strongarm the Ukraine for a 40% increase is clearly retaliatory and inhumane. It also demonstrates the importance of removing ourselves from dependency upon fossil fuels of all kinds. It was wise of Ukrainian authorities to stockpile the gas against this sort of threat, but their reserves will run out by very early spring, leaving nearly 50 million people freezing and without gas for cooking, heating or hot water, and electric generation. (Ukraine produces about 45% of its electricity via nuclear reactors, but relies upon fossil fuels to generate the remaining 55%, so their electric may be diminished as well.)
Germany, Italy and Turkey were amongst nations which lowered their demand for natural gas after prices were raised to $460-$520 per thousand cubic meters beginning in October of 2008. Despite that decrease in sales, Gazprom reports record revenues of $75 billion to $77 billion this year.
Energy independence is essential for all nations’ people.
*EDITOR’S NOTE: We were previously misinformed. Russia is actually demanding $450 per 1,000 cubic meters, an increase of two and a half times the price paid last year – 250% increase.
MO Commission Stiffles Alternative Power Generation
The people of Missouri have gotten on board with generating energy via wind and solar technologies. Their Easy Connection Act is a law specifically intended to promote alternative energy solutions. just as the people of Missouri are climbing on board, though, the Missouri Public Service Commission imposed a regulation which would most certainly stop homeowners’ and small businesses’ efforts dead in its tracks.
The MO Public Service Commission (MPSC) has instituted a requirement that anyone who generates less than 10 kilowatts must carry $100,000 in liability insurance, while those generating 10 to 100 kilowatts must carry 1 million dollars in liabiliity insurance. This requirement goes directly against the spirit and intent of the state’s “Easy Connection Act,” which encourages generating power by harnessing solar and wind, and prescribes the crediting of electricity put back into the grid. Obviously, whatever the cost of such insurance, it would drive people away from generating their own electricity by forcing them to incur a recurring annual insurance which could very well be more costly than the value of the electricity generated.
Missouri Renew, the citizen’s action group which pushed for the Easy Connect Act, has filed suit against the MPSC. They cite that there has been no incident of loss, no lawsuit, and that there is no basis for the requirement. The Commission counters that they want to be protected in case someone is harmed while messing with the connection box.
If the state wants to be protected, perhaps it should be the one purchasing the policy. It’s certainly not a realistic concern, and obviously moves in direct conflict with responsible generation of electricity. We’re forced to wonder whose side the Commission is on.
The MPSC can be reached at 573-751-3234, by email at: pscinfo@psc.mo.gov, or by mail to the Public Service Commission, Governor Office Bldg, 200 Madison Street, PO Box 360, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0360. The Commissioners are: Chairman Jeff Davis, Connie Murray, Robert Clayton III, Terry Jarrett, and Kevin Dunn.
Read more
Thinking Of Mom On The Holidays
She gave us a womb to develop in, and then birth. She has kept us warm, sheltered, safe, nurtured, and given us a sense of stability and security. She tends to our needs, while giving us the freedom to wander and explore and figure out our place in life. She provided us with siblings to learn from, to know and enjoy. We take romps with her, we frolic in the sun, in the water, in the rain and snow with her. We play in the mud, and grow into men and women with her. We build our homes with her, and when we pass on from this life, she cradles us again. The earth is indeed our mother.
This holiday season, amidst all the festivities, the kids and decorations and food and parties, let’s pause for just a bit, think of all the times shared with our mother, Earth. Let’s be thankful for them, reminisce a bit, and renew our pledge to protect her as she has protected us.
None of us would intentionally do anything to harm either of our mothers, right? Take a minute to think, now, of the ways we may have hurt either of them unintentionally. Perhaps it was a careless word or gesture, some thoughtless unintentional act. Moms absorb a lot, they take a lot without a word of protest, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t hurt them, and that doesn’t mean we should add to the already heavy burden that they both carry for us.
So call up your mom, tell her you love her. Remind the both of you of the good you’ve shared, thank her, and remember to be gentle with her. Hold your tongue — and your trash. Pitch in, lend a hand, so she doesn’t have so much to do. Remind the both of you that you do appreciate and love her. Make your new year’s resolution early. Vow to be kinder to your mother from now on — not just on the holidays, but every day. It’s gotta be tough. She does so much for all of us kids. Let’s make her life easier from now on.
Making Conversion Dreams Come True
Tom Hanks is a long-time proponent of the electric car. His RAV4, an electric conversion, has been driven over 48,000 miles and consumed not one drop of gasoline doing so. The conversion owns at least 93 miles between charges, more than enough for most commuters, and includes electric windows, a high-quality stereo, air conditioning and even an onboard GPS mapping system. Who says you can’t have it all?
Tom Gage, president and CEO of AC Propulsion in San Dimas, California, has been performing conversions like this for several years now. AC Propulsion has it down to a science, and a model called the E-Box. This unglamorous van-style vehicle gets at least 120 miles per charge. You just plug it into a 220 outlet. Maximum capacity is achieved overnight.
The E-Box’s battery? Make that an unlikely plural. Lithium Ion laptop batteries get the job. While your laptop computer may have 6 or 8 cells in it, the E-Box relies upon 5,000 of them strung together by Tom and employees, forming a large, flat battery that sits low in the bottom oft the E-Box. Like Tom’s RAV4, the E-Box has all the basic creature comforts: AC, power windows, stereo, etc. Hanks is outspoken about his vehicle of choice. He has hybrids, he says, but prefers the E-Box for running around L.A.
The price is a bit steep on a conversion, though. You’re looking at about $55,000 — plus your original car. But then again, the cost per mile is down to something like 2 cents, so the savings does come to you. Tom Hanks has had his E-Car for some 3 years now, and offers no complaint.
Is this the car of the future? Expect the future to look even better. As solid as AC Propulsion’s conversions are, a car that’s built from the ground up to be an electric car may not give you all the same stylings you’d prefer, but it’s bound to be more cost effective. No need to wait. Functional E-Cars are already here!
Read more
Blame Canada!
Perhaps it shouldn’t have come as quite so big a surprise. After all, it’s a big country with a lot of roads being supported by fuel tax. The way in which it’s being done seems very out of character for the Canadians, though. It seems clear and evident that the Canadian government is stonewalling electric cars — including those made right there in Canada!
Two electric car manufacturers, Zenn Motor Company from Quebec, and Dynasty out of Vancouver, have plug-in low-speed electric cars in production. Zenn’s designs have earned them awards in Europe, and their cars are driving in urban areas of the United States. It is all the more clear that no one is a prophet in his own town, though. Canada is flat-out stonewalling sales of the vehicles within their own country. Excuses vary with each phone call. One time, it’s claimed that they haven’t complied with a law, though they show proof that they have. Another time it’s that the department is considering revamping the requirements because they’re too broad — which avoids the question but does not answer to why Zenn is not being allowed to sell their cars when they comply with existing law.
The cost of transportation and import duties can account for a large part of the costs. In selling within their own country, the manufacturers would be able to be more competitive. But their homeland government doesn’t seem willing to budge. Dynasty has already given up fighting with their government. Both companies are about ready to take their manufacturing operations to more friendly ground.
What’s the real reason behind this? Why would Canada want to stop a company from bringing a car to market which offsets 6 tons of carbon a year, when they’re unable to meet the Kyoto Protocol agreement as it is? The same root as most evils, it’s all about money. The government taxes gasoline and diesel, and supports their roads and highways with that tax money. If they allow electric cars, that revenue is reduced. If the E-cars should become popular, that would put a major dent in their budget. For now, at least, it seems they’re more worried about the lost taxes than complying with the Kyoto treaty.
UPDATE: Canada has seen the light and Zenn’s e-cars will see Canadian roads, but the decision came too late for Dynasty, and Zenn continues to examine if they care to remain there, after the way they were treated.
Barak Obama is no fool. He has come out in strong public support of the hybrid, but been far less vocal in his support of the all-electric plug-in cars. It would seem he’s being a realist on two fronts. Firstly, there’s concern that the U.S. buyers will reject an electric vehicle which cannot be driven across the country (though relatively few ever do such driving,) but more importantly, perhaps he thought this all through and realized there’d be a need for a period of transition to allow brainstorming for a means of paying for the roads that the E-cars will drive on. That puts him one step ahead of most of us, who are just now realizing the impact an electric car may have upon the Federal Highway funds and other public benefits funded by the gasoline taxes at Federal and State levels. In some cases, cities and counties also stand to lose revenue as gasoline sales decline.
We’re entering a new era. The benefits are enormous, but there will be growing pains. For right now, that seems to be the pain of lost tax revenue. We will have to ferret out a solution, if we’re going to enjoy the government’s support of our bold new clean Green cars.
Silver-zinc — the Battery of the Past and Future
Lithium Ion batteries, several varieties of them, are the mainstream these days, for everything from cameras and laptops to the latest electric cars. They’re good on many levels, but not without dangers. IT’s not common, but sometimes they overheat — VERY abruptly, and catch fire or explode. This puts them into the Danger Zone category, meaning that we still need to be working on something newer, better.
Or do we? Silver-Zinc is the new best thing. It’s not really new, though. The military and aerospace industries have been using silver-zinc batteries for some time now, with tremendous success, but they were never made to be rechargeable.
Whereas a Lithium battery has a cobalt core and uses a highly flammable liquid as their electrolyte, the Silver-Zinc batteries have something far more safe, less volatile, in their center: Pure, simple water. What makes the technology even better is that they can produce about 40 percent more power at the same size. But that’s still not the best part.
ZPower, a California company, is developing a Silver-Zinc battery — with a very responsible twist. They promise to be the first battery manufacturer to buy back the batteries after they’ve been depleted, to recycle the silver. How much? Ross Duebner, CEO of ZPower, isn’t promising, but says it’ll be in the tens of dollars. They can do it, because they find that their battery is about 95% recyclable by weight. Lithium Ion batteries may be recycled as well, but it’s only technically true. What happens with them is that they’re melted down for their lithium and cobalt, and the other parts of the battery help fuel the fires that do it, so TECHNICALLY they’re being recycled… kinda…sorta… right? Meanwhile, Silver-Zinc batteries have no toxic chemicals in them, and no dangerous heavy metals. Moreover, once the silver is mined, by recycling it, silver-zinc batteries become a closed loop, a renewable source of rechargeable batteries.
Their new laptop battery should extend at least two hours beyond a 5 hour Lithium battery’s useable time; ZPower’s Silver-Zinc laptop batteries are expected to run your computer for at least seven hours on a charge.
That’s a pretty big boast. Considering their backers, ZPower may just be able to back it up. Intel and OnPoint Technologies, which is a venture capital fund of the U.S. Army, are amongst those on board with ZPower.
At least at first, these batteries won’t be any cheaper than Lithium. Silver isn’t inexpensive, and they do deliver more power, but we’re hoping that the price will come down. Maybe silver-zinc technology will end up being the standard for all sorts of batteries, a welcome solution for storing alternative energy sources.
A key part of the Green nature of the silver-zinc battery remains that it’s truly able to be recycled, not just burnt to a crisp and then having a few key elements floated back out in a smelting pot. Despite claims to the contrary, that’s pretty much exactly what happens when Lithium Ion batteries are supposedly “recycled.”
But will people do so? Will they return their silver-zinc batteries, or just toss them in the trash? With the buyback program in place and financially viable, it should be a no-brainer that people will turn them in. ZPower cites that large bulky lead batteries are recycled at least 90 percent of the time. Then again, they’re in your car already, and your car’s at the shop so, to the consumer, Recycling amounts to disposing at the same time. There’s minor room for concern, but the buy-back program should ensure that the metals are recycled.
It seems like silver-zinc technology could very well be our next Green thing.
Read more
Recycling Slams to a Sudden Stop
All across the nation, recycling has hit an abrupt and solid brick wall. The economy has fallen off sharply and China, the largest buyer for recycled materials, just isn’t buying. With prices so low that they’re not worth handling, recycling centers all across the nation are at a loss as to what to do with what has suddenly become just so much trash.
How bad is it, really? Tin was at $327 a ton earlier this year. Now? Five bucks. That’s it. Collect, compact, contain, warehouse, and handle it, and you get $5 for a 2,000 pounds of vegetable cans. Even at the lower gas prices, it doesn’t pay to start up the heavy equipment to load it onto a truck in the first place. And it’s not just tin either. West coast prices for mixed paper are down to $20 a ton, less than a fifth of the $105 of earlier this year. Gas prices haven’t fallen that far.
Some recycling centers are warehousing it… and warehousing it… and warehousing even more, in hopes that the prices will come back up. They don’t have much choice. It cost them more to gain it in the first place than the buyers are paying now. Some have government contracts to keep collecting it, but the market just doesn’t justify the costs.
The single exception is glass. It seems there’s still a domestic demand for that. But all that paper and plastic that we’ve been so conscientiously separating and hauling to the colored bins and dumpsters? It’s likely that it’s headed for landfill… or worse. While you may have been recycling because it’s good for the planet, THEY were doing so because it made money.
Two questions remain:
1) Why do recycled products cost so much more than new materials when we’re giving it to them, (only to have it sold at a profit,) and we then buy it back as other products?
2) Are we still supposed to be separating and recycling this stuff?
Sooner or later, the falling economy was bound to affect recycling. Perhaps the better idea these days is to use less in the first place.
Here’s a thought: Just because they’re not accepting it at the recycling bins doesn’t mean you can’t still recycle, right there at home. Do you buy bottled water? Start refilling them, reuse them instead of throwing them out. Do you ship things? Take that paper, those egg crates and other clean recyclable products, and use them for packing. Tin cans? What about craft projects, pencil holders, robot toys? If push comes to shove, smash ‘em down and warehouse ‘em yourself.
Times are changing. We’ll adapt, and figure things like this out. Local solutions may be developed.
Meanwhile, use less, and keep on recycling right there at home.
Busting Some Eggs (Part 1 of 2)
Ever since Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” came out in 2006, the movement to get us off of fossil fuels has been rapidly gaining momentum. In just two short years, and despite an administration that is obviously and decidedly interested in keeping us burning gasoline, we’ve seen solar technologies take off, wind turbine farms explode, and a plethora of other alternative resources and technologies coming forth. Some are future science at best, while others are very well grounded, sensible solutions that we can implement today.
The Pickens Plan, instituted by a former oil baron billionaire who sees the need for the United States to free itself from dependence upon foreign oil, has garnered some attention by suggesting that we burn our own nation’s natural gas instead of sending out 700 billion dollars a year to foreign countries. It’s likely that a good share of his intention was to get a grass-roots movement behind switching to natural gas, but he also has investments in wind farms. What’s more important, though, is that his website, which was set up to be an open forum for exploring ideas, has brought a wealth of alternative energy technologies to light, and inspired scores of other ideas as well. Some are admittedly tin-foil cap, but other possibilities, such as functional electric and compressed-air cars, have stepped to the forefront because of the site.
The general public is developing a Green consciousness. This is happening so rapidly in some areas that it seems to support the 99th Monkey theory. Of a sudden, large numbers of people speak in terms of electric cars as a foregone conclusion. Most include them in any possibility of a bailout program for the ailing auto manufacturing industry. New ideas are being met with curiosity rather than pessimistic suspicion… and all of this is happening while it seems our nation and the entire world may be on a swift downhill slide towards another great depression.
Read Part 2, “To Make An Omelette” in the Wheels section
Read more
Spain’s Solar Supremacy? Over Their Dead Bodies!
Spain is literally leading the way to solar supremacy over their dead bodies. The country’s habitable regions have limited free space for solar installations, so they’re getting very practical about it all, using up every bit of open space that they can find. ANY space. While Spin has put solar farms in cemeteries before, Santa Coloma de Gramenet, a working man’s town outside of Barcelona, has mounted 462 solar panels atop the graves themselves, and is now piping that solar energy back into their local grid that supplies electricity for the 124,000 people who live within a mere 1.5 square miles.
This solar power use in Spain is being heralded as both sensible and noble. That solar array will produce energy to power 60 homes, while eliminating 62 tons of CO2 from the atmosphere.
Esteve Serret, the director of Conste-Live Energy, said “The best tribute we can pay to our ancestors, whatever your religion may be, is to generate clean energy for new generations.” Would that the rest of the world would adopt such wisdom. In this sense, using the graveyard for solar power is noble as well.
Spain offers generous subsidies to solar manufacturers. The country has abundant sun, and along with that comes a high demand for air conditioning. To facilitate the jump-starting of solar power, Spain has initiated feed-in tariffs which guarantee up to triple the market price for solar energy — guaranteed — for the next 25 years. New legislation would require all new buildings to include solar technology. Spain really is pushing for solar supremacy, even if that means generating it over their dead bodies. Read more
Advertisement
