Indiana regulators approve coal plant 5

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   Tasermons Partner Posted 3:35 am
   21 Nov 2007

   One wonders......if it had been a "traditional" coal plant if it would have approved the application.  That the "gasification" label possibly makes it easier to get approved and limits resistance from local communities who don't know the full potential effects of gasification, and are more willin' to go along with it 'cause it isn't a traditional plant and claims to be "greener"?

   Permalink

2. 

   WKB Posted 3:54 am
   21 Nov 2007

   Southern Indiana is not hip.I  live in Evansville, south of Edwardsport. Our first Step It Up rally in April focused on Duke's plant. 200 people showed up, and in Eville that's a great turnout. Along with the knowledge and efforts of Valley Watch, a local watchdog group, we convinced our utility, Vectren, to back out of investing in this plant.
   We already live within 62 miles of 17 coal plants - the greatest concentration in the world. We had air quality alerts this year from May to September.
   But Bush's pal Mitch Daniels has been intent on building more coal plants here since before he took office.
   Valley Watch calls us an "energy sacrifice zone" and indeed that seems to be the way Daniels perceives us as well. Daniels recently called southern Indiana "the Saudi Arabia of coal." This is how backwards he is in his thinking. Climate change isn't even on the radar.
   We've got plants popping up in Western Kentucky, too.
   http://www.courierpress.com/news/2007/oct/30/peabody-narr ...
   Any attention Grist and environmental groups want to focus on our area is more than welcome!

   Permalink

3. 

   Tasermons Partner Posted 7:40 am
   21 Nov 2007

   Arkansas is arcaneLooks like Arkansas is no better:
   http://www.kcbd.com/Global/story.asp?S=7394526

   Permalink

4. 

   Delay And Deny Posted 1:36 am
   23 Nov 2007

   I Wish I Had You...To Talk Toooooo....It's not a "coal" plant, it's coal gasification.  That's a completely different technology.   The point is to transform the coal into a fuel which can be used cleanly.   By-products include the ever popular hydrogen.
   Recent studies published in Grist show that moving from old coal plants to new coal technologies alone could put us under the Kyoto limits -- in a span of a few years, not decades!
   http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/gasifi ...
   Rather than burning coal directly, gasification (a thermo-chemical process) breaks down coal - or virtually any carbon-based feedstock - into its basic chemical constituents. In a modern gasifier, coal is typically exposed to hot steam and carefully controlled amounts of air or oxygen under high temperatures and pressures. Under these conditions, carbon molecules in coal break apart, setting off chemical reactions that typically produce a mixture of carbon monoxide, hydrogen and other gaseous compounds.
   Gasification, in fact, may be one of the best ways to produce clean-burning hydrogen for tomorrow's automobiles and power-generating fuel cells. Hydrogen and other coal gases can also be used to fuel power-generating turbines, or as the chemical "building blocks" for a wide range of commercial products.
   
   

   Permalink

5. 

   Tasermons Partner Posted 2:22 am
   23 Nov 2007

   Still...Though gasification plants are "cleaner" in some respects than "traditional" coal plants, they still have a much larger GHG footprint than other types of plants, such as natural gas, and definetly have a much larger footprint than renewable energy sources do.
   Plus, there are special considerations and environmental problems/challenges associated with the gasification process.
   We need to tread carefully with this new tech.  It shouldn't be seen as an easy replacement for conservation and renewables...which is where ideally the primary focus should be, with enhanced technological considerations working alongside it (but not as the primary focus).

   Permalink