Tag Archives: pittsburgh

It continues: Two Pennsylvania coal plants will close for good next week

It continues: Two Pennsylvania coal plants will close for good next week

FirstEnergy

The Hatfield’s Ferry power plant in Greene County. Goodbye and good riddance.

The coal sector is in its death throes, thanks to cheaper alternatives and a growing distaste for what is the worst of the global-warming fuels. The latest casualties: two coal-burning power plants in Pennsylvania that will pump their last energy into the grid, and cough their last pollution in to the air, this weekend.

Officials with FirstEnergy Generation told state lawmakers on Thursday that their 370-megawatt plant in Washington County and its monster, 1,710 megawatt facility in Greene County will shutter next week, with little to no hope of them being sold or reopened.

“Those plants are losing money today and will lose money in the future. Our plans are not to run those units again,” said James Lash, FirstEnergy’s president, according to a report in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

Lash painted a grim future for coal-fired power plants, saying electricity is priced too low in a market where demand for power has dropped and the capital investment needed to meet environmental regulations is too high. Electricity prices have dropped 10 percent from summer to fall, while the cost of natural gas – which also is used as a fuel for power generation – remains at historic low levels because of the abundance of gas from supplies such as the Marcellus shale reserves, Lash said.

It would take another $270 million investment to make the two plants compliant with environmental regulations, including the pending Mercury and Air Toxic Standards rule, which would result in the plants being greater money losers if the company were to make those investments, Lash said.

The previous owner of the plants, Allegheny Energy of Greensburg, spent $715 million in 2009 to install scrubbers at Hatfield’s Ferry.

While the plants’ closure is good news for the climate, it will mean a lot of pain for workers. An estimated 380 union jobs will be lost. Here’s hoping those workers can find better, more healthful jobs in the fast-growing renewable energy sector, which is being supported in Pennsylvania with nine-year-old renewable energy standards that include what the NRDC describes as one of the most ambitious solar provisions in the eastern United States.


Source
FirstEnergy affirms plan to shutter 2 plants, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

This article is from: 

It continues: Two Pennsylvania coal plants will close for good next week

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on It continues: Two Pennsylvania coal plants will close for good next week

Pennsylvania’s ag-gag law could protect frackers

Pennsylvania’s ag-gag law could protect frackers

Shutterstock /

World Resources

Put that video camera away or else.

Film a fracker, go to jail?

It could become illegal to document many of the fracking operations in Pennsylvania under an ag-gag bill being considered in the state House.

Ag-gag laws have been introduced or passed in more than a dozen states, aiming to prevent animal-welfare activists from documenting systemic abuses at corporate farms and slaughterhouses. They do this in a variety of ways, mostly by making it illegal to film such abuse; by requiring any such footage be handed over immediately to law enforcement officials (thereby hobbling activists’ ability to document patterns of abuse, rather than one-off instances); and/or by requiring job applicants to reveal any activist affiliations.

But experts warn that Pennsylvania House Bill 683 would go further by also protecting frackers from unwanted scrutiny when they operate on farmland. A fracking spree is underway in the state, which sits atop the natural-gas-rich Marcellus Shale deposit, and much of the fracking is conducted on agricultural lands.

From a report in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

Ross Pifer, director of the Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center at Penn State University’s Dickinson School of Law, said hydraulic fracturing operations could be protected under the bill because gas companies often lease land from farmers.

“If you view it expansively, you’d have to view it as: Anything that takes place on that land (is protected),” Pifer said.

Melissa Troutman, outreach coordinator at Mountain Watershed Association, which investigates and records fracking activity, said the law would open the door for gas companies to hide activities legally.

“If it passes, what’s next? No documenting commercial or recreational activity?” Troutman said. “Right now it’s legal to photograph industrial operations on public lands. Will that be illegal next?

“If you’re not doing anything wrong, there’s nothing to hide. So why is there a need for this bill?”

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

See the original article here – 

Pennsylvania’s ag-gag law could protect frackers

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Pines, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Pennsylvania’s ag-gag law could protect frackers

Fracking waste deemed too radioactive for hazardous-waste dump

Fracking waste deemed too radioactive for hazardous-waste dump

Shutterstock

A truck carrying fracking waste was quarantined and then sent back to where it came from after its contents triggered a radiation alarm at a Pennsylvania hazardous-waste landfill. The truck’s load was nearly 10 times more radioactive than is permitted at the dump in South Huntingdon township.

The radiation came from radium 226, a naturally occurring material in the Marcellus Shale, which being fracked for natural gas in Pennsylvania and nearby states. “Radium is a well known contaminant in fracking operations,” writes Jeff McMahon at Forbes.

From the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

Township Supervisor Mel Cornell said the MAX Environmental Technologies truck was quarantined Friday after it set off a radiation alarm at MAX’s landfill near Yukon, a 159-acre site that accepts residual waste and hazardous waste.

[Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection] spokesman John Poister confirmed the drill cutting materials from Rice Energy’s Thunder II pad in Greene County had a radiation level of 96 microrem.

The landfill must reject any waste with a radiation level that reaches 10 microrem or higher.

“It’s low-level radiation, but we don’t want any radiation in South Huntingdon,” Cornell said.

Poister said DEP instructed MAX to return the materials to the well pad where it was extracted for subsequent disposal at an approved facility.

Pennsylvania is currently studying radiation issues associated with fracking of the shale and disposal of the industry’s waste.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Source: 

Fracking waste deemed too radioactive for hazardous-waste dump

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fracking waste deemed too radioactive for hazardous-waste dump

Coal keeps on selling, lawsuits and bad economics be damned

Coal keeps on selling, lawsuits and bad economics be damned

Shutterstock

Vile scourge/cheap energy producer.

When I started writing this post, the ticker on the homepage of Peabody Energythe largest private-sector coal company in the world, indicated that it has sold 970,470 tons of coal so far in 2013. Can’t find the ticker? It’s down there next to the “Environmental Responsibility” box. Yes, really.

An activist group has filed a lawsuit against Emerald Coal Resources, citing extensive pollution in southwestern Pennsylvania. From the Associated Press:

The Center for Coalfield Justice, based in Washington, Pa., filed the federal lawsuit Friday in Pittsburgh against Emerald Coal Resources LP, which operates the Emerald Mine in Waynesburg, Greene County. The citizens’ group is being backed by the Earthrise Law Center in Norwell, Mass.

The lawsuit contends Emerald Coal has violated pollution levels for iron, manganese, aluminum and other pollutants more than 120 times in the past 12 months and more than 400 times in the past five years. The group is basing those claims on violations the company has been self-reporting to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection under Emerald’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit as part of the federal Clean Water Act.

The parent company for Emerald is Alpha Natural Resources, which recently announced plans to shut a number of mines.

972,199 tons … 972,283 tons …

In Virginia, meanwhile, a report outlines how the state’s investment in coal energy is not paying off.

From WAMU radio:

Environmentalists have long criticized Virginia coal companies for their impact on air quality, but a new report suggests there are economic reasons to stop mining.

In the report, Appalachian Voices, a nonprofit environmental organization, found Virginia gives coal companies more in tax breaks than the state receives from them in taxes.

Virginia pays a net amount of about $22 million to the coal industry every year, according to Appalachian Voices Director Tom Cormons. The figure takes into account all taxes the industry pays to the state, he said.

The full report [PDF] articulates how the state of Virginia helps keep the state’s remaining mines open.

Coal’s importance for Virginia is not likely to grow in the future based on the declining competitiveness of Virginia coal resulting from the depletion of the lowest-cost coal reserves. Additionally, new regulations and technology requirements related to air emissions and tighter restrictions on surface mining are also likely to impact Virginia coal production, although to what extent is unknown. Should this occur, coal’s contribution to the Commonwealth’s budget and state and local economies will likely diminish.

Strategies

Virginia’s increasingly poor investment in coal.

Peabody Energy sold 8,000 tons of coal in the time it took me to articulate today’s reasons why we shouldn’t be extracting or subsidizing coal at all. Take a look at Peabody’s ticker right now and share the current count in comments below. Then weep. 

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

View original: 

Coal keeps on selling, lawsuits and bad economics be damned

Posted in Citizen, GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Coal keeps on selling, lawsuits and bad economics be damned

Fracking companies want to ship wastewater by barge, since boats never spill

Fracking companies want to ship wastewater by barge, since boats never spill

Over the summer, ProPublica revealed that the wastewater produced through the fracking process — primarily water mixed with salt and who-knows-what chemicals — was often stuffed into over-pressure wells, and that an unknown number of those wells are leaking. Fracking companies stroked their chins and said, “Hm,” and came up with a proposal: Well then, why don’t we ship the wastewater in barges on rivers before we stuff it into the ground?

gb_packards

A barge carries environmentally friendly coal up the Ohio River.

From PublicSource:

The shale gas drilling industry wants to move its wastewater by barge on rivers and lakes across the country. But the U.S. Coast Guard, which regulates the nation’s waterways, must first decide whether it’s safe. …

The Coast Guard has been considering whether to allow the industry to use the waterways for about a year, according to [Commander Michael Roldan, chief of the Coast Guard’s Hazardous Material Division], who said the question came up when the Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh — the local office of the Coast Guard — called the Washington office to clarify whether bulk transport was allowed after Marcellus Shale drillers began making inquiries.

The Coast Guard’s decision would affect more than Pittsburgh’s iconic three rivers. Nearly 12,000 miles of waterways could be open to these waterborne behemoths, each carrying 10,000 barrels of wastewater.

Of course it’s safe, Coast Guard! Jeez. I challenge you to name one time when the fossil fuel industry has transported fluids by ship and anything bad has happened. (Here is a list of 140 of them.) And it’s not like you have scientists saying anything could go wrong, except Benjamin Stout, a biology professor at Wheeling Jesuit University, who told PublicSource, “Oh, crap. A lot of things could go wrong.”

A barge accident would be a “massive catastrophe,” said Steve Hvozdovich, Marcellus campaign coordinator for Clean Water Action, a national environmental advocacy organization.

“It’s not just a contamination of a waterway,” Mr. Hvozdovich said. “You’re talking about the contamination of the drinking water supply for about half a million people. … It seems like a very bad idea.”

But industry officials and transportation experts counter that other industrial materials, some toxic, are moved on barges now. They include chlorine, hydrochloric acid and anhydrous ammonia. Why should the drilling industry be treated differently? they ask.

Yes, yes, good argument. Why shouldn’t we be allowed to do this dangerous thing when so many other people are? It’s the corporate version of, “But all the other kids are doing it!” To which the best response should be, “Well, fracking company, if all the other kids spilled toxic fluids into a waterway serving as a source of drinking water and were subsequently sued for millions or billions of dollars in addition to having to spend millions or billions on clean up, would you do it too?” (And the fracking companies would probably respond with an enthusiastic, “Yes!”)

One thing that might hold up the Coast Guard’s analysis: No one is sure how much wastewater we’d be talking about. So let’s make a deal: We agree to allow shipping by barge, as long as the amount does not exceed that which could be held in the barge captain’s mouth for the duration of the journey. Government regulation at its finest.

Source

Shale drillers eager to move wastewater on barges, PublicSource

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Excerpt from:  

Fracking companies want to ship wastewater by barge, since boats never spill

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fracking companies want to ship wastewater by barge, since boats never spill