• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

War on coal casualties

I used to play on an old steam engine growing up when I went to my best friends house.

The guy that owned it bought some land that had been used for a sawmill/log yard and the engine was left on the property because no one could figure out how to work it, and sat there for decades.

Eventually, it was sold, and rumored to Dolly Partin and used for spare parts for their steam engine in Pigeon Forge at Dollywood.

One of my earliest memories was being at Little Shepherd Trail and hearing the old whistle blowing when they were using the engine to log with. I can remember my Dad and me talking about how sad and mournful it sounded.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUP2DA-8xHI[/youtube]
 
About 5,000 coal miners, energy workers, families and supporters gathered on the West Side Steps of the U.S. Capitol at 11 a.m. Oct. 29 as part of the "Stand Up for American Jobs" rally.

"We are going to Washington to show the support that exists for the people of our country's mining industry, and to put a face to the drastic job-crushing policies coming out of this administration," West Virginia Coal Association President Bill Raney. "This administration's policies are crippling the coal industry, and so much more."

Raney said there is a growing number of Americans who have been "pushed aside by this president, creating heartbreak and misery in hundreds of thousands of homes."

Buses left West Virginia from Huntington, Danville, Beckley, Morgantown and other towns early Tuesday morning.
I am all for this but I'm afraid their protest will fall on deaf ears from the majority of both parties. I am not normally a supporter of unions. I think for the most part they have outgrown their britches. However, unions were made to fight tyranny and so on this, the coal miners have my support.

40% of the nations energy is from coal. I think instead of going to DC they need to shut the industry down with a strike that calls for DC to get more reasonable. Holding 40% of the nation's electricity hostage as stockpiles dwindle will have a strong effect to say the least. If they don't do something drastic they will be in a weaker and weaker position every year. My biggest concern would be that Obummer would let it all come to a stop and could care less. He would punish the nation with it much as he did during the shutdown.

As pro union as Obummer is, I wondered why he hates the coal industry so much. I think part of it is that he's in bed with the eco Nazi's. I think the biggest part is that they are regular folks who turn to god and guns in time of difficulty as he indicated with disdain about Pennsylvanians during the first run for potus.
 
John A. said:
“the owners of newly built electric generating units will likely choose technologies that meet these standards even in the absence of this proposal due to existing economic conditions as normal business practice.”[/i]

Boy whoever wrote this last sentence really nailed it.

What has been considered "NORMAL BUSINESS PRACTICE" since the 1970's and the creation of the EPA is excess taxation by the EPA.

Look up cap and trade and tax credits that companies could buy and sell as needed to meet their "business standards".

Here's the real scoop since there may be many who may be ignorant of how this works so you can better understand what the last paragraph of the article means...................................

Now, back to the subject pertaining more to coal fired plants that have switched over to gas fired or other means of heating water to turn into steam to turn their turbines to make them spin so they can make electricity, I want to ask you a sincere question.

Have you seen a DECREASE in your electric bill in the last 5 years the EPA has been directed to bankrupt coal by the president and force them by taxation to undergo a huge financial burden to switch the type of fuel they use so the EPA won't come down on them like Thors hammer and so they can maintain their permits just to be allowed to continue to operate and produce the product (electricity, something we all use)?

Have you seen a DECREASE in your grocery bill?

Or decrease in cost of anything for that matter?

Chewing gum?

Anything?

Because that is something that gets passed along to the consumer in the end.

Serious questions. Have you?

I know I'm at the opposite end of the continent from you guys and a bit north, ;) but no matter which way you slice power generation...we're all getting raped.

Governments on both sides of the border talk out of both sides of their mouths. On the one hand, the eco-freaks have been trying to shut down our one natural gas fired plant here for....well since I was a kid. I live in granola country surrounded by a bunch o' hippie tree hugging, yuppies. They've managed to keep it only to add power to the grid during peak usage.

However, our main source of power comes from hydro-electric plants on our many raging rivers. That being said our provincial government is now staking our "future successes" on natural gas exploration and export to China. Natural gas costs to the average consumer, though we are literally sitting on some of the largest deposits on the globe...have skyrocketed over the last 10 years. Natural gas is the main heating fuel for residential and commercial properties here other than electricity of course.

Our core resource industries of forestry and mining have been in steady decline for decades now. Coal trains still roll to the ports but not like days gone by. A large chunk of our raw logs are exported to China so we can buy them back after milling...retarded. Again, happening for several decades now. Why? Greedy companies and governments doing back room deals to pad their own wallets and pensions and panel their own houses while the rest of us go to the unemployment lines and try to scratch out a living so we can......pay more taxes.

For the record...IMO...global warming is BS. How very convenient for Mr. Gore that he made millions (and that my friends is a fact) off of fear mongering. Any thinking person should be able to deduce that we do not have enough hard, recorded FIRST HAND evidence to prove anything. What is certain, the earth has always gone through warming and cooling trends...who really knows the scope, timing and cycle??? I'll tell you....no one does...cuz they ain't lived that long and there is no written historic record...period. There are only clues in nature of what happened in the past, that must be interpreted and guessed at. It's all a guessing game. People, bad people, opportunistic people have long attempted to profit and control others through fear for their own personal gain.

Welcome to North America.....................
 
saw the story on ABC about Dr. Paul Wheeler....what a dirty bastard. I'd like to slap him when they showed that old boy's wife crying
 
Good call Oli. Maybe they should bring back the Molly Maguirers to help him see the error of his ways.
 
That is a subject very near my heart. My Dad died of black lung.

That was over 3 years ago last August.

It's a terrible irreversible disease caused from breathing dust and coal dust from an enclosed mine from the machines retrieving the coal from the ground. Even though he wore a mask, I can remember him getting out of the shower and getting toilet paper and rolling around inside his nose when he got home wiping out the coal dust, despite being able to see that around his nose and mouth where the mask was a lighter color so I knew he wore it.

My mom has yet to see a penny of Black Lung survivors benefits despite having them sued and Dads death certificate even has Black Lung as the cause of death listed. Well, the medical term for that anyway.

The Federal courts have been putting it off for years. Not only has Dad succumbed to it, many of the miners that worked with Dad have also died and even getting a witness of their working conditions is getting harder by the day.

They're as crooked as workers comp sending you to "company doctors" that will say there's nothing wrong with you even if you walked into their office without a head.

This is my 59 year old Dad about 5 days before he past away.

At this stage, he was swelled badly due to his kidneys was shutting down and I think the day after that was when his kidneys finally did shut down, and you can tell that his blood pressure was off by looking at his face, and that big white thing under his nose hooked to all of those tubes was 100% oxygen just so he didn't smother to death like a fish out of water.

And even wearing it 24 hours a day was still not enough because the oxygen wouldn't transfer to his heart correctly due to being "clogged up" with the coal dust and if he did try to get it and walk from the living room to the bathroom, even with the oxygen, would often pass out before he got back to his chair.

I know where the guy in the article is coming from wanting to wrap their hands around their neck and choking them to see how they like not being able to breathe. I have pictured that in my head myself. Only I wanted to lock them in a small clear plexiglass box and let them run out of oxygen slowly and watch as they struggle to breathe for a few minutes so they really could understand what it's like. And not let them out until after they passed out and they thought they were going to die. I'm sure that would give them a whole new outlook on things because that's what it's like if you have black lung, only nothing will let them out of the box except God calling you home.

be42d50b-6622-4d74-ac96-68dcb15e8aa1_zps5bd2c8bc.jpg
 
I just really want to scream when I see stuff like this.

I am a hunter, a fisherman, an outdoorsman. I have a vested interest in nature and the environment yet even I feel the EPA is out of control.

Going "green" should be switching to cleaner technologies when and if they become a viable replacement, not destroying America before that point under the guise of protecting the environment. Switching over to technologies that cost 10 times more yet produce a fraction of current technologies is insanity.

The amount of damage these people are doing to our economy, jobs, families, etc. that is totally under the radar of most media (choosing to ignore it) and the general public is unreal.
 
^^ There's a term for this. It's a called "Green Washing". Similar to White Washing. Looks fine for a few days on the surface, but doesn't do any real good.
 
Here's a bit of insanity directly attributable to the EPA coal regs, and Econuts: Burn wood instead of coal for electrical production. :roll: Note that 70,000 tons of wood from US forests are being shipped to England every day to power a electric plant.

To make a little more sense of this volume, a 30 year old Loblolly Pine (which I have several acres of) weighs about 2500lbs. So every day nearly 70,000 trees will be harvested just to feed this one power plant. :shock:

Is wood the best fuel to generate electricity? Despite wood’s low energy density and high cost, utilities in the US and abroad are switching from coal to wood to produce electrical power. The switch to wood is driven by regulations from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other international organizations. These regulations are based on the false assumption that burning wood reduces carbon dioxide emissions.

Wood has never been a major fuel source for electrical power. In 1882, when Thomas Edison built the first power plant in New York at Pearl Street Station, he used coal to fire the plant. A switch to wood is not going back in time; it’s adopting a fuel that was regarded as inferior at the dawn of the electrical age.

Pound for pound, wood contains less energy and is more expensive than other fuels. A 2008 study conducted at the Rapids Energy Center plant in Minnesota found that, compared to coal, more than twice the mass of wood was required to produce the same electrical output. A 2008 study by the UK House of Lords concluded that electricity from biomass was more than twice the cost of electricity from coal or natural gas. Nevertheless, an increasing number of electrical power plants are switching from coal to low-energy-density and high-cost wood fuel.

This irrational behavior is driven by the EPA, the US Department of Energy, the European Union, the California Air Resources Board, and other world organizations that assume that biomass fuel is “carbon neutral.” Biomass-fired plants receive carbon credits, tax exemptions, and subsidies from promoting governments.

When burned, biomass emits carbon dioxide into the atmosphere like any other combustion. A 2012 paper by Synapse Energy Economics estimated that burning biomass emits 50 to 85 percent more CO2 than burning coal since the energy content of biomass is lower than coal relative to its carbon content.

The “carbon neutral” concept originated in a 1996 Greenhouse Gas Inventory paper from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations. The IPCC assumed that, as biofuel plants grow, they absorb CO2 equal to the amount released when burned. If correct, substitution of wood for coal would reduce net emissions.

But a 2011 opinion by the European Environment Agency pointed to a “serious error” in greenhouse gas accounting. The carbon neutral assumption does not account for CO2 that would be absorbed by the natural vegetation that grows on land not used for biofuel production. Substitution of wood for coal in electrical power plants is actually increasing carbon dioxide emissions.

Nevertheless, governments have adopted the “carbon neutral” assumption and continue to promote biomass as a substitute for coal. As a result, nations and utilities are not required to count their CO2 emissions from biomass combustion.

In July, Dominion Virginia Power completed conversion of its Altavista Power Station to biomass fuel, the first of three planned facility conversions at a total cost of $165 million. The change was lauded as a method to “help to meet Virginia’s renewable energy goal.” Virginia citizens paid for the conversion and will pay higher electricity bills in the future.


More: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/09/w ... -solution/
 
A lot of people are touting that gas is "the wonder fuel of the future".

But what they are not saying out loud that for electricity production, gas doesn't burn as hot as coal, therefore, it takes more gas to produce the same amount of electricity.

As Paul Harvey would say; "And now you know the rest of the story".
 
Scott M said:
So, the casualty here is; our forests.....

And everything that depends on them.

Edit: Another way to think about this is by acreage planted. To harvest 70,000 tons per day of trees means about 300 acres clear cut every day, assuming 200 trees per acre, which is generally what you'd see on a plantation such as mine. So in a years time 300x365=109,000 acres (170 sq miles) up in smoke to feed that one powerplant in Britain. Atlanta is only 132 sq miles by way of comparison.
 
Looks like house republicans are trying to slow the EPA. It's probably to little to late. It seems like the EPA makes a decree and it's up to Congress to stop it versus the EPA coming up with a proposal, selling it and getting it approved.:

Republican leaders on the House Energy and Commerce Committee are calling on the Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw its proposal to impose carbon dioxide limits on power plants.

Committee leaders sent a letter to EPA director Gina McCarthy on Friday, asking her to withdraw the proposed regulations, arguing that the agency is trying to "impose standards beyond the scope of its legal authority."

In September, the EPA released a proposal to set emissions caps for new coal-fired power plants that would likely require the industry to use carbon-capture technology, which involves burying the carbon underground.

Critics argue the technology, which is still under development, is too expensive, not commercially available and poses serious safety risks.

The agency maintains the technology has been “adequately demonstrated” based on three government-funded projects. The lawmakers argue the EPA is prohibited by law from using the projects to justify its proposed regulations.

Last month, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., released a draft a bill to block the EPA's proposal to limit emissions from new power plants and require the agency to set rules for coal-fired power plants that incorporate "commercially feasible" technologies.

At a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on the matter Thursday, Manchin said the EPA's proposal would hold the coal industry to "impossible standards" by forcing it to do something that is impossible to achieve.

"If we just stand by and do nothing and let the EPA eliminate coal from our energy mix, we’re going to see the stability of our electrical grid threatened and see the price of electricity rise
dramatically, jeopardizing America’s economy and countless jobs with no real environmental benefit, " Manchin said.

Committee Chairman Fred Upton, who has endorsed the Manchin-Whitfield proposal, said the EPA's proposed rule is a threat to the nation's fuel diversity that allows for a stable and affordable electricity supply.

"The president's energy strategy is the exact opposite of an all-of-the-above approach and would limit our energy choices, jeopardize jobs, raise energy costs and threaten America's global competitiveness," Upton said.

During the hearing, EPA official Janet McCabe voiced concerns over the GOP proposal, which she said would limit the development of cutting-edge clean energy technology and prevent timely action on cutting carbon pollution.

The Manchin-Whitfield proposal has yet to be introduced.
 
I got en email from friends of coal today asking to sign a petition. If any of you are interested in helping, here is the link.

The EPA has announced new proposed rules that threaten the entire coal industry. If enacted, these new rules could force plants to close, people to lose their jobs and devastate the communities that rely on coal to thrive. Sign our letter to the EPA and tell Gina McCarthy that you support jobs and coal communities.

The EPA has released their proposed Carbon Pollution Standards for New Power Plants. This proposal could have a devastating impact on our economy, our coal communities and our long-term energy future. We’re asking all of you to help us by submitting the comments below to the EPA, letting them know you want to protect coal jobs and find a balanced approach that keeps one of our most abundant, domestic resources part of our energy mix.
Comment on Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495

On September 20, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced the proposed Carbon Pollution Standards for New Power Plants and I write to you today to voice my strong objection to these proposed regulations.

The American coal industry supplies and supports hundreds of thousands of jobs, provides reliable and affordable energy, keeps energy costs low for businesses and families, and helps move our nation towards an energy independent future. Proposing and potentially implementing these new standards would be devastating to the industry and a country that relies on coal to power our everyday needs.

EPA regulations have already contributed to shutting down coal plants in 33 states at a time when people need jobs, not regulatory overreach.

This is about more than just the industry and the jobs it supports. It's also about innovation and progress. The coal industry has invested hundreds of billions of dollars to develop and implement cleaner more efficient technology.

Enforcing these proposed, unattainable standards on new power plants could effectively halt the progress that has already been made and prevent the continued development of clean coal technology.

We should be encouraging innovation and growth, not squashing it with burdensome regulations.

We should be supporting industries that provide good jobs for hardworking people.

We should be striving for a balanced approach to energy policy that uses all of our resources.

We must protect our coal jobs and our coal communities.

Thank You.

http://www.eparegscostjobs.com/
 
Just signed on John. I hope it helps. The one thing that would really help turn the country around financially would be energy independence. If we utilized our oil and coal resources and developed alternatives that made economic sense we would drive down energy costs and our manufacturing would improve. That's real jobs instead of a McJob. Unfortunately neither Dem orRepub seems to care.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top