Our World and Everything in It

Ah, how soon we forget. Just a little over a year ago the United States Supreme Court ruled that the EPA could not bypass its authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. That ruling caused a rush to court on behalf of other industry polluters, i.e., coal burning facilities. But luck ran out for the coal industry when the of U.S. Court of Appeal’s basically threw the EPA’s cap and trade program out, and told the EPA that they were wrong by taking power plants off the list of hazardous pollution sources with its “Clean Air Mercury Rule.” Now the EPA has two years to develop mercury emissions standards for existing power plants. http://www.blogsmonroe.com/world/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=232

So it seems a little redundant for citizens to have to sign a petition to send a message to our state congress to get Michigan moving. This particular petition calls for Governor Granholm to issue an executive order to immediately direct Michigan’s DEQ (Dept. of Environmental Quality) to regulate CO2 emissions from coal and other power facilities.

The real goal here is to show our state government we are indeed watching what does or does not happen in Michigan as far as legislation to move forward to bring new jobs to boost the economy, while continuing to curb pollution in Michigan. Our two houses and the governor continue to come to a stalemate regarding jobs, the environment, pollution, and our economy. We wouldn’t be as afraid to loose jobs in polluting industries like construction of coalburners, refineries, and even nuke plants, if we had a decent RPS (Renewable Portfolio Standard) and Energy Efficiency program to entice more green industry into our state, which seems to go hand in hand with the technical industries also.

Job growth in a new sector certainly takes the sting out of job loss and poor working conditions in waning manufacturing sectors. So get on with it Michigan! We’re missing a golden opportunity to transform ourselves quickly from old manufacturing status quo to something new completely that’s being afforded by green industry.

Perhaps signing a petition to nudge our politicians forward is a very good idea to show we want the green—both industry and paycheck green.

Take the time to sign at:   http://progressmichigan.org/page/s/globalwarming.
 

Hopefully, everyone in Michigan realizes by now that we are not simply in an economic downturn. We are going through a transformational change away from a predominantly manufacturing state toward more economic diversity. We should have done this long ago. Michigan has suffered horrible ups and downs in the economy from relying too heavily on the auto industry. If we can just hang tight and move to change wisely, things will get increasingly better for Michigan. Dr. Charles Ballard, an economist, writes about transformational change in his book “Michigan’s Economic Future.”
http://www.absolutemichigan.com/dig/michigan/michigan-books-michigans-economic-future/

We don’t need anyone to tell us we’re going through something much different than regular economic cycles. We know we’re trying to expand our markets, many of which will be green markets.  Back in 2006, Governor Granholm issued an Executive Directive for the development of a comprehensive plan for meeting the state’s electric power needs that would include alternative sources and a timetable. As a result the MPSC, Michigan Public Service Commission, developed the 21CEP or 21st Century Energy Plan. That plan calculated what would happen if Michigan’s economy went through a tranformational change for the worse, which is evident as loss of manufacturing capacity and jobs continues: http://www.emaee.org/articles.php?id=42 and http://www.cis.state.mi.us/mpsc/electric/capacity/energyplan/newenergy_oct11_2006rev.pdf

The MPSC calls transformational change for the worse “low load growth sensitivity” and the results of this low demand for electricity is found on page 67 of the above pdf from the MPSC. The table there shows no new coal plants are needed until 2021. This is big difference from DTE’s rate filing before the MPSC that shows no growth demand until 2012, a nine year difference. But it shows that even DTE doesn’t expect any increase in electricity demand for years. Pages 73-75 of http://efile.mpsc.cis.state.mi.us/efile/docs/15417/0001.pdf

There should be a moratorium on any new permits for coalburners then. The rush to get scrubbers on Michigan’s coalburners satisfies Michigan’s lax CO2 laws that state if a number of emissions are eliminated, then the owner of the coalburning facility can apply for a permit to expand that facility and not have to capture or control the remaining emissions. Unfortunately sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen oxide (NOx), mercury, and CO2 are all lumped together. The scrubbers will eliminate the sulfur and nitrogen, but the mercury and more CO2 are good to go. Why the rush to put scrubbers on coal plants now if not to apply for permits, and before the rules change? Any new permits for expansion or new construction of coalburning facilities should be denied because by DTE’s own admission, the increase in demand for electricity in Michigan is simply not there, at least for awhile. 

We’ll soon be seeing a new media blitz from the coal industry because people are catching on that coal is not clean. The industry is throwing $30 million dollars into an advertising and public relations campaign under the name of Americans for Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC). But the list that follows are all polluters like Billiton the largest mining company in the world, or CONSOL the largest producer of bituminous coal in America. They just don’t have motivation to cut into that kind power unless it’s from the kindness of their hearts.

AMEREN, American Electric Power, Arch Coal, Arkansas Electric Coop, Associated Electric Coop, Association of American Railroads, Basin Electric Power Coop, BHP Billiton, Buckeye Industrial Mining, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Group, CONSOL Energy, CSX, Detroit Edison, Duke Energy, Edison Electric Institute, First Energy Corp, Foundation Coal, Hoosier Energy, Massey Energy, National Mining Assoc., National Rural Electric Coop, Norfolk Southern, Peabody Energy, Southern Co., Tri-State Generation and Transmission, Union Pacific Railroad, Western Farmers Electric Coop.

This group is using other groups like America’s Power and Clean Coal USA to advertise across the country to make their coal look green. So be alert. There is nothing new. There is not a new kind of coal plant that generates electricity with lower CO2 emissions. There is coal that has very low sulfur content. And sulfur content and other particulates can be removed by what is termed “scrubbers.”  That’s not new technology, but it will help alleviate lung problems. Until something drastically changes coal users like the cheap dirty stuff because everything else costs money. This is a good article about it from the Wall Street Journal: http://www.mindfully.org/Energy/Clean-Coal-Oxymoron-WSJ.htm

In 2001 President Bush committed to more advanced clean coal technologies. According to an article on DOE’s website: “The Clean Coal Power Initiative is providing government co-financing for new coal technologies that can help utilities meet the President’s Clear Skies Initiative to cut sulfur, nitrogen and mercury pollutants from power plants by nearly 70 percent by the year 2018. Also, some of the early projects are showing ways to reduce greenhouse emissions by boosting the efficiency by which coal plants convert coal to electricity or other energy forms.” Come on, 10 more years to just get sulfur, nitrogen, and mercury pollutants down? That’s lame. http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/cleancoal/.

Not much is new with coal except for trapping the gas, and where to put it. Our Michigan CO2 well should be about full this weekend. It didn’t hold nearly enough liquid CO2. It’s not a solution. How many more holes are we going to rip into the earth? We have over 500,000 mines in the U.S. Many are old and abandoned. We have over 500,000 oil wells, many are done, fini. That’s a lot of holes in the ground. Will the earth heal quickly from the millions of holes we’ve drilled?
 

I’m sorry to read that Michigan persists with pollution policy instead of sound environmental policy. We need to get the corporate friendly senate moving in a cleaner direction. We have an obligation in this state to at very least try to keep the water clean. If we keep goofing off, someone might decide we are poor stewards and should share the wealth and management of our water. Does adding more coalburners to the list of 19, including the country’s second largest in Monroe, sound like anyone here pays attention to health issues, future problems with water shortages, or the earth? The latest out of MI senate is a push to alter abortion issues in Michigan. That’s the big priority? People need jobs; we need a decent and moral economy. By moral, I mean we do our utmost not to disturb life in the process of living and producing.  A green economy can offer plenty of jobs but that ride is being held up either on a state or federal level and benefits the oil industry.

We know for instance about oil leases that have been sold in pristine areas and/or habitat for polar bears, seals and all types of birds. Drilling there is pending and the oil industry wants to get moving. It’s becoming obvious that placing the polar bear on the endangered list is purposely being stalled. All that is needed is a great motivator. Bingo, gas will go up beyond $4.00 per gallon shortly. We’re already being taunted by that forecast. People are expected to cry drill, drill, drill and to hell with the animals. And we’ll probably do that, instead of seeing the big picture and how we’re being manipulated by the utilities. Even Warren Buffet commented that we’ve been sticking straws into the earth and sorry but it’s a finite practice. We will eventually run out. We collectively had over 500,000 wells. Our demand is ridiculous, and growing and it all revolves around the same fossil sources.

Heaven forbid we advance in technology and perfect wind and solar power for the individual home, and make it cheap. Houses would stand-alone without need for utilities. It’s almost laughable isn’t it? We are street smart enough to know the powers that be won’t let that happen. Anyway, our airwaves will be controlled shortly. Can’t even get free air anymore, besides there is that ever lovin entertainment/sports world that’s always going to charge too.

We could practice conservation. We could develop an RPS for Michigan, (more on that in another blog), which would entice green developers to come here. I’ve been saying this for quite awhile. What green industry is going to plant themselves next to a bunch of pollution? We’ll never get away from polluting industries once they are established without paying for it dearly. The buck will pass on to us for corporation’s stubborn business sense if and when in the future a big conservation effort needs to be enacted because, gee, we really are polluting ourselves to death. 

I was reading the Sierra Club’s “The Mackinac” and it states what I’ve been reading elsewhere, that many places in this country are not giving permits to more coalburners. The front-page article said 44 proposed coal-fired plants were either denied or withdrawn in 2007 thanks to The Sierra Club. So what happened here? 

There were five more coalburners looking for environmental permits in Michigan, with three more new plants under discussion the article said. It also stated that the challenge to put a moratorium on coal-fired plants in Michigan is daunting. Well I guess, especially with a corporation friendly senate. It said, “The state has refused to regulate the CO2 from coal plants that contribute to global warming (so long as the applicants address other pollutants, the state will let them be built). So that’s why the rush to install scrubbers? The scrubbers address other pollutants that are breathing irritants, but not the mercury that is permeating through the water to the fish, to the birds, and eventually anyone who drinks the water—one of the world’s largest freshwater supplies that is no longer so fresh. Or the CO2, that’s warming us up and causing some really bad weather—almost tornado season. What’s the sense of the Great Lakes Legacy Act?  What a tail chase, and meanwhile the water and Michigan loses, while the polar bears, seals, fish, and birds, the entire earth, take a back seat to our excess.

 Take a stand and participate. Read: http://michigan.sierraclub.org/.

Back in February before the flu bug got me I read an article in the Detroit Free Press called “Beneath state: A warming solution, Friday, February 22, 2008, Section A, by Tina Lam, about Michigan being the first state to inject CO2 into the earth somewhere around Gaylord. The article said Michigan’s bedrock is perfect for storing the CO2 between layers of the rock. It also said 3 times that it is experimental.

The well head is about 8 feet high with all type of sensors and an underground pipe that sends the CO2 from DTE’s Turtle Creak natural gas plant to the well. The article said CO2 is a by-product of natural gas extracted from underground. The injection process will stop by the end of this month (March).  The well will hold 10,000 tons of CO2.  There are many of these wells that were already used for oil and gas, some 55,000 of them in Michigan! Who knew? And there’s a push to drill for more oil in the lakes? It looks like someone has been busy at it all along. How many wells are there like this in the country? Add over 500,000 abandoned mines too and it truly is a “Swiss Cheese Nation” as I called it before. The term “rape and pillage” comes to mind. Some of these wells are a mile deep. Ouch.

The gas is well below 3,000 feet of any layer from which drinking water comes and spokesman John Austerberry said the CO2 is harmless, that “even if it somehow escaped, it wouldn’t harm anyone.”
Anybody remember a blog I did with the title: “CO2 Buildup Causes Lake to Explode?” Might want to read that again. http://www.blogsmonroe.com/world/?p=226. It’s the first thing I thought about.

American and European opinion differed greatly on that explosion in Africa’s Lake Nios in Cameroon.  It happened in 1986. The lake exploded from 1.6 million tons of CO2 gas being released that had settled on the bottom. Over 1700 people were asphyxiated up to 16 miles away along with all their livestock, some 3000 head of cattle. I’m thinking about the “experimental” word again and lucky us.

I can’t believe it. The Bush administration hasn’t exited yet and things are changing for the environmental good already. According the Environmental News Service today, Feb. 8th, 2008, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia “vacated two rules issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that failed to set strict limits on mercury emissions from power plants.” Vacated, I can’t believe it. That means “No Way!”

· The EPA’s cap and trade program was thrown out the window by the court.
· Then the court told the EPA how they “erred by taking power plants off the list of hazardous pollution sources when it issued its Clean Air Mercury Rule” that advocated the cap and trade program.
· The article went on to say, “the EPA now has two years to develop mercury emissions standards for existing power plants.”

The Clean Air Mercury Rule was an attempt by the EPA to limit the amount of mercury discharged by industry. There were two caps. The first was to be 38 tons of emissions reduced by first getting rid of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide called “co-benefits” by the rule. The rule suggests mercury reductions are achieved by doing this. But mercury is a chemical element. It is what it is. It is not sulfur and nitrogen. They are what they are. Granted they’re bad for the respiratory system, but what about the mercury? The court obviously got tired of this nonsense too and told the EPA to get on the ball. There was also an obvious problem with this little statement in the Clean Air Mercury Rule: “”…and because recent information demonstrates that it is not appropriate or necessary to regulate coal and oil-fired utility units under section 112 of the Clean Air Act.” What?

I griped about all of this in another blog when DTE (Detroit area energy provider) announced they were installing scrubbers for sulfur and nitrogen on their Monroe coalburner. Whoopty Doo. Scrubbers do nothing about the mercury, but today the courts sure did. I also predicted that  utility companies would continue too long on their same course and then whine about the cost to reverse things and comply with new clean air policy. How soon before we hear the sob stories?  So predictable. When companies have a big lobby, they throw all foresight to the wind.  They don’t need to stay on the ball. They pay to change the play instead.  And the taxpayer bears the brunt. Read about that again: http://www.blogsmonroe.com/world/?m=200701.

This ruling comes on the heals of the June 2007 edict by the Court of Appeals that vacated the EPA’s Incinerator Rule. The court blasted the EPA for violating the Clean Air Act for relaxing limits on emissions of smog-forming compounds from large power plants, factories, and other industrial sources,” according to Chemical and Engineering News. Smog and smoke have always been pretty self explanatory to me. If you can see it in the air, it’s substantial, and you probably shouldn’t be breathing it. As a result of the court’s ruling, chemical plants, refineries, and other industrial facilities that burn the waste they generate in on-site incinerators must comply with the law’s most stringent rules governing hazardous air pollutants. So what about Holcim Cement?

As I sit in a county with the nation’s second largest coalburner that sits on Lake Erie, and a Holcim cement plant that’s big on incinerating and has racked up big fines for doing it, it’s going to be real interesting how the court’s rulings play out.

The announcement of the court ruling today: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2008/2008-02-08-01.asp.
The June, 2007 ruling about incinerators: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/85/i25/8525news7.html.
The EPA’s Clean Air Mercury Rule that is defunct as of today: http://www.epa.gov/camr/basic.htm.
A disturbing report about mercury hot spots: http://www.mindfully.org/Air/2004/Fort-Wayne-Indiana-Mercury11jan04.htm.
 

Did you know that a lake could blow up from CO2 gases settled on the bottom? Until 1986 scientists didn’t think so either. I was watching the History Channel. A Professor Riskin hypothesized about methane gas sea explosions causing prehistoric earth to scorch. The scientific community was not convinced about gas exploding out of the ocean until in 1986 Lake Nios in Cameroon, Africa exploded from 1.6 million tons of CO2 gas being released that had settled on the bottom. Over 1700 people were asphyxiated up to 16 miles away along with all their livestock, some 3000 head of cattle.
 
Scientists argued for a while that it was a volcanic eruption and a mix of sulfur that caused the explosion, but sulfur substances weren’t found. The survivors of the explosion claimed they smelled sulfur but there is evidently something called olfactory hallucinations associated with CO2 asphyxiation and one of them is the smell of sulfur.

According to an article on Bnet, it was believed carbon dioxide gas build-up had a volcanic origin and built up slowly in the lake over a long period of time. U.S. researchers didn’t know exactly what triggered the explosion, but it was never believed a volcano or earthquake was responsible. French researchers disagreed. They believed the exploding cloud that dispersed throughout the area traveling at 40 mph was a mix “of steam, carbon dioxide and sulfur compounds that had been building up in a layer of groundwater heated by volcanic rocks far below the lake. These compounds reportedly were injected into the lake when the pressure of the steam eventually cracked the rock that had been holding it down.”

The problem is “U.S.scientists said lake temperatures were not elevated, its bottom did not appear to have been disturbed, there were no volcanic sulfides in the lake and no suspended sediments that might have resulted had steam rushed through bottom sediments.”

Either way we look at it, whether the CO2 was just laying there and blew or was caused by too much pressure from too much CO2 being injected into the rock fissures, it does not bode well for a future with too much CO2 around. So much for the gasification process relative to “clean coal.”

Coal burns filthy. The reason why it’s recently being touted as “clean” is because of a gasification process where the CO2 pollution is trapped, and liquified. The pollution never gets into the air but the liquified CO2 needs some place to go. Just like the spent fuel of a nuke, the best place for the leftover liquid CO2 is to put it in the ground by injection. But do we know how much CO2 is safe to inject? Will we have to worry about CO2 geisers in the future?  If so the future is looking pretty prehistoric. Told ya we’re dinosaurs.

Read more about the Lake Nios’ explosion:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_v131/ai_4645289

I don’t know if any other people interested in moving forward with all types of alternative energy have noticed the purposeful placement of the word “foreign” in many of the presidential contenders, Bush/Cheney, and legislator’s speeches. When a politician says they will make sure to fund research for new technologies to get us away from “foreign” oil dependence, they are probably talking money for a new type of oil drilling process. Technically, they won’t be lying, just misleading, if you tend to disregard that tricky little word “foreign.”

Granted, it’s been said that we do not have alternative technology available yet to take up the brunt of our oil demand, but it seems we keep looking to only one, and not a combination of alternative sources. What about a combination of alternative energy sources? I hear this idea floating around, but no gelling. The Sierra Club of Michigan has a very good presentation that shows a combination of energy sources, wind, solar, geothermal, etc., plus conservation programs like reclaiming wastewater, and recycling may meet all of our energy demands in Michigan. But we’re not advancing toward a future that will no longer be reliant on one big massive conglomerate like the oil cartel is to us right now. It seems we work toward monopolies in this country. Then we’re upset when we’re stuck with them without a choice. We should be looking to all venues to move forward for our energy future, not reinforcing the idea of fossil fuel again, like it’s all right because it belongs to us. 

I see the big push to get away from “foreign” oil as the big ruse to drill in the Arctic circle, the polar bear habitat, Utah, even Livonia, MI for Pete’s sake, and anywhere a slant oil drill can legitimately be utilized to “not’ enter our protected National Parks. They do so anyway at an angle right under protected habitat, while doing a great deal of damage with all the accompanying paraphernalia like roads, pipeline, trucks, heavy equipment, and trash. Ditto for coal mining. Using coal is getting away from “foreign” oil, all oil, but is still perpetuating the use of filthy fossil fuel that will eventually run out. Sure it might be thousands of years before it does, but at what price, gutting the countryside, ruining the earth trying?

So beware of that tricky little “foreign” word that comes before oil. It’s not a detail that should go unnoticed, because it doesn’t make any difference. It does, or they wouldn’t be slipping it in there.  It makes all the difference in our lives, our environment, and our world whether our future continues to poke around the earth and the oceans below for oil or coal that is “OURS.” Our oil and coal burn just as filthy as the “foreign” stuff.

I just got through reading some current worldwide environmental news and have to say, we don’t seem to have a clear-cut view of anything. What we profess, what we say, and what we actually do is all contrary.  First, I saw the Pope give his blessing and speak on behalf of peace and the environment over the Christmas season to over one billion Catholics. And the World Council of Churches that represents 560 million Christians worldwide is calling concerns over global warming a matter of faith. The WCC has had a program about climate change since 1992 and books about ecotheology (I’m interested).  Dr. Samuel Kobia the Secy. General of the WCC stipulates that Christians are well aware that dominion over all living things was given to us. He said that meant, “We were entrusted with the care of the rest of God’s creation.” The emphasis is on the word “CARE” here.

Care doesn’t come under savagely taking a machete to an orangutan trying to defend it’s young, or hooking a live dolphin in the side and sending it to be stripped of skin before it’s even dead, while the resulting meat is basically poison from ingesting too many pollutants, or shooting 6 elephants dead for stepping into a coffee field that is supposed to be their sanctuary. We should actively try to get this stopped, but our demands for things like lumber and coffee encourage it.  Oh and don’t forget about native animals and the latest Internet hunting websites that have yet to be banned in over 20 states.

I was looking on the Internet for websites to find out how our political candidates stand on the environment. Fortunately, I received my League of Conservation Voters newsletter in the mail today. The LCV has a new Presidential Candidate Profiles Website. It has the most comprehensive analysis of the candidate’s positions on global warming, energy, and how they’ve voted in the past. It also has Operation: Spotlight. Real interesting. The objective of the LCV is to target 14 states with a total of 159 electoral votes to elect environmentally friendly legislators in those states.

Unfortunately, Michigan is on the list of the 14 states that need a change in order to be environmentally up-to-par. I say unfortunately because we are surrounded by the world’s 2nd largest freshwater supply, and we can clearly see the fight for freshwater is in America’s future after this summer’s droughts. While our current legislators work to get a multi-state compact signed to keep our water here where it belongs, we have a Republican Senate that is not too terribly friendly to the environment. So we fight to keep freshwater here, and then do nothing to stop the industry pollution that threatens it? No sense to it at all. I know we have the Great Lakes Legacy cleanup thing going. You know where they dumped all the dredged up toxic sludge from the first project? Right near my house near Pt. Mouille game reserve, various protected wetlands, and another DNR game reserve all on the banks of Lake Erie again. It’s all just getting moved around. 

As far as our federal congress, a small group of Republican Senators has already blocked the House’s new energy bill. The LCV sites Senator Sununu for standing “with a minority in the Senate that sided with big oil and big coal to block a measure that is good for jobs, good for the economy, good for national security, good for consumers and good for the planet.” The power behind the lobby of big polluters is a force to be reckoned with. The LCV website is very informative as to who and who isn’t being bought by big energy, oil, lumber, coal, etc. According to the LCV, among the top candidates who are up for re-election or looking to move to the senate and receiving massive contributions by polluters to stop any progress forward to protect our earth, our health, and the lives of everything on the planet:

• Heather Wilson (NM)            835,512
• James Inhofe     (OK)             636,965
• Pete Domenici   (NM)            567,928
• Steve Pearce     (NM)             547,415
• Arlen Specter    (PA)              546,303

What’s up with New Mexico? I know it has plenty of open land. It’s a shame its legislators are being backed by dirty money, by that the LCV means polluter’s money, because New Mexico has a lot of open space. It could be an ideal place for solar or possibly geothermal energy. And it is one of 5 states fed by one river threatened by global warming.  Three people on that list will vote against the environment. Where’s the sense? If New Mexico runs out of water, watch them eyeball Michigan. It’s irresponsible. Add up that column above and it totals $3,134,123.00 to keep polluting. And it’s very early yet. Imagine the contribution total by November, 2008. It’s a sad statement considering the same money could be invested in alternative energy sources creating a win win situation no matter how the future progesses. 

 Check out more of “Operation: Spotlight, exposing the influence of dirty money in Congress” on the LCV website. This is valuable info. Politicians have scorecards for their voting history for specific environmental bills year by year. If you’re concerned about the environment, it is essential to know the candidates.  This is a must see checklist for doing your homework before elections: http://www.lcv.org/      

 http://www.lcv.org/OperationSpotlight/home.html