1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

General News EPA shutting down electric power plants.

Discussion in 'Current Events, World News, & LGBT News' started by Bi in MD, Jun 8, 2015.

  1. Bi in MD

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2015
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Annapolis MD
    Gender:
    Male
    Out Status:
    A few people
  2. dano218

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,165
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I completely agree. I don't like the EPA at all. You tell my why states like Pennsylvania, West Virginia ,and Kentucky are in severe poverty because of what they have done to the coal industry. I agree we need to protect the environment but the reality is has its negatives huge negatives.
     
  3. Bi in MD

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2015
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Annapolis MD
    Gender:
    Male
    Out Status:
    A few people
    What I dont understand is how they dont see that reducing population would be a greater impact on the countries energy needs than by shutting down the power plants that will be needed to generate the power to take care of all the new people they want to add.

    Right now however, there is not alternative that is worth talking about unless its nuclear.
     
  4. AwesomGaytheist

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Messages:
    6,909
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Three words: wind and solar. The middle of the country is to wind as Saudi Arabia is to oil.
     
  5. dano218

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,165
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Agreed more cities are getting smaller and a less cities are getting overcrowded that would be productive way of keeping the environment healthy. But how can you stop people of moving to the same location. A strong majority does not like small city life anymore and are drive to bigger cities how do we really prevent that? I lived in a coal mining state for about 2 years I seen first hand what the poverty is like. You cry about the environment all you want but how do prevent proverty from taking aways these jobs at the same time.
     
    #5 dano218, Jun 8, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2015
  6. Bi in MD

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2015
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Annapolis MD
    Gender:
    Male
    Out Status:
    A few people
    two words.
    not dependable.
     
  7. 741852963

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,522
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    I used to be very pro-nuclear. Its an extremely efficient source of electricity.

    The problem is I just don't think we have the technology yet to safely dispose of nuclear waste.

    Whilst there have been relatively few disasters involving the plants, when they do occur the effects travel halfway across the globe. Compare that to say a fire at a coal plant which would be much less of a problem.

    And then you have the remnants of decommissioned sites acting like a cancer on the land. Look at Pond B30, we cannot even begin to neutralise the threat it causes to it being a toxic pool of radioactive soup. And yes that is a seagull happily swimming in hazardous waste in the picture.

    Leaked Sellafield photos reveal 'massive radioactive release' threat - The Ecologist

    Sellafield: the most hazardous place in Europe | Environment | The Guardian

    Sellafield has been a nightmare (from cleanup to the radiation in Cumbria and the Irish Sea). Yes it was "old tech", but I think that is a sign that we often think we know what is safe, and then years down the line we have to deal with the consequences.

    Now I'm no fan of coal and oil, and wind and solar have a long way to go - but at least we know where we stand with these industries.

    ---------- Post added 8th Jun 2015 at 10:50 AM ----------

    It depends. You have areas where it is sunny most of the time, areas where it is windy most of the time.

    Neither is likely to be a year round industry, but both can supplement each other.

    Solar is also fantastic for home use, drastically cutting the need for energy from non-renewable sources.
     
  8. Chip

    Board Member Admin Team Advisor Full Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    Messages:
    16,551
    Likes Received:
    4,750
    Location:
    northern CA
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I don't think anyone is arguing that coal is a major contributor to greenhouse gases and global warming. Given that (republicans aside) the problem has reached crisis levels, I think it makes sense to start taking steps. It's not like any of this caught the power companies by surprise... they have just been too cheap to want to actually do anything to solve the problem themselves, so the government is (belatedly) pushing them to do so.
     
  9. Bi in MD

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2015
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Annapolis MD
    Gender:
    Male
    Out Status:
    A few people
    another problem I see with solar or wind is the real estate that it takes up.
    as far as the two supplementing each other, you still run into a problem with line loss when transmitting, so the actual initial output has to be even greater.
    again, right now nuke is the best way to go. as far as the what ifs, just look at the damage that mining coal causes in the streams and rivers.
    at this moment, there is no good solution. So, I say take the best solution and work on an alternate source that will be safe, reliable and sufficient.
    Maybe set up natural gas plants next to garbage dumps so they can pull the methane from the rotting garbage to power the plant.
     
  10. dano218

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,165
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    You care about our rivers and lakes i thought you were more of a republican lol
     
  11. Bi in MD

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2015
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Annapolis MD
    Gender:
    Male
    Out Status:
    A few people
    Im a republican for constitutional reasons. Like, I respect the constitution.
    as far as the environment, I think global warming is a hoax on the world, regardless, I would like to see cleaner air and water ways.
    Oh, and more people living in the city. not me mind you, but the more that live in the city the less I have to deal with where I live. ( anti social and hate crowds.) If a man cant pee in his own front yard, something is wrong with where he lives.
     
  12. dano218

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,165
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I agree i don't care for or believe global warming and living in a pro coal state for awhile I am more sympathetic to the coal mining families. Being me though I would want to live in a big city IJ 'd be crazy to pass on that.
     
  13. Bi in MD

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2015
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Annapolis MD
    Gender:
    Male
    Out Status:
    A few people
    I guess you can still pee out into the front yard, but if you are on a second floor or above, you might want to look down and check for pedestrians first. could get ugly.
     
  14. Par

    Par
    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Yorkshire
    Gender:
    Female (trans*)
    Sexual Orientation:
    Lesbian
    Closing down old coal plants is the only way to persuade companies to finally get their act together and start using renewable, sustainable and safe methods of energy production.

    Wave power has a lot of potential - It's reliable (when was the last time you saw the sea without waves?), renewable, sustainable and poses little to no damage to the environment.
    OK, it's not as productive as current power stations - but there is a heck of a lot of coastline and ocean out there to harness.
     
  15. dano218

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,165
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I know and I understand but the poverty i seem caused by closing down coal plants is heartbreaking. West Virginia and Kentucky which were coal mining states have on of the largest rates of poverty in the US. It has its positives and negatives.
     
  16. BryanM

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Messages:
    2,894
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Columbia, Missouri
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    They
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    As someone who is a very strong believer in the power of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, I would just like to point out that the United States could damn near power itself if it placed solar panels, wind farms, and geothermal dams in the correct places. These energy sources are getting quickly more and more dependable each and every day, and within the next ten years, those energy sources will be more than ready to use.

    It is a known fact that climate change is a real phenomenon, and once the Republican Party and the Blue Dogs in the Democratic Party realise this, the sooner we can start cutting carbon emissions and potentially reversing the effects of climate change. We only have one earth, it only makes sense that we take care of it like it is. Now obviously this does not mean ending all non-renewable energy sources immediately. The first logical steps to take would be to ban artificial fracturing (also known as fracking) and to start having gas mileage requirements on all vehicles made by a certain year. We already have the second one, and it will help to reduce the US's carbon emissions by about 20%. It's sad that protecting out planet has somehow turned into a Republican vs Democratic issue, as it should be in the best interest of all of us to leave our children with an earth that they can not only live on, but thrive on.
     
  17. dano218

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,165
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    The sad truth tough those blue dog democrats are in typically red states so they will get defeated if they approve of environmental regulations and stuff like that. And I don't blame them for wanting to stay moderate because they lost the senate in November. It is all about politics and if the politics are not gonna help them with their state than they are not gonna go for it. I know those blue dog democrats its is hard enough now to defend their moderate records to anti Obama voters. Most of them don't survive. But i do agree we need to preserve our environment as mush as possible.
     
  18. HuskyPup

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2013
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    An Igloo in Baltimore, Maryland
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Finally some good news! I'm glad those plants are getting shut down. Good to see the EPA doing some good. Coal mining, which today is largely strip-mining and mountain-top removal, destroys the landscape, leaves vast scars that span thousands of acres and take millennia to heal; not only that, the run-off chokes off streams, pollutes rivers, lakes and even groundwater. Then, you have the chemicals used to process the coal; consider the 2014 Elk River chemical spill, in which the company got off scott-free, while so many were affected. And none of this even addresses issues like soot, acid rain, air pollution or climate change. Plus, coal isn't renewable; you can't just mine it forever, and the work has considerable health risks, not to mention a horrible record as concerns worker safety.

    These states need to diversify their economies, if they want to stay afloat. I say let them turn to wind and solar, and also, try to develop the tech sector. Invest in education. Build factories to make solar panels, wind turbines, and engineering firms to support them.

    Also, build up the tourist sector. Those mountains are beautiful. I say stop destroying them (literally) and stop causing so much harm to the land. Invite people to see the wonders of the hill country; of hiking, hunting and fishing in a clean, healthy environment.

    Jobs could also be created by promoting the various traditions of Appalachia; from moonshine to quilts, from fiddles to banjos, let's celebrate the colorful customs of the area, and make some money at it.

    There's so much more than dirty, old coal, and the shifty companies involved in it.

    They should look at places like Asheville, NC, and try to model more towns like that: destinations people wanna go to.
     
    #18 HuskyPup, Jun 8, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2015
  19. AKTodd

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,190
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    Bear in mind that a significant chunk of the drop in coal usage is due to the rise of fracking and natural gas usage. Which doesn't thrill me, but to say that the economic impacts in these states are solely due to government action is not looking at the complete story. Economics is also playing a role here.

    It is indeed unfortunate that poverty levels are so high in that part of the country - but are we supposed to burn coal forever (or until it's totally used up at some point) solely for the sake of providing jobs for people? That's before we consider the environmental impacts of both the mining and burning of coal, which can extend vastly beyond the regions where the mining is taking place and impact a much larger number of people.

    If green energy (and natural gas development) keeps growing at the rate it is, or innovates suddenly, or nuclear power were to suddenly become a big thing, the same effects would be impacting the populations of these states sooner or later.

    A fairly obvious solution, or at least step in that direction, would seem to be to try to diversify the economies of these states so that they become less dependent on coal. That's not going to happen overnight, obviously, but I would think that there would be various efforts underway to attract other industries to these areas.

    As far as global warming is concerned - the vast majority of the scientific community is in agreement on this and saying that is all must be a giant conspiracy seems rather odd. If no one was being asked to change their lifestyle in any way and climate change was just an interesting bit of science would we even be having this debate? Literally thousands of researchers are all coordinating and maintaining a giant conspiracy across years and even decades of time for the sake of what? Research grants? And no one in all that time is messing up and spilling the beans in any credible or verifiable manner? Uh-huh.

    Just on a personal level, both here and back home, the climate is definitely changing. Alaska is seeing 90 degree summers when/where that's never happened before. Anchorage is seeing winters with essentially no snow. And the part of Virginia where I live has gone from cool wet winters with maybe 3in of of snow every three years or so. to colder, drier, winters with multiple inches (14 in one year) of snow coming year after year. Something is definitely changing.

    Todd
     
  20. dano218

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,165
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I agree I am just stating the negatives which I saw personally. As long as there are good solutions for these people who will be out of jobs I am all for it.