Staff Contributors
Guest Contributors

Coal is the enemy of the human race: Roderick Bremby is a hero edition

Kansas coal plant air permit denied on basis of CO2

Posted by David Roberts at 11:00 PM on 18 Oct 2007

More bad news for coal / good news for humanity. This is a particularly delicious morsel, to be savored slowly, like a fine truffle.

Roderick L. Bremby
Roderick L. Bremby, enemy of coal, friend of the human race
Photo: KDHE.

For years now, a power company called Sunflower has been pushing to build two 700MW coal-fired power plants in Kansas, backed by the usual happy-horseshit PR about how clean and modern and awesome the plants would be.

Then there was a public comment period, and guess what? The public wasn't into it. And also, remember when the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA could regulate CO2 as an air pollutant? Turns out that gave some air quality people some ideas.

Or at least one air quality guy. My new hero, Roderick L. Bremby, Secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, gave Sunflower an answer today: Oh hell no.

"I believe it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment and health if we do nothing," said Bremby.

...

"Denying the Sunflower air quality permit, combined with creating sound policy to reduce carbon dioxide emissions can facilitate the development of clean and renewable energy to protect the health and environment of Kansans," said Bremby.

This is the first time a coal plant air permit application has ever been denied on the basis of CO2 emissions. Wooord up!

(And crap, just as I was in the middle of writing about this, the WaPo beat me to it with a front-page story. Go read that.)

Yessss

Now to get the demand for that electricity down before shortages develop--the efficiency part of the equation. One big ticket item would be air conditioning. We need less energy intensive ways to get it. Peak load during day, in summer, hmmm, what kind of peak power generation might be applicable for that?

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Kansas, not Kentucky

Sunflower wants to build two 700MW coal-fired power plants in Kansas, not Kentucky as stated in the second paragraph.

Oops! Fixed.



grist.org
Did We Need It In The First Place?


What has me suspicious about all these coal plant cancellations (see other Grist article) and this is -- well, how can they just cancel these plants?

I mean, if it was so important to have all these coal plants, or any plants, wouldn't we be having all these shortages and brownouts and so on?

Or are we just spending the public's money willy-nilly on unnecessary overcapacity?

In fact, could we do away with some of our base load capacity and reduce CO2 immediately and by far reaching proportions?


Texeme.Construct(function(x)=Participation(x))

Natural gas displacing coal is a wedge with scale

Solar heat displacing natural gas is a wedge.

Not using energy is a wedge.  And so on.

It all seems so simple...

This is big news in the finanical press today

http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/19/news/companies/coalplant_ ...

Perhaps investors are getting the message that coal is now officially, a crap investment.

Ethanol was part of their plans as well

According to an article in the San Francisco Sentinel:

Sunflower, which already has a smaller coal-fired plant in Holcomb, has portrayed the proposed plants as part of a "bio-energy center" that would [have] include[d] an ethanol plant and an $86 million facility that would use a still-experimental algae process to capture carbon dioxide emissions from the proposed generating units. But one investor in the center had pulled out before yesterday's decision.



These are only my personal opinions.
Would that it were Kentucky!!

...that turned down a coal fired plant (not that had one planned).  As a Kentuckian living every day in the shadow of a mountain top removal strip mine (with the noise of the machinery grinding in my ears day and night), the decision by Bremby is reason to celebrate. Wish there were more such heros out there.

Even if some day some one were to make electrical generation from coal carbon nuetral for the atmosphere (fat chance!), coal mining would still be environmentally devastating, removing forest cover, destroying ecosystem, and ruining watershed.

Really conserving energy

Sunflower wrote: Not using energy is a wedge.

The sun continuously leaks energy at a rate of 3.846e26 watts. Would you suggest plugging that leak, to save energy?


You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
sign in
Search Gristmill
Subscribe
  • subscribe via RSSStay updated with the Gristmill RSS feed.
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
  • Subscribe in Netvibes
  • Subscribe in Google
Using Gristmill
  • What is Gristmill?
  • Posting rules
The comments of Gristmill users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?

Gristmill is powered by Scoop.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Job Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcast
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2008. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks