Tennessee coal sludge disaster ‘shows that the term clean coal is an oxymoron.’
Tennessee coal sludge disaster ‘shows that the term clean coal is an oxymoron.’
Monday, more than 500 million gallons of toxic coal sludge burst through a retention wall in eastern Tennessee, causing massive property and environmental damage and leaving residents holding their breath over possible long-term consequences. Environmentalists said the spill was more than 30 times larger than the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The incident underscored the false nature of the “clean coal” propaganda. In an interview with NBC Nightly News, Elliott Negin of the Union of Concerned Scientists explained:
This disaster shows that the term ‘clean coal’ is an oxymoron. It’s akin to saying ‘safe cigarette.’ Clean coal doesn’t exist.
Watch it:
The New York Times writes, “Even as the authority played down the risks, the spill reignited a debate over whether the federal government should regulate coal ash as a hazardous material. Similar ponds and mounds of ash exist at hundreds of coal plants around the nation.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
… Mr. Peabody’s Coal Train should have hauled their trash away , guess the coal company is to busy counting it’s cash ….. oh well , the gubbmint man don’t seem to care .
December 24th, 2008 at 11:47 pmThis only the second or time I have heard about this disaster….seems like the media is as good as ever about keeping everything sanitized and under wraps.
December 25th, 2008 at 12:04 amHang on, let’s not get nuts. Just because it doesn’t exist, I haven’t seen info saying that it hypothetically could never exist. Seems like a great opportunity for tech research investment to me.
So, here are the questions:
Does clean coal exist? No.
Should it? Yes.
Should we spend money to make it exist? – ???
If it were instantiated at some point in the future, that would indeed be awesome. As I’ve heard it put, the U.S. is “the Saudi Arabia of coal.”
Mind you, I’ve got serious problems with recent attempts by the coal industry (in both ad campaigns and lobbying attempts) to make it sound like clean coal is already a reality, or is already on its way to becoming a reality. As the Clean Coal Carolers put it, “it’s getting cleaner every day…” No, it’s not.
It sounds a lot like the cigarette industry’s intentional misdirections some time ago, which finally got to the point that an entire industry chose to make themselves criminally liable for massive damages. But according to the Ayn Rand / Alan Greenspan school, that was impossible, and therefore didn’t happen. Still, these coal folks best watch they step, or they’re going to end up with an unsaleable product AND massive lawsuits coming at them from all directions (at least, both consumption and production).
However, if it’s possible, then the technology required would be a really great public/private investment. Not only could we make it clean for our own supply, we could export such clean technology to China so they’d quit dirtying the planet’s air so damn much.
But at present, all that is still a pretty big “if.”
December 25th, 2008 at 3:05 amLet me guess… the Tennessee Valley Authority had no Government over sight either.
R_B
December 25th, 2008 at 4:30 amBut at present, all that is still a pretty big “if.”
December 25th, 2008 at 3:05 am
Perhaps you could tell us why “we” should spend a whole shit pot of cash developing a system to clean up coal–as you youreslf admit, a difficult, daunting, and probably futile task–instead of putting that money into renewable, alternative energy systems? Coal IS carbon, which is the problem…
As much money as it would certainly cost to ‘create’ a “clean coal” technology–were such a thing even feasible–would probably cover the cost of developing practical, small, efficient solar collectors, and installing them on every roof in Murka.
Of course, that wouldn’t make the rich energy companies any richer; would, in fact, probably COST them revenue, which would be TOTALLY WRONG, of course!!!
There really is only one “reason” to spend money on ‘clean coal,’ and that is to put money in the pockets of the people who own the leases on coal fields that will become essentially worthless of if an when renewable, alternative energy production tachnologies come into being.
Phuque Mr. Peabody! Go Solar, go wind, go tidal!!!
December 25th, 2008 at 8:25 amYou’re full of it, ElBruce.
December 25th, 2008 at 9:14 amCoal is filthy and destructive when it’s mined. It’s filthy and destructive when it’s processed. And it’s filthy and destructive when it’s burned. Apparently, it’s also filthy and destructive AFTER it’s been burned. Any attempt to “clean it up” will only make coal more expensive and compound the damage it does.
There is no such thing as “clean coal”. Pick up a piece of coal and see how quickly your hands get dirty. That should tell anyone how dirty coal really is. As for the dam breakage, another piece of infrastructure that should have been repaired but instead was neglected by the government owned TVA. When will the people of Tennessee realize that Republicans do not have their best interest in mind when they move to DC?
December 25th, 2008 at 10:03 amSteve Earle has a song about coal mining.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBuMFDHkrH8
Although I agree the main thrust of this is “clean coal”, there are plenty of tangential questions:
Wouldn’t shoring up the levee containing the sludge be part of the infrastructure that the current WH says building up is a waste of time ? How much would it have cost to have repaired the levee vs. the costs of this episode ? Especially important as the TVA is a govt facility.
After Katrina hit NOLA, wasn’t there something about the inadequacy of current dams ?
The video clip says that officials are urging residents to boil their water. As the contaminants are heavy metals and polycyclic hydrocarbons, what good would boiling do and wouldn’t boiling the water tend to concentrate the contaminants ? (OK, I realize that bacteria could be introduced into a broken line, etc. – but I still say it sounds like the govt gave a knee jerk reaction that does no good and possibly makes things worse.)
And as hinted at in a posting above, if the WH believed in “clean coal” wouldn’t they be pouring in the R&D dollars to make it a reality ?
December 25th, 2008 at 4:05 pmMore: Tom Kilgore, identified as the CEO of the TVA, said he was grateful that noone was hurt. Wonder what swimming in PAHs and heavy metals will do to you in the long term ?
TVA said they would relocate folks – well considering that the area is covered in toxic sludge, the best thing for them to do is to wall off the area (to lessen ability of folks to bring suit).
That amount of almost anything would have to be cleaned up. If the soil tests come back with PAHs, mercury, etc. then it may classify as hazardous waste. Anyone wanna bet the company doesn’t argue that it is impossible to fully remediate such an area, and try to get away with a less than active solution ?
December 25th, 2008 at 4:18 pmHow convenient that this occurs just 2 days or so after the apparent murder of the STAR WITNESS in the FEDERAL RICO TRIAL OF KARL ROVE AND the Bush 2004 election theft in Ohio. Michael Connell was the creator and operator of the computer servers that rigged the Ohio election in 04. Friday last he died when his plane crashed suddenly in Ohio, just before he was scheduled to testify. Odd too, how the Ash Pond “disaster” occured in Tennessee. It was Chattanooga where the 04 election returns were routed OUT OF OHIO to servers in Tennessee and then back to Ken Blackwell’s office in Ohio. (Ken Blackwell was Ohio Secretary of State and also Ohio’s co-chair of the Bush re-election committee. His office routed voting returns into Tennessee and then back to his Ohio office on election day. The man behind that, the one who knew exaclty what happened that day just died before revealing what he knew.)
December 25th, 2008 at 6:19 pmAh, yes… I was driving through Missouri this week, and heard a radio show with an agitated male and female commentator talking about ‘clean coal’ and how the ‘greenies, or treehuggers as my co-host likes to call them’ just won’t admit that ‘clean coal’ is a fabulous technology, so much cheaper than natural gas! Ah, yes.
December 25th, 2008 at 9:46 pmWhat I thought of that radio diatribe is that it illustrated well how people that talk about ‘cost’ so often leave out the hidden (or not so well hidden) – shall we say, non immediate costs of coal and nuclear? It gives you plenty of power, yes, and it’s cheap unless you count paying for the mutated children, degraded crop land and cancer victims.
December 25th, 2008 at 9:48 pmI I have a problem with coal fired power plants long before they ever get the chance to produce 1 kw of power,,, it’s called mountain top removal. YUK!!! nufsaid
December 26th, 2008 at 2:17 pmI doubt it was an accident, considering this is a very hot topic, and it looks like they got their point across.
Obama is being sworn in, and they want first to get their agenda signed “Stop Coal Production” put more out of work, make us bow a little lower to the Arab “Muslims” for our energy, less we totally collapse.
the hug-a-trees and kiss-a-rocks remind me of someone that is so brainwashed that something exists that really don’t they would blow up a train, or something that would kill a lot of people, just to prove a bomb exists.. that is what I think..
December 26th, 2008 at 4:07 pmSure does smell this close to Obamas swearing in, and this being a very Hot Topic
The Gore worshipers of Global Warming .
PPOR, Christian Con.
December 26th, 2008 at 4:36 pm