Back during the Clinton administration there was a push for ethanol to be a revolutionary new fuel. The thinking then was that we would grow our own fuel from corn and it would be a source of domestic energy. Unfortunately, the physics just didn't add up. No matter what process is used, it take more energy to create ethanol that it will ever provide. Therefore, using ethanol as an additive in our fuel has made us MORE dependent on fossil fuels. The same situation is occurring now with bio-diesel. Taking vegetable oil and 'cracking' it with methanol to produce fuel requires sodium hydroxide, an expensive, toxic, and energy intensive chemical. Not only that, methanol comes from fermented trees and requires intense energy use to make as well. Bottom line, after all is said and done, bio-diesel, ironically, only intensifies our need for energy and thus makes us even more dependent on fossil fuels!
However, there is a way around this. When Rudolf Diesel invented his engine more than a hundred years ago, he envisioned that straight corn oil or sunflower oil would burn efficiently in his engine. This is actually true. A diesel engine can handle 20% straight vegetable oil. The energy put into harvesting and crushing oil rich seeds is much less than the energy we would extract. Now, we're talking! If we modify diesel engines to burn 100% vegetable oil, this would be an efficient solution to eliminating our need for fossil fuel oil. No one ever pursued Diesel's idea of converting his engine to 100% vegetable oil, because the oil that comes out of the ground was so cheap back then. As we all know, things have changed and it now makes sense to revisit this issue.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Friday, March 5, 2010
Mixed reaction to demise of River Hill project
By Wendy B. Lynn Staff writer
KARTHAUS - The Quehanna Industrial Development Corp. in Karthaus has been trying to bring to fruition a multi-million dollar project for the region in the form of the River Hill Power Plant, a facility that would burn waste coal in order to produce electricity.
Recently, board member Ray Savel informed The Progress that plans for the power plant are dead. The Progress also received a press release on the power plant from the Sierra Club in Pennsylvania, which said Sithe Global, the company behind the project in Karthaus as well as the Toquop coal plant in Nevada and the Desert Rock plan on the Navajo reservation in New Mexico, is canceling its proposed $600 million River Hill plant due to financing difficulties.
"We have suspected for a long time that the River Hill project was very tenuous at best," said Randy Francisco of the Sierra Club in Pennsylvania in the press release. "It says a lot about these dirty coal plant proposals when they can't get taxpayer bailouts and they can't make them viable even with the backing of a company with pockets as deep as Blackstone's," he added, referring to the Wall Street equity firm, The Blackstone Group, which was a financier for the project.
According to the press release, the plant would have emitted tons of global warming pollution every year along with harmful levels of soot and smog pollution.
Savel disagrees with Sierra Club's assessment of the situation. He said the plans for the project, which was to be a state-of-the-art power plant, included cleaning up the waste coal piles dotting the landscape around Karthaus, which would help clean up the water and acid mine drainage. Savel called it a "win-win" situation because not only would the plant help clean up the area, it would also provide jobs during construction and operation, jobs Savel pointed out that are desperately needed. Savel added that the coal plant would have been clean burning as well.
"I'm an environmentalist," he said. "That's why we need to get these coal piles cleaned up." Savel was also instrumental in spearheading efforts to clean up the Quehanna Wild Area north of Karthaus. The wild area is home to elk and one of the largest stands of white birch trees east of the Mississippi.
"We're not going to give up," Savel continued, saying it was a shame, disappointment and disgrace the government didn't go along with helping to finance the project with a guaranteed backed loan.
The next meeting of QIDC is scheduled for Wednesday and the directors will be looking at possibly trying another route to have the power plant built.
Savel suggested that maybe the Sierra Club has a better way to get jobs into the area.
The press release from the Sierra Club stated that the end of the power plant plans was an opportunity for the development of clean, renewable energy sources for the area and to create more jobs for the people of Pennsylvania.
"We are relieved that we will not have to breathe the pollution this plant would have spewed," said Michele Babin in the press release. Babin is part of the Sierra Club's Moshannon Group. "Pennsylvania needs to shift toward a cleaner, healthier and more secure energy future that creates jobs and protects our environment," she said.
The press release said Sithe Global's other two coal projects have also stalled.
Sithe Global could not be reached for comment.
KARTHAUS - The Quehanna Industrial Development Corp. in Karthaus has been trying to bring to fruition a multi-million dollar project for the region in the form of the River Hill Power Plant, a facility that would burn waste coal in order to produce electricity.
Recently, board member Ray Savel informed The Progress that plans for the power plant are dead. The Progress also received a press release on the power plant from the Sierra Club in Pennsylvania, which said Sithe Global, the company behind the project in Karthaus as well as the Toquop coal plant in Nevada and the Desert Rock plan on the Navajo reservation in New Mexico, is canceling its proposed $600 million River Hill plant due to financing difficulties.
"We have suspected for a long time that the River Hill project was very tenuous at best," said Randy Francisco of the Sierra Club in Pennsylvania in the press release. "It says a lot about these dirty coal plant proposals when they can't get taxpayer bailouts and they can't make them viable even with the backing of a company with pockets as deep as Blackstone's," he added, referring to the Wall Street equity firm, The Blackstone Group, which was a financier for the project.
According to the press release, the plant would have emitted tons of global warming pollution every year along with harmful levels of soot and smog pollution.
Savel disagrees with Sierra Club's assessment of the situation. He said the plans for the project, which was to be a state-of-the-art power plant, included cleaning up the waste coal piles dotting the landscape around Karthaus, which would help clean up the water and acid mine drainage. Savel called it a "win-win" situation because not only would the plant help clean up the area, it would also provide jobs during construction and operation, jobs Savel pointed out that are desperately needed. Savel added that the coal plant would have been clean burning as well.
"I'm an environmentalist," he said. "That's why we need to get these coal piles cleaned up." Savel was also instrumental in spearheading efforts to clean up the Quehanna Wild Area north of Karthaus. The wild area is home to elk and one of the largest stands of white birch trees east of the Mississippi.
"We're not going to give up," Savel continued, saying it was a shame, disappointment and disgrace the government didn't go along with helping to finance the project with a guaranteed backed loan.
The next meeting of QIDC is scheduled for Wednesday and the directors will be looking at possibly trying another route to have the power plant built.
Savel suggested that maybe the Sierra Club has a better way to get jobs into the area.
The press release from the Sierra Club stated that the end of the power plant plans was an opportunity for the development of clean, renewable energy sources for the area and to create more jobs for the people of Pennsylvania.
"We are relieved that we will not have to breathe the pollution this plant would have spewed," said Michele Babin in the press release. Babin is part of the Sierra Club's Moshannon Group. "Pennsylvania needs to shift toward a cleaner, healthier and more secure energy future that creates jobs and protects our environment," she said.
The press release said Sithe Global's other two coal projects have also stalled.
Sithe Global could not be reached for comment.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
County discusses River Hill project status
By Jeff Corcino Staff Writer
Despite numerous media accounts that the proposed River Hill Power Plant has been nixed due to financing difficulties, the Clearfield County Commissioners said they have not received an official notification from Sithe Global that its status has been changed.
At their workshop meeting yesterday, the commissioners said they had a conference call a week ago Tuesday with the federal Department of Energy, Sithe Energy and U.S. Sens. Robert Casey and Arlen Specter's offices and the company never mentioned the project was being killed.
Sithe Global has proposed constructing the $600 million River Hill Power Plant in Karthaus that would burn waste coal to generate electricity.
However, the company is having difficulty finding financing for the project and is seeking loan guarantees from the federal government.
Under a loan guarantee program, the federal government would pledge to repay the loans if the company would happen to default on them, thus allowing greater security for investors and allow the company to receive better interest rates for its financing.
The size of the loan guarantee the company is seeking, approximately $1 billion, is one of the main sticking points keeping the project from moving forward, according to Commissioner Mark McCracken.
The other obstacle is the insistence by the federal government that the company install carbon capture and storage technology on the plant as a requirement for receiving the loan guarantee, Commissioner John Sobel said.
Sobel said the company is unwilling to commit to this at this time because the technology is still in its infancy and is not commercially available yet.
According to Sobel, there are some small power plants with the technology but none the size of the proposed River Hill Power Plant. And he said this makes it difficult for the company to estimate how much such a system would cost and determine how much money it would need for the project.
But Sobel said the company is willing to install the technology retroactively when it does become commercially available.
Carbon capture and storage systems are designed to capture carbon dioxide emissions and store them, often underground, so they aren't released into the atmosphere.
Carbon dioxide emissions are believed to be a cause of global warming and the federal government is attempting to reduce it.
All three commissioners voiced their support for the River Hill Power Plant, saying it would spur economic growth while improving the environment by burning waste coal that is polluting area waterways.
Commissioner Joan Robinson McMillen argued that the project should receive the support of the federal government because President Barack Obama has been arguing for job creation.
"Here we have a shovel-ready project that will create 1,200 construction jobs," McMillen said. "You can't ask for a better job creation bill than that."
Sobel also criticized the president for saying he is a "friend of coal," and now it turns out that this may not necessarily be the case.
McCracken speculated that perhaps the design of the plant could be changed to allow it to burn natural gas as well as waste coal to make it a more viable project.
In other business, the commissioners voted to advertise for bids to renovate Jury Room No. 2. In addition to the renovations, the jury room will be receiving additional soundproofing so jury deliberations cannot be heard outside the room and additional insulation to improve energy efficiency, Sobel said.
The commissioners allocated $25,000 in the budget for the renovations.
Despite numerous media accounts that the proposed River Hill Power Plant has been nixed due to financing difficulties, the Clearfield County Commissioners said they have not received an official notification from Sithe Global that its status has been changed.
At their workshop meeting yesterday, the commissioners said they had a conference call a week ago Tuesday with the federal Department of Energy, Sithe Energy and U.S. Sens. Robert Casey and Arlen Specter's offices and the company never mentioned the project was being killed.
Sithe Global has proposed constructing the $600 million River Hill Power Plant in Karthaus that would burn waste coal to generate electricity.
However, the company is having difficulty finding financing for the project and is seeking loan guarantees from the federal government.
Under a loan guarantee program, the federal government would pledge to repay the loans if the company would happen to default on them, thus allowing greater security for investors and allow the company to receive better interest rates for its financing.
The size of the loan guarantee the company is seeking, approximately $1 billion, is one of the main sticking points keeping the project from moving forward, according to Commissioner Mark McCracken.
The other obstacle is the insistence by the federal government that the company install carbon capture and storage technology on the plant as a requirement for receiving the loan guarantee, Commissioner John Sobel said.
Sobel said the company is unwilling to commit to this at this time because the technology is still in its infancy and is not commercially available yet.
According to Sobel, there are some small power plants with the technology but none the size of the proposed River Hill Power Plant. And he said this makes it difficult for the company to estimate how much such a system would cost and determine how much money it would need for the project.
But Sobel said the company is willing to install the technology retroactively when it does become commercially available.
Carbon capture and storage systems are designed to capture carbon dioxide emissions and store them, often underground, so they aren't released into the atmosphere.
Carbon dioxide emissions are believed to be a cause of global warming and the federal government is attempting to reduce it.
All three commissioners voiced their support for the River Hill Power Plant, saying it would spur economic growth while improving the environment by burning waste coal that is polluting area waterways.
Commissioner Joan Robinson McMillen argued that the project should receive the support of the federal government because President Barack Obama has been arguing for job creation.
"Here we have a shovel-ready project that will create 1,200 construction jobs," McMillen said. "You can't ask for a better job creation bill than that."
Sobel also criticized the president for saying he is a "friend of coal," and now it turns out that this may not necessarily be the case.
McCracken speculated that perhaps the design of the plant could be changed to allow it to burn natural gas as well as waste coal to make it a more viable project.
In other business, the commissioners voted to advertise for bids to renovate Jury Room No. 2. In addition to the renovations, the jury room will be receiving additional soundproofing so jury deliberations cannot be heard outside the room and additional insulation to improve energy efficiency, Sobel said.
The commissioners allocated $25,000 in the budget for the renovations.
Monday, March 1, 2010
It’s a Crime to Burn Natural Gas for Electricity Production
Another common myth out there is that natural gas is somehow more ‘carbon friendly’ than coal. Well, technically yes, but only if the natural gas is burned for the sake of cooking or heating a home where almost 100% of its energy is utilized. If used for power generation, natural gas offers little to no advantage over coal on a delivered megawatt basis. Natural gas does not burn nearly as hot as coal and produces less steam and energy at the power station. Thirty percent of heat from natural gas is lost due to the latent heat of vaporization during steam generation then another 30% is lost in electrical transmission. However, liquid transportation or pipeline distribution from natural gas sources to homes is extremely efficient. In sum, we lose 40% efficiency if we use natural gas to make electricity; therefore, natural gas burned for power is just as ‘dirty’ as coal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
