Disenchanted61
Member
- Jul 15, 2011
- 273
- 40
Where did the poster get this information from, is what I want to know?!
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The new regulations will affect power plants in 28 states and are scheduled to go into effect in 2012.
EPA Unveils New Standards For Coal-Fired Power Plants
By reducing this ozone and particle pollution which are linked to costly and life threatening problems such as asthma, heart attacks and premature deaths, we anticipate up to $280 billion in annual benefits,"
well
We need solutions.
The tree-huggers won't let us build nuke plants, the Chinese are building new coal plants at an alarming rate and we can't stop them from polluting our air.
I'm seeing more regulations and fewer solutions. It's obvious Obama doesn't have any answers so he allows the EPA to regulate us back into the Stone Age.
The energy companies have had plenty of time to meet existing environmental regulations. They have failed to do so, and will continue to fail to do so until they are forced to.
I remember Clinton signing water purity laws right before he left office that would have raised bottled-water prices to an estimated $100/gal.
Bush had to override the new regs and was accused of wanting to kill babies.
These regulations are intended purely to curb consumption.
Obama is in the habit of governing with politics only in mind rather than worrying about the economic impact.
We need solutions.
The tree-huggers won't let us build nuke plants, the Chinese are building new coal plants at an alarming rate and we can't stop them from polluting our air.
I'm seeing more regulations and fewer solutions. It's obvious Obama doesn't have any answers so he allows the EPA to regulate us back into the Stone Age.
coal is more than clean enough. Have you ever heard of anyone getting sick from environment mercury? The fact is there are plenty of natural sources of mercury that spew far more into the environment than man made coal plants. The later is trivial in comparison.
The radiation danger is also trivial. It's almost entirely in the form of Carbon 14, which is abundant in the environment.
The energy companies have had plenty of time to meet existing environmental regulations. They have failed to do so, and will continue to fail to do so until they are forced to.
Horseshit. Existing coal plants meet all existing regulations. They have to. it's the law.
What we're talking about here is new draconian regulations that the Obama brownshirts have conjured up.
It is too much to ask of the energy companies that they don't destroy our water with mercury?
Spend some fucking money and put in the scrubbers that are going to clean up this mess, you cheap fucking bastards.
And then you'll bitch that your power bill goes up.It is too much to ask of the energy companies that they don't destroy our water with mercury?
Spend some fucking money and put in the scrubbers that are going to clean up this mess, you cheap fucking bastards.
The poor coal industry is being held to a standard that the rest of the population is; OH BOO FUCKING HOO!! QUIT YOUR BITCHIN !!The energy companies have had plenty of time to meet existing environmental regulations. They have failed to do so, and will continue to fail to do so until they are forced to.
Horseshit. Existing coal plants meet all existing regulations. They have to. it's the law.
What we're talking about here is new draconian regulations that the Obama brownshirts have conjured up.
. Have you ever heard of anyone getting sick from environment mercury?
Mercury in the EnvironmentAlthough it is less toxic than methylmercury, elemental mercury may be found in higher concentrations in environments such as gold mine sites, where it has been used to extract gold. If elemental mercury is ingested, it is absorbed relatively slowly and may pass through the digestive system without causing damage. Ingestion of other common forms of mercury, such as the salt HgCl2, which damages the gastrointestinal tract and causes kidney failure, is unlikely from environmental sources.
And then you'll bitch that your power bill goes up.It is too much to ask of the energy companies that they don't destroy our water with mercury?
Spend some fucking money and put in the scrubbers that are going to clean up this mess, you cheap fucking bastards.
Yeah, they'll blame that on greedy corporations making obscene profits!
We need solutions.
The tree-huggers won't let us build nuke plants, the Chinese are building new coal plants at an alarming rate and we can't stop them from polluting our air.
I'm seeing more regulations and fewer solutions. It's obvious Obama doesn't have any answers so he allows the EPA to regulate us back into the Stone Age.
coal is more than clean enough. Have you ever heard of anyone getting sick from environment mercury? The fact is there are plenty of natural sources of mercury that spew far more into the environment than man made coal plants. The later is trivial in comparison.
The radiation danger is also trivial. It's almost entirely in the form of Carbon 14, which is abundant in the environment.
and black lung is a miners myth, all so they can get free monies and not have to work.
coal is more than clean enough. Have you ever heard of anyone getting sick from environment mercury? The fact is there are plenty of natural sources of mercury that spew far more into the environment than man made coal plants. The later is trivial in comparison.
The radiation danger is also trivial. It's almost entirely in the form of Carbon 14, which is abundant in the environment.
and black lung is a miners myth, all so they can get free monies and not have to work.
You dont have to worry about black lung when you strip mine like me.
and black lung is a miners myth, all so they can get free monies and not have to work.
You dont have to worry about black lung when you strip mine like me.
do u tip the strippers?
it is one of our largest resources. But the largest part is low grade
The poor coal industry is being held to a standard that the rest of the population is; OH BOO FUCKING HOO!! QUIT YOUR BITCHIN !!The energy companies have had plenty of time to meet existing environmental regulations. They have failed to do so, and will continue to fail to do so until they are forced to.
Horseshit. Existing coal plants meet all existing regulations. They have to. it's the law.
What we're talking about here is new draconian regulations that the Obama brownshirts have conjured up.
It is too much to ask of the energy companies that they don't destroy our water with mercury?
Spend some fucking money and put in the scrubbers that are going to clean up this mess, you cheap fucking bastards.
One CFL bulb in 6000 gallons of water exceeds the EPA mercury standard.. Care to condemn the bastards that are forcing THAT choice on every consumer???
Actually, modern CFLs (from the same Stanford study) only have enough to make about a 1000 gallons of water unsafe to drink. 1000 gallons is about as much water as is in one of the small inflatable back yard soaking tubs that some people call "pools." You know, those 10' diameter, 2.5' deep kiddie splashers. The mercury (not to mention radioactive particulates, sulfur compounds, arsenic, fly ash, and CO2) emitted by the power plants to make up the difference between the energy to power a modern CFL, or even more importantly LED, lighting over compensates many hundred fold any minor release that may occur from the rare CFL that ends up broken and in a landfill. There are recycle centers everywhere for the CFL bulbs and you only need to change them every decade or so. If that bothers you buy the LED bulbs, no mercury, more efficient than even the CFLs, and they will last several decades.
Frequently Asked Questions
Information on Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs (CFLs) and Mercury
November 2010
http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf
What are mercury emissions caused by humans?
EPA estimates the U.S. is responsible for the release of 103 metric tons1 of mercury emissions each year. More than half of these emissions come from coal-fired electrical power. Mercury released into the air is the main way that mercury gets into water and bio-accumulates in fish. (Eating fish contaminated with mercury is the main way for humans to be exposed.) Most mercury vapor inside fluorescent light bulbs becomes bound to the inside of the light bulb as it is used. EPA estimates that the rest of the mercury within a CFL – about 11 percent – is released into air or water when it is sent to a landfill, assuming the light bulb is broken. Therefore, if all 272 million CFLs3 sold in 2009 were sent to a landfill (versus recycled, as a worst case) – they would add 0.12 metric tons, or 0.12 percent, to U.S. mercury emissions caused by humans.
How do CFLs result in less mercury in the environment compared to traditional light
bulbs?
Electricity use is the main source of mercury emissions in the U.S. CFLs use less electricity than incandescent lights, meaning CFLs reduce the amount of mercury into the environment. As shown in the table below, a 13-watt, 8,000-rated-hour-life CFL (60-watt equivalent; a common light bulb type) will save 376 kWh over its lifetime, thus avoiding 4.3 mg of mercury. If the bulb goes to a landfill, overall emissions savings would drop a little, to 3.9 mg. EPA recommends that CFLs are recycled where possible, to maximize mercury savings.
The projected increase in the use of compact fluorescent lamps
(CFLs) motivates the development of methods to manage consumer
exposure to mercury and its environmental release at the end of
lamp life. This work characterizes the time-resolved release of
mercury vapor from broken CFLs and from underlying substrates
after removal of glass fragments to simulate cleanup. In new
lamps, mercury vapor is released gradually in amounts that reach
1.3 mg or 30% of the total lamp inventory after four days.
Similar time profiles but smaller amounts are released from spent
lamps or from underlying substrates.
Figure 1 shows time-resolved mercury release data from
two CFL models. The release is initially rapid producing vapor
concentrations from 200−800 μg/m3 during the first hour, which
far exceed the OSHA occupational limits. The release decays on a
time scale of hours and continues at significant rate for at
least four days (data beyond 24 h not shown). The total Hg
released after 24 h is 504 (13 W model) and 113 μg (for 9 W) by
integration, which are 11.1% and 1.9% of the total Hg content
specified by the vendors, respectively. Over 4 days (extended
data not shown), the 13 W bulb released 1.34 mg or 30% of the
total Hg.
Mercury in new lamps is primarily in elemental form, but over
time interacts with the phosphor and glass to produce a more
complex internal partitioning in spent lamps, which contain
elemental, immobile (glass matrix imbedded), and oxidized soluble
forms (3,5,12). Landfill leaching can be minimized by avoiding or
reducing the mercury to water-soluble oxidized forms. Some
manufacturers are reported to incorporate reducing agents in
lamps to improve performance in TCLP testing. This approach may
protect local groundwater but would lead to formation of volatile
elemental mercury and enhanced environmental release of the vapor
in landfill gases.