Missouri Utility Drops Nuke Construction Plan

May 1st, 2009

The New York Times reports here that AmerenUE, a utility company servicing Missouri and Illinois, has suspended its effort to build another reactor and power plant near Fulton, MO. Evidently, the biggest obstacle was Missouri’s anti-CWIP regulations. Construction Works in Progress, or “CWIP” regulations in some states, like Florida, allow utility companies to charge rate payers for construction costs before a new power plant generates and sells a single watt of electricity. Missouri does not allow utilities to charge up-front to build new facilities.

Without the ability to charge its customers up front, AmerenUE couldn’t finance the project. Banks and other private investors still don’t see nuclear power as a wise investment, even though uranium prices are way down.

Tip: Beyond Nuclear and Index Mundi

Bookmark and Share

Stimulus Funds for Moab Uranium Tailings Cleanup

April 27th, 2009


Uranium mine near Moab, Utah adjacent to the Colorado River. Photo source: Ecoflight

Lately, my go-to source for western U.S. water news and commentary is Coyote Gulch, a blog with it’s ear on the ground. Earlier this month, it reported here on a nice chunk of change from the U.S. Department of Energy going to clean up after the uranium industry. An excerpt:

Gary Harmon writing for the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel. From the article:

The federal government will provide $108 million from the economic stimulus package to push ahead more quickly with the cleanup of uranium mill tailings from Moab, Utah. The new spending will more than double the number of employees from 125 to at least 275, officials with the U.S. Department of Energy said. The cleanup is scheduled to begin April 20 and is estimated to cost about $1 billion, which will be paid by the Department of Energy.

Footnote: Whole Earth Catalog writer/hipster Stuart Brand recently gave the New York Times an interview. He’s got a book coming out later this year in which he promises to explain why nuclear power is “green.” Can’t wait to see that.

Tip: Muck & Mystery

Bookmark and Share

Ethanol Critics: What’s Their Beef?

April 13th, 2009

Drive small, drive less, walk more, eat less beef.

In 1980 we had a biologist running for president. Barry Commoner, standard-bearer for the Citizens Party, gave a speech at Calvin College in Grand Rapids and I drove across town on a rainy night to hear him. I’d read his book, Science & Survival and knew he was critical of nuclear power and the complicated, centralized government-military-industrial apparatus that supported it.

During the speech, Barry brought up biofuels, or “gasahol.” He briefly described growing corn and distilling a mash to make ethanol to use as motor fuel. The residue, he said, was rich in nitrogen, phosphorus, and minerals that made an excellent fertilizer. At this, there was a collective “ooh” that wafted across the audience. We understood the balance. “Yeah, it’s a nice arrangement,” Barry said in his Brooklyn accent. Yeah. Yeah! He was having a good night, there among the believers. Barry referred to himself as a “congenital optimist.” The biosphere with its life and solar constant, not the lithosphere with its dwindling store of fossil fuels, would power our future.

NCGA Corn Usage 2008
Source: National Corn Growers Association

Today we’ve got ethanol – big time. Nearly a quarter of the Yellow Dent “King Corn” crop goes to fuel production. Farmers are doing much better. About three years ago, corn was selling around $1.50 per bushell. Last summer, it rose to over $7 before “crashing” to about $3.50 a bushel as speculators pulled out of commodities.

Today, the ethanol industry falls short of Commoner’s dream, however, with respect to the distiller’s residue. It’s not plowed back into the soil as fertilizer. It, along with nearly the half of the corn yield is sold to confined animal feed operations (CAFO’s), to make meat and dairy products. CAFO’s stink, and the reliability of rural manure management is poor. Spreading manure on fields is weather dependent and runoff is common. The CAFO’s and environmental regulators get sued for polluting the rivers and lack of enforcement of regulations. CAFO’s on the Plains are remaking the topography, building mountains of dung covered with thousands of cows like ants on an ant hill, fed and watered constantly and pumped with antibiotics. I’ve seen such places first-hand. A dark brown dung heap baking in the summer like an asphalt parking lot has to be a miserable place. The fact is, under prevailing conditions, beef production is a dirty business.

The third highest use of corn is export, much of it to China and Japan, not to feed hungry people, but to feed cows and pigs and support growing demand for meat in those countries. A lot of corn goes to producing High Fructose Corn Sweetener, which appears to be a factor in growing rates of metabolic disorders such as diabetes, and obesity as mentioned here, and here.

The charge that using corn to make motor fuel starves people is ludicrous. Only a tiny fraction of Yellow Dent corn goes directly into cereal and basic human food. It’s a raw material for a wide array of sometimes dubious products, like sweeteners, and the producers of those products are sore at having to pay higher prices for their raw materials.

One group defending ethanol against those who want to end mandates for biofuels is FoodPriceTruth.org. They argue that the number one driver of higher food prices is higher oil prices. Considering the food on our dinner plates has traveled an average of 1500 miles, they’ve got a point.

Some ideas to ponder: Barry Commoner’s Four Laws of Ecology

1. Everything is Connected to Everything Else. There is one ecosphere for all living organisms and what affects one, affects all.

2. Everything Must Go Somewhere. There is no “waste” in nature and there is no “away” to which things can be thrown.

3. Nature Knows Best. Humankind has fashioned technology to improve upon nature, but such change in a natural system is, says Commoner, “likely to be detrimental to that system.”

4. There Is No Such Thing as a Free Lunch. In nature, both sides of the equation must balance, for every gain there is a cost, and all debts are eventually paid.

Bookmark and Share

Why Did My Plant Die?

April 5th, 2009

by Geoffrey B. Charlesworth

You walked too close. You trod on it.
You dropped a piece of sod on it.
You hoed it down. You weeded it.
You planted it the wrong way up.
You grew it in a yoghurt cup
But forgot to make a hole;
The soggy compost took its toll.
September storm. November drought.
It heaved in March, the roots popped out.
You watered it with herbicide.
You scattered bonemeal far and wide,
Attracting local omnivores,
Who ate your plant and stayed for more.
You left it baking in the sun
While you departed in a run.
To find a spade, perhaps a trowel,
Meanwhile the plant threw in the towel.
You planted it with crown too high;
The soil washed off, that explains why.
Too high pH. It hated lime.
Alas it needs a gentler clime.
You left the root ball wrapped in plastic.
You broke the roots. They’re not elastic.
You walked too close. You trod on it.
You dropped a piece of sod on it.
You splashed the plant with mower oil.
You should do something to your soil.
Too rich, too poor. Such wretched tilth.
Your soil is clay. Your soil is filth.
Your plant was eaten by a slug.
The growing point contained a bug.
These aphids are controlled by ants,
Who milk the juice, it kills the plants.
In early spring your garden’s mud.
You walked around! That’s not much good.
With heat and light you hurried it.
The poor plant missed the mountain air;
No heat, no summer muggs up there.
You overfed it 10-10-10.
Forgot to water it again.
You hit it sharply with a hose.
You used a can without a rose.
Perhaps you sprinkled from above.
You should have talked to it with love.
The nursery mailed it without roots.
You killed it with those gardening boots.
You walked too close. You trod on it.
You dropped a piece of sod on it.

Exerpted from A Gardner Obsessed: Observations, Reflections, and Advice for Other Dedicated Gardners and Horticulture April, 1996.

Tip: Harold Kantrud.

Bookmark and Share

Regulatory Fallout from Kingston Coal Sludge Incident?

April 4th, 2009


Ruptured lagoon berm sends coal sludge into the confluence of the Clinch and Emory Rivers. Photo by Antrim Caskey used with permission.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be reviewing hundreds of wetland and watercourse permits formerly handled by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), according to this LA Times article. The EPA has had the authority to intervene for years, but rarely did under the Bush Administration.

Looks like things are different now. The EPA appears to have a new mandate from President Obama and its decision to flex some regulatory muscle may have been prompted, in part, by the TVA Kingston Coal Sludge Incident. The new action will focus on mountain top removal permit applications where coal companies are requesting to fill streams and wetlands with overburden (soil and rock), but the high-profile environmental disaster at Kingston may have helped prompt the EPA to step forward.

On the morning of December 22, 2008, an earthen dam on a 40-acre sludge lagoon broke releasing 5.4 million cubic yards of wet sludge, covering about 300 acres of land, destroying 3 homes, and breaking a major gas pipeline near Harriman, TN. The environmental cost will take a long time to assess.

Dave Cooper’s eye-witness account is an interesting perspective of the TVA Kingston incident.

What is this sludge? Coal doesn’t burn completely. It is an organic sedimentary deposit derived from ancient forested swamps containing, among other things, giant ferns the size of modern trees. After burning, the coal leaves a mineral residue called flyash that is collected from the power plant’s furnace. The flyash is the texture of silt, which is finer than sand but coarser than clay – about like flour.

Flyash can be used to make cement, concrete, asphalt, grouting materials, and other useful products, according to the Federal Highway Administration’s Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center.

The market for flyash doesn’t keep up with it’s production, apparently, so the stuff piles up, either in wet lagoons or in dry piles. When the wet sludge enters water bodies, it’s constituent metals like arsenic, mercury, and lead pollute the water. The silt is suspended in the water column or coats the benthic community, causing problems for fish, fresh water clams, and other aquatic life.

When the siliceous dry sludge is wind-blown, it’s an air pollutant. Fine silica dust is a respiratory irritant responsible for silicosis.

According to the Engineering News Record, the lagoon has recently shown signs of trouble:

…Jack Sparado, a former national mine safety and health engineer, says that the inspection report indicates serious problems that TVA should have addressed. He conducted the engineering analysis of a similar, 300-million-gal, coal slurry spill in Martin County, Ky., in 2000 and wrote the engineering report of the Buffalo Creek, W.Va., coal slurry spill that killed more than 100 people in 1972.

Sparado says the dike has been failing since 2003 because of foundation piping, or internal erosion. There had been two minor blowouts in recent years and TVA noted seepage. The agency took corrective measures, Sparado says, but the only solution would have been to drain the reservoir and reconstruct the dam. “It was completely irresponsible of TVA to allow the dam to continue to be used when they knew of these previous problems,” he says. “They should have done a complete stability analysis of whole dam and essentially reconstructed it. It certainly should have been engineered better than it was.”

Ronald Hall, Kingston plant manager, says that other than the blowouts, TVA had “no indication or concerns leading up to the event.”

“…other than the blowouts, TVA had no indication or concerns leading up to the event.” Hmmm.

The Knoxville News Sentinel is keeping an updated list of articles from various sources about the Kingston lagoon disaster.

The Natural Resources Defense Council’s blog OnEarth has a good summary of the incident, including an aerial video clip shot from a helicopter.

As America simultaneously rebuilds it’s economy and plans for it’s energy future, King Coal will fight hard to hold it’s current dominant position. Those of us who want clean renewable energy should gird their loins for a tough fight. Some oversight and enforcement from the EPA would help.

Bookmark and Share

Cattlemen’s College Sponsored by Pfizer

March 30th, 2009
National Cattlemen's Beef Association

National Cattlemen's Beef Association

Image source: National Cattlemen’s Beef Association

As previously posted here, the Union of Concerned Scientists reported that 70 percent of all antibiotics and similar drugs are given to animals that are not sick. Even after reading that, I was still surprised to find out that the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, a major beef trade association with a serious lobbying effort, has an annual “Cattlemen’s College” symposium sponsored by pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. Guess I was expecting some other company sponsor like Wrangler jeans or Stetson hats. Maybe John Deere or Butler Grain Bins. Scheiner Bock beer would be good sponsor.

No word yet on whether or not the course registration comes with a free trial prescription for Viagra. Like Ann Vileisis (previous post) says, “food has stories.”

Bookmark and Share

Author Ann Vileisis: “Food Has Stories”

March 28th, 2009

Ann’ book, Kitchen Literacy: How We Lost Knowledge of Where Food Comes from and Why We Need to Get It Back is available at Amazon. What intrigues me is the idea that “food has stories.” That means food is not just about plants and animals raised for consumption, but also about people, places, motives, risk, success, failure, redemption, and (hopefully) new lessons and insight.

Ann’s other book, linked in the sidebar, is Discovering the Unknown Landscape: A History Of America’s Wetlands. It is about America’s long, often troubled relationship with wetlands. Again, the the history consists of many rich and complex stories.

Bookmark and Share

Put Livestock Back Out to Pasture

March 26th, 2009

Grazing livestock would enhance soil fertility, raise healthier animals, and improve public health.

“…an estimated 70 percent of all U.S. antibiotics and related drugs are given to animals that are not sick. This overuse of antibiotics contributes to the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria, with the result that antibiotics we commonly use are becoming less effective in fighting human illnesses, including some life-threatening infections.” - Union of Concerned Scientists

In the above photo, courtesy of EPA Region 8, the steel storage bins in the background hold corn for the cows. Corn is hard on the bovine digestive system, which is designed for grass. I’ve seen these kinds of “cow cities” in eastern Colorado and Texas. The business model depends on cheap corn, which puts weight on the cows much faster than green, low-carb grass.

The ground beneath the cows is actually a huge pile of manure. If one views the larger image, it’s apparent that many of the cows are sitting or lying down. That doesn’t necessarily mean they are sick, but that still looks like a lot of cows down.

The implications of this kind of factory farming extend well beyond the aesthetic to a serious public health issue. Antibiotic resistence is recognized as a major problem in treating major diseases such as MRSA, tuberculosis, staph, strep, malaria, typhoid fever, and others. Source: Center for Disease Control.

There is an alternative to this kind of beef. Grass-fed beef is available and found with a bit of searching. Information on producers by state is available from AmericanGrassFed.org and LocalHarvest.org

An additional benefit of growing perennial forage crops, or hay fields, is soil carbon capture and sequestration (CSS). With less plowing of the soil, more soil organic carbon derived from root decay and micro-organisms remains in the soil.

The era of big CAFOs really needs to be over.

Bookmark and Share

Carbon Sequestration by Mineral Carbonation

January 25th, 2009

Given the evidence supporting the view that burning fossil fuels is contributing to global warming and a a potential dangerous climate perturbation, there’s considerable interest in carbon storage. So-called Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) could be done many ways such as increasing soil organic matter and planting more trees, ocean storage, burial in deep geologic formations, and mineral carbonation.

Howard Herzog of the MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment has this assessment of prospects for CCS by way of carbonation, i.e., formation of carbonate minerals.

Thermodynamically, the plan makes sense as the formation of both calcite and magnasite releases heat (exothermic) as shown here:

CaO + CO2 =  CaCO3 + 179 kJ/mole
MgO + CO2 = MgCO3 + 118 kJ/mole.

The article claims “calcium and magnesium are rarely available as binary oxides.” Instead, carbon dioxide could be reacted with dissolved magnesium silicates, forsterite and serpentinite, in an anion exchange reaction to form magnesite (MgCO3), like this:

½Mg2SiO4 (Forsterite) + CO2 = MgCO3 (Magnesite) + ½SiO2 + 95kJ/mole

1/3Mg3Si2O5(OH)4 (Serpentine) + CO2 = MgCO3 (Magnesite) + 2/3SiO2 + 2/3H2O + 64kJ/mole

Again, since the reactions are exothermic, the reactions should proceed to the right, the lower energy states. A big andvantage of this process, if feasible, is permanent carbon storage. Other proposed CCS techniqes may leak back to the atmosphere.

There are problems with mineral carbonation, though, involving solubility of the reactants and kinetics. It turns out the forsterite and serpentine need to be dissolved in acid or molten salts, which are both potentially messy and expensive operations. Or, the rock can be ground into a fine powder and dissolved in a hot water solution. The rock grinding consumes a lot of energy.

Such a scenario would require setting up the mineral carbonation factory at a large serpentinite mine where such rocks exist – Quebec, for example. The process would basically dig up one kind of rock, make a carbonated rock, and stuff the new rock back in the hole. The biggest obstacle to making it work, according to Herzog, seems to be finding an economical way to speed up the chemical kinetics.

CCS is a brand new technology and there are no doubt many ready to set up shop and get there hands on some of the big federal economic stimulus money. We’ll need to watch out for snake oil salesman. Herzog does not enthusiastically endorse the process described above but, rather, recommends a “portfolio approach” consisting of a diversified package of strategies.

Like all good researchers, he recommends more study.

Herzog’s article quotes significantly from the following:

Yegulalp T.M., K.S. Lackner and H.J. Ziock, “A Review of Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Use of Coal for Power Generation,” presented at Sixth International Symposium on Environmental Issues and Waste Management in Energy and Mineral Production, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, May 30-June 2 2000).

Bookmark and Share

Ocean Phytoplankton and Climate Interactions

January 14th, 2008

“Give me a half a tanker of iron, and I’ll give you the next ice age.” – John Martin, Oceanographer

For over a decade, fertilizing the oceans with iron, an important plant nutrient, to create algal blooms has been proposed and demonstrated as a way to capture atmospheric carbon and mitigate global warming.  The carbon-rich algae, or phytoplankton, grow, die, and sink to the ocean bottom where the carbon is stored, or “sequestered.” At least nine ocean-going iron enrichment experiments have been done thus far and the process works.

A NASA satellite image of an algal bloom about 100-miles (150km) created by one iron enrichment experiment is shown here.

Sattelite image of ocean algal bloom (NASA)

Photo source: NASA and CSA

But it turns out the phytoplankton have still another strong environmental effect: the production of cloud-seeding aerosols.

Evidence shows as the wind sweeps these materials up from ocean waves rich in phytoplankton, the effect is enhanced cloud formation and increased albedo, which reflects solar radiation back out to space.

Does this offer at least a partial fix for global warming? Iron’s cheap and relatively abundant. It could be spread around the ocean on a large scale. The thought of manipulating ocean ecosystems undoubtdedly makes some people nervous, including me. Common sense would go against the notion of fixing one problem by creating another. Then again, we seem to have no problem drastically altering the earth’s land surface through deforestation, agriculture, and urbanization.

But, given that the ocean is 71% of the earth’s surface and probably the primary regulator of earth’s climate, we better be careful with it.

Bookmark and Share