NOTICE!

The Weatherzone forum has now closed and is in read-only mode until the 1st of November when it will close permanently. We would like to thank everyone who has contributed over the past 18 years.

If you would like to continue the discussion you can follow us on Facebook and Twitter or participate in discussions at AusWeather or Ski.com.au forums.

Page 13 of 25 < 1 2 ... 11 12 13 14 15 ... 24 25 >
Topic Options
#1191379 - 27/04/2013 00:03 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
SBT Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2007
Posts: 14286
Loc: Townsville Dry Tropics
Japan turns back to coal-fired power plants

(1) http://www.smh.com.au/business/japan-turns-back-to-coalfired-power-plants-20130425-2ihb0.html

The Japanese government is moving to speed up the environmental assessment process for new coal-fired power plants as its power sector struggles with a surging energy bill in the wake of the forced idling of much of the country's nuclear power plants following the Fukushima power plant meltdown in 2011.

At present, it can take up to four years for approvals for new plants to be processed.

According to Japanese media reports, the government intends to make 12 months the maximum period for assessing and approving new coal-fired power plants as its utilities seek to develop more power stations to stem surging energy supply bills.

The closure of much of the country's nuclear power capacity following Fukushima has forced the utilities to restart idled oil-fired power plants, which has pushed up energy bills significantly since oil is the most expensive fuel source.

Advertisement

And with the government considering the closure of much of the installed nuclear capacity over the medium term, the spotlight is back on coal as the cheapest energy source, notwithstanding plans to cut carbon emissions.

A commitment to slice 2020 carbon emissions by 25 per cent from their 1990 level will be revised by October, according to Japanese newspaper reports.

Tokyo Electric, which operated the Fukushima complex, is adding an estimated 2.6 gigawatts a year of coal-fired generation capacity from two new plants that started operation this month.

It is also sourcing electricity from two coal-fired plants operated by Tohoku Electric Power Co that have been restarted after being repaired following the devastating March 2011 earthquake and tsunami.

The No.2 unit at Tokyo Electric's Hitachinaka plant, with 1000 megawatts of capacity, began operating this month, along with the 600MW No. 6 unit at its Hirono power station. The utility is also purchasing half of the output from the No. 1 and No. 2 units at Tohoku Electric's Haramachi plant in northern Japan, each of which can generate 1000MW.

In total, these coal-fired power plants are expected to consume about 11.5 million tonnes of coal in a full year of operation.

The government's move to speed up the assessment process coincides with Tokyo Electric's call for tenders for the construction of new coal-fired power stations with 2600MW of capacity, which it wants to have in operation by the end of the decade, to replace lost nuclear capacity.

Of Japan's 50 nuclear power plants, just two are in operation at the moment. All were shut for a review of operating procedures after the Fukushima accident.


Oh dear, looks like the myth of the renewables taking up the slack from close nuclear just isn't working.
_________________________
785mm Jan
799mm Feb
130 March
2019 Total 1714mm
2018 Total 822mm






Top
#1191393 - 27/04/2013 07:32 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
LittleDavey83 Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 16/12/2005
Posts: 725
Loc: Coral Cove, QLD
Yeah SBT, I know the scare's overrated, but I still wouldn't like to live next to a rail line transporting uncovered coal...or rock, or anything really. It's not hard to set up a retractable cover, nor overly expensive (and yes I know we're talking about trains kilometres in length!!) I just think it's a no-brainer, whether its dangerous or not, considering the lengths that road transport goes to. Whether it's NEEDED from a health perspective, well...that's another issue lol. Just cover it, then no-one can complain! Easy solution really.

Top
#1191396 - 27/04/2013 07:58 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: SBT]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Originally Posted By: SBT
So the odd train trundling past at 60kph with little to no visible dust isn't going to cause anyone any real issues.


Just because you can't see visible dust does not mean it is not there! and beside that is the worst kind of dust(especially from coal), the smaller the particles the further they travel into your lungs.

A few odd trains? bit like a few odd trucks "rumbling day and night" passed your house.......
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1191407 - 27/04/2013 09:06 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Originally Posted By: SBT
Average for a susceptible miner to contract miners lung was from memory around 15 years of exposure in a confined space for periods of 6 to 12 hours a day 5 days a week for 12 to 15 tears.


At least the miners get to go home at the end of the day and got a few days off to get away from the dust, here the dust is in and around people's homes for 24 hours a day 7 days a week...and who are the most at risk? children playing in their yards..
Quote:
``What people are telling me is that they're constantly having to clean outside areas and spaces because they are being covered in dust,'' he said.


Originally Posted By: SBT
So the odd train trundling past at 60kph with little to no visible dust isn't going to cause anyone any real issues.


The odd train trundling past?

Quote:
"These trains carry up to one million tonnes per month of coal through the streets of Toowoomba, Ipswich and Brisbane.


1 million tonnes per month completely uncovered.

Originally Posted By: SBT
Approx 10,000 tip truck trips passed my house 24/7 for 15 months......


10,000 trucks at roughly 20 tonnes per load.....
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1191419 - 27/04/2013 10:01 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
SBT Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2007
Posts: 14286
Loc: Townsville Dry Tropics
1000000 tones a month and no one has attributed any disease or injury resulting from those trains or what they are carrying now have they? Wouldn't you think that Qld Health would have built a database of such things occurring. If it was happening you would see a corridor of health issues the length of the railway lines from Ipswich to the Port of Brisbane dating back 70 odd years and indeed along every rail corridor that coal is carried on in Australia but it just isn't happening.

Steam trains used to run on all major suburban train lines within every capital city in Australia for over 100 years and they spewed smoke, ash and dropped coal on the tracks and all manner of cinders. I used to love standing on the pedestrian railway bridges while these trains run underneath me and covered me in coal smoke, I still can't help but remember this when ever I smell coal smoke.

Proof is what is called for here people. So how about proving what your saying is fact not half baked ideas based on a premise that coal dust is dangerous when it comes off trains in the form of dust. Any links including the Qld Public health database would be good if you can find it. Some successful legal precedents in the form of successful law suits where someone has either individually or as a group has sued the company and won damages from injuries caused by coal dust from trains. I won't hold my breath though waiting.

Look if Hansen can't prove it, and he is one of the most coal fired power stations hatting nutters on the planet, then you lot have zero chance of doing it either.

By all means demand that coal be covered when it is being transported. I don't have a problem with that because then you will force them to be seen to be doing something, (the greens excel at this form of demands - must be seen doing something that doesn't achieve anything) just that it won't actually achieve anything except make loading and unloading a longer process and more complicated process, cost a fortune, employ a heck of a lot of Chinese making the covers and employ a lot of Australians to repair them when they get torn and force up the price of coal for zero benefit to the company.

Unless of course it is just another conspiracy theory cover up by "big coal".
_________________________
785mm Jan
799mm Feb
130 March
2019 Total 1714mm
2018 Total 822mm






Top
#1191470 - 27/04/2013 22:08 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
Bill Illis Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 11/07/2010
Posts: 1003

Clearly, there are substances that are harmful to human health and the environment.

But humans are not dumb. When we understand the actual implications of a substance is harmful, it gets banned or is tightly regulated.

Let's think of nerve gases (most of which started out as by-products of insect-control), plutonium (but not uranium as we have evolved to get rid of a certain amount of uranium - it is a common element in soils etc), radiation, excess amounts of heavy metals (similar to the uranium story, smalls amounts are not harmful), poisons, asbestos (which unfortunately took too long to recognize).

Then there is a lot of substances that some people think ARE harmful and, in fact, are not harmful in the least or at an easily manageable level.

This is where the environmental movement goes wrong. It is not looking at whether something really is harmful, it is based on myth and emotional reactions.

There are substances that are border-line. My earlier example of asbestos is one where it took a long time to understand how harmful it is. There are others like DDT, which is fine for humans, indeed it protects us remarkably well from insect-borne deseases and damage, doesn't actually hurt birds unlike the myth which still exists but it is a persistent-little chemical. It doesn't break-down in nature. So although its banning was a mistake based on myth at the time, it turned out to be a good decision because of its persistence factor.

That's my view.

Let's focus on the facts and proof (but we should be aware of risks because every now and again, some substance/chemical turns out to be more of a problem than we thought). On the other hand, the environmental movement does not understand how much damage they are doing by not focussing on facts and instead relying on instinctive emotional reactions.

If people want to go back to hunter-gatherer ways, then more power to them.

But you can't force the rest of us to do so.

Top
#1191483 - 28/04/2013 01:21 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
Crookhaven River Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/05/2010
Posts: 629
Loc: Crookhaven Heads N.S.W 14m AS...
"plutonium (but not uranium as we have evolved to get rid of a certain amount of uranium - it is a common element in soils etc), radiation, excess amounts of heavy metals (similar to the uranium story, smalls amounts are not harmful)"


Lung cancer deaths from indoor radon and the cost effectiveness and potential of policies to reduce them

Quote
Lung cancer is the commonest fatal cancer in many countries; in the United Kingdom in 2006 it accounted for 22% of deaths from cancer.1 Most lung cancers are caused by cigarette smoking, but another recognised lung carcinogen is the chemically inert gas radon-222 (half-life four days), a ubiquitous natural air pollutant arising from radioactive decay of the uranium-238 present throughout the earth’s crust.

Outdoor radon concentrations are usually low, but indoors they are higher, especially in houses and other small buildings, and in most countries radon is the largest source of exposure to natural ionising radiation.

If inhaled, solid short lived radon progeny may deposit on the bronchial epithelium exposing sensitive cells to α irradiation. Radiobiological evidence suggests that cells exposed to even a single α particle become appreciably damaged. Therefore, at low doses the risk of cancer is proportional to the number of cells exposed, and the dose-response relation is likely to be linear.

For most people the bronchial dose of radiation is determined principally by the concentration of radon in the home. Studies of radon related lung cancer have quantified the risk in terms of radon concentration rather than radiation dose because concentrations can be measured directly. For the same reason policies to control radon are usually formulated in terms of radon concentration.

http://www.bmj.com/content/338/bmj.a3110
_________________________
Rainfall: June 2015 94mms/ JULY 2015 MTD 110mms/ July 2014 total 4.5mms/ TOTAL 2015 YTD 806mms/ 2014 total 1018mms
“The world is big and I want to have a good look at it before it gets dark.”
John Muir

Top
#1191493 - 28/04/2013 08:56 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: Crookhaven River]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Quote:
Steam trains used to run on all major suburban train lines within every capital city in Australia for over 100 years and they spewed smoke, ash and dropped coal on the tracks and all manner of cinders. I used to love standing on the pedestrian railway bridges while these trains run underneath me and covered me in coal smoke, I still can't help but remember this when ever I smell coal smoke.


And back then there was probably not 16.7 Million Vehicles on the road to add to that pollution...
Australia as a whole has become a more transient nation, so how many of those that would live next to train lines now would spend 2-3 (or more generations) next to train lines? back in the early days people stayed in the same house or same area, now they don't they move from house to house, city to city state to state.

Originally Posted By: SBT
Look if Hansen can't prove it, and he is one of the most coal fired power stations hatting nutters on the planet, then you lot have zero chance of doing it either.


there is no link between coal dust and health issues?

It is a bit like some of the other post that i made...
Quote:
Pollution link to cancer also found in Newcastle

Damning new evidence of the link between cancer and industrial pollution has been produced by further analysis of statewide NSW Cancer Council statistics obtained by the Workers Inquiry.


A few more....

Research finds additional harm from coal dust exposure

Link

Characterization of dust exposure for the study of chronic occupational lung disease: a comparison of different exposure assessment strategies

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/151/10/982.full.pdf

Toxicity and occupational health hazards of coal fly ash (CFA). A review of data and comparison to coal mine dust
http://annhyg.oxfordjournals.org/content/41/6/659.full.pdf

Characterisation of atmospheric particulates around a coal-fired power station
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166516298000676

Health effects of electricity generation from coal, oil, and nuclear fuel

http://repository.cmu.edu/tepper/1173/?utm_source=repository.cmu.edu%2Ftepper%2F1173&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

Particulate air pollution and acute health effects

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673695901736

Originally Posted By: Bill Illis
But humans are not dumb. When we understand the actual implications of a substance is harmful, it gets banned or is tightly regulated.


Humans are not as smart as you may think,
take smoking look at all the evidence that show how bad it is for people, but has it been banned? no, for one there is too much money to be made from taxes, then there is the other old adage, oh my father smoked everyday until he was 90....doesn't mean to say that you wont drop dead at 40 though.....Or no it wont happen to me.....

Asbestos? how long was it before they finally took action on that? how long did they blame "something else?" evidence was there for years yet it was ignored!

How smart is that?

The ones that are smart are Europe and Japan, if they think a substance is bad they will ban it, and there are substances that have been banned in those countries for decades that are still freely available here, why? because a country like the USA claims it is “safe” so Australia follows along blindly........
There is plenty of evidence that proves that coal and coal dust is harmful, but do people want to listen (especially the sceptics) ...no.
Humans may not be dumb. but they are not very smart either.
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1191498 - 28/04/2013 09:31 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
SBT Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2007
Posts: 14286
Loc: Townsville Dry Tropics
We have been using coal to fire steam trains and stationary engines since the 1780's (231 years).

If coal dust was going to cause a problem when it was being transported it would have been recognised a heck of a long time before now and steps taken to reduce the risk or eliminate it from use.

Whinging and whining about so called health issues because YOU think coal dust is dangerous when it is being transported and then throwing into the equation industrial pollution from Newcastle (which contains millions of different compounds as well as coal dust), pollution from vehicles, asbestos and smoking as examples of how long it took to recognise the health issues works directly against your own argument. The health issues where recognised and steps taken to reduce or eliminate the cause but for some reason this isn't good enough for you.

An example of this sort of action can be found here:
Originally Posted By: Greenpussers
Beryllium

(The author of this first article is unknown, but it is most probably from a newspaper journalist)

UP to 3000 sailors have been exposed to a deadly dust while serving in the navy. The dust was created during routine work on the hulls of HMAS SUPPLY and the aircraft carrier HMAS MELBOURNE and all personnel who served on the ships between the 1950s and 1985 are being urged to have medical tests.

The dust came from machines called jason pistols which were used to scour paint and rust from the ships. The pistols used vibrating rods coated with an alloy containing a heavy metal called beryllium. It is now known beryllium dust can cause fatal and untreatable lung disease, similar to asbestosis. Beryllium poisoning has led to huge compensation claims overseas, particularly in the US. Jason pistols containing the metal stopped being used in 1985.

The Australian navy would not comment other than to confirm the jason pistols were used by servicemen and the subject was under investigation. The danger was identified by veterans' group the Naval Tankerman Association in mid-December. It has urged all its members, via its website, to see a doctor. National President Bob Currin said: "We have established that 3000 seamen and women were serving on the ships that used jason pistols over the relevant period. Hundreds have suffered breathing problems, but up to now they have been catalogued as asbestosis. We do not know how many of them may be caused by beryllium."

The alert was sounded after former naval officer Peter Robertson, who served on HMAS SUPPLY, received a medical report indicating beryllium exposure. "I was in the navy for 23 years and I never got told about this - there were no tests given," he told The Daily Telegraph last year. "There were more than 150 crew on the HMAS SUPPLY and, as far as I know, no one has been told."

Mr Currin, from Baradine in northwestern NSW, who says he served on HMAS SUPPLY for nine years, said: "We knew the jason pistols were made from a special compound that stopped them sparking off the ship's metal when we chipped the paint and rust. It's only now we've discovered it included beryllium and was dangerous." Beryllium is a heavy metal which, when inhaled in dust form, causes pneumonia-like symptoms, similar to asbestosis. Beryllium poisoning kills 2 to 6 per cent of those exposed and can lie dormant for years. Symptoms include scarred lungs, shortness of breath and eventually death. It is incurable. It was used in jason pistols because it does not cause sparks when used to strip metal.

HMAS SUPPLY was a refuelling ship filled with flammable oil and HMAS MELBOURNE was an aircraft Carrier which carried large supplies of aviation fuel. "The list of those exposed to beryllium runs to thousands, including myself," Mr Currin said. "Jason pistols were used in general maintenance. Everyone used them. Everyone mucked in to do the cleaning." Mr Currin said he was routinely covered head to foot in dust after using the device. "The needles, which are made of beryllium, would vibrate to break up the paint. As that happened, dust would come off the needles. This is the problem. You'd be covered in dust. There's no doubt we all breathed it in."

Despite the dangers posed by beryllium being known since the 1950s, Mr Currin said none of the hundreds of former personnel he had corresponded with in recent weeks had been informed of the danger by the navy. He said "hundreds" of cases of reported asbestosis among affected sailors were now being reviewed to see if beryllium was involved. "Just the knowledge that they have been exposed is worrying their family," he said. Mr Currin said it might never be known how many personnel had been affected because many had claimed enhanced pensions on the grounds of having asbestosis. Beryllium poisoning and asbestosis present similar symptoms.

Former personnel who renounced their asbestosis claims risked losing their pension.


20/20 hindsight is a marvellous crutch for an argument don't you think? Well you must think it is the ideal crutch to use because you keep using it over and over again.

Mistakes made in the past are being rectified as they are discovered, not covered up and hidden as you are claiming.

There is no Death or Disease corridors associated with transporting coal anywhere in the world that I can find and throwing a red herring into the argument by claiming Newcastle has industrial pollution problems WITHOUT proving that it was caused by coal dust is disingenuous and beneath contempt. Industrial pollution can come from hundreds of different sources such as the quote above.
_________________________
785mm Jan
799mm Feb
130 March
2019 Total 1714mm
2018 Total 822mm






Top
#1191506 - 28/04/2013 11:13 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: SBT]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Oh, so i alone think coal dust is Dangerous?
what about all of the scientists that have proven links between coal dust and disease? all of the studies that have been done that prove links between coal dust and disease? they know nothing? they are wrong also? the miners with "miners Lung" are wrong? the people with "Black lung" are wrong?

But didn't you say yourself miners were susceptible...
Exposure concentrations vs exposure times. Average for a susceptible miner to contract miners lung was from memory around 15 years of exposure in a confined space for periods of 6 to 12 hours a day 5 days a week for 12 to 15 tears.


Originally Posted By: SBT
There is no Death or Disease corridors associated with transporting coal anywhere in the world that I can find


Cancer Mortality (1965–77) in Relation to Diesel Fume and Coal Exposure in a Cohort of Retired Railway Workers2

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/70/6/1015.short
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1191524 - 28/04/2013 13:14 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: SBT]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Nurses have joined a Newcastle-based community campaign to warn of the health hazards from increasing coal shipments.

He said the same monitoring stations also indicated that pollution regularly exceeds World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines for fine particles with a diameter of less than 2.5 microns, which can reach down to the alveoli in the lungs.
"All particle pollution can adversely affect the respiratory and cardiovascular systems and the latest WHO air quality guidelines identify fine particles as one of the most dangerous pollutants for human health," Dr Whelan said.

Full Story


NZ Government.

Originally Posted By: Health Effects of Coal Dust in a Non-Occupational Context :
Literature Review
The particle size distribution of this respirable fraction includes a proportion of particles less than
2.5 µm in diameter (referred to as PM2.5). While all sub-PM10 particles are considered respirable,
those less than 2.5 m in diameter are likely to penetrate further into the lung and are generally
considered therefore to present a greater risk to health. Factors associated with the extent of coal dust release wherever coal is mined, transported.
stockpiled, handled or loaded include wind speed, moisture content (especially of the stockpile
surface) and the extent of mechanical handling of the coal.

The latter factor contributes to abrasion
of the coal material and thus to the generation of dust.

Full Story


Occupational Safety and Health Guideline for Coal Dust (< 5% SiO2)

Link
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1191537 - 28/04/2013 14:47 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
old_man_fisho Offline
Cloud Gazer

Registered: 04/03/2012
Posts: 36
Y'all know coal dust contains Uranium and Beryllium right?! evillaugh

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.pdf
http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/1084k/report.pdf

So does the soil in your garden, but hey, who cares right!?! LOL!
_________________________
Maybe gone forever...but not forever gone! wink

Top
#1191551 - 28/04/2013 17:13 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
SBT Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2007
Posts: 14286
Loc: Townsville Dry Tropics

Originally Posted By: Page 3 of YS Article
Models developed on the basis of a 1992 American study5 indicate that between 2% and 12% of miners exposed to a constant dust burden of 2mg/m3 in a bituminous coal mine would be expected to have simple CWP after a 40 year working life.


So 2mg of dust per cubic metre exposure for 40 years creates a medical condition in 2 to 12% of the total number of miners working underground.

Well colour me a realist but coal dust in the open will never reach those concentrations from a coal train driving past, nor would the coal dust be hanging suspended in the air for 8 hours.

In other words you have once again provided the very means to debunk your own claims.
_________________________
785mm Jan
799mm Feb
130 March
2019 Total 1714mm
2018 Total 822mm






Top
#1191565 - 28/04/2013 18:56 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: SBT]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
And which post was that one above from?

Coal dust led to former railway worker's death, inquest is told

Link




Hello? is anybody there?




Quote:
Dr Andrew Jeremijenko - a Mater Private Emergency doctor who has treated numerous coal workers over 20 years - said the State Government was not being honest about the potential harm of tiny coal particles.


Meanwhile in Brisbane.....



Originally Posted By: SBT
So the odd train trundling past at 60kph with little to no visible dust isn't going to cause anyone any real issues.


Oh... the odd train trundling past...



Coal workers’ pneumoconiosis (CWP) is the disease most commonly associated with coal mining. It is not a fast-developing disease, usually taking at least ten years to be manifested, and often much longer when exposures are low. In its initial stages it is an indicator of excessive lung dust retention, and may be associated with few symptoms or signs in itself. However, as it advances, it puts the miner at increasing risk of development of the much more serious progressive massive fibrosis (PMF).

Less well studied are the epidemiological effects of respirable coal dust in lower
concentrations, or exposure for shorter periods, as can occur for individuals living in
proximity to transport lines and processing centers such as proposed Gateway Pacific
Terminal.


Quote:
A 1993 study on a West Virginia rail line, transporting bituminous coal similar
to the coal from the Powder River Basin, showed loss of coal dust of up to a pound of
coal per mile per car (Simpson Weather Associates, 1993). This loss occurs throughout
the entire transport,
as the mechanical fracturing of the coal continuously produces
fugitive dust as the coal settles. [b]There are even substantial coal dust emissions on the return trip, as the “empty” cars actually contain a significant quantity of fine particles
known as “carry back” (Cornell Hatch 2008). [/]
In addition to the dust emission from coal cars, the terminal processing, storage, and
shipping of coal, such as is planned for the Gateway Pacific Terminal, can lead to even
higher fugitive emissions, approximating those of an open pit coal mine (Ghose and
Majee, 2007). In this study of airborne monitoring around an open pit mine in India, and
in the attendant transport corridor, PM10 episodically approached levels that would be
considered in violation of OSHA standardsin the United States, and the residential areas
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1191575 - 28/04/2013 19:59 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
...





Edited by Seabreeze (28/04/2013 21:24)
Edit Reason: personal remarks

Top
#1191593 - 28/04/2013 21:18 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
ColdFront Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/06/2008
Posts: 19046
Loc: The Beach.
That's such a ridiculous argument ROM. The guy started a thread to discuss the need to advance ourselves away from dirty fossil fuels. He didn't anywhere say it had to happen yesterday so suggesting he should go and live in a cave and rub sticks together for heat in the meantime is absurd and for anyone on the fence it appears as a diversion away from surrender due to defeat.

There is evidence aplenty that coal is not the perfect solution to our energy needs. There are drawbacks with most forms of energy truth be told including the so-called "green alternatives" as they too have to be manufactured but attacking his "well being" and mental state is pretty low just because he doesn't support your view.

It's a shame all the AGW associated threads can't be made to RIP. No-one wins and to varying degrees you are all wrong. The history of scientific research isn't long enough to qualify whether or not humans are having a major impact on AGW so despite the constant merry go round none of you will likely be proven right before you push up daisies.

One thing is for certain and no amount of denying will ever change the fact that we are polluting our planet. The smog in China is proof enough as is it is in countless cities around the world and acid rain is NOT a natural occurrence. If the end result is that we embrace so-called clean energy based on a lie but it still results in cleaner air then we all win. Or at least future generations of this amazing species might.


Edited by Seabreeze (28/04/2013 21:26)
Edit Reason: personal remark made in response
_________________________


Top
#1191595 - 28/04/2013 21:31 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
Seabreeze Offline
Weatherzone Moderator

Registered: 18/09/2005
Posts: 10670
Loc: SWR
A note to criticise ideas / arguments but avoid criticising the person, and furthermore, how they may choose to live in their own home.

Top
#1192143 - 01/05/2013 09:22 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
CeeBee Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 25/02/2012
Posts: 2654

Coal Power Plants Are Killing Thousands in Europe: Report



Lots of the world's attention has been focused recently on the startlingly high levels of smog in China. But things aren't too great in Europe, either, where the popularity of coal-fired power plants is endangering the lives of entire generations of people.

That's according to a report released late last week by the Health and Environment Alliance, a Brussels-based nonprofit, which indicates that coal pollution causes more than 18,200 premature deaths each year in Europe – or 23,300 deaths, if you add in Serbia, Croatia and Turkey. The economic costs of burning coal totals between €42.8 and €54.7 billion annually (up to $71 billion in dollars), equaling about 4 million lost working days every year.

It's interesting to study the country-by-country breakdowns in HEAL's report, which the group says is the first to comprehensively examine the medical-economic impact of coal on the continent. Some of the worst polluters are power-generation facilities in former Eastern Bloc countries, like the imposing Maritsa Iztok lignite complex in Bulgaria and the quad-smokestacked Turcenia Power Station in Romania. More than half of the total health impacts that HEAL logged come from Romania, Poland and Germany, while runner-up countries with high levels of combustion include Bulgaria, Turkey, the Czech Republic, France and the United Kingdom.

Coal as a power source has been a decades-long wane in Europe, but HEAL sees the potential for a "short term rebound" in the fossil-fuel's popularity due to high prices for natural gas. Actually, it's already happening: Coal is gaining traction in part due to the actions of Germany, which ditched nuclear power in favor of coal in the wake of the Fukushima disaster. And there are 50 more coal power plants in development in Europe, some designed to burn lignite (aka "brown coal") that's cheap but especially foul for the environment.

Coal pollution has been linked to chronic diseases of the heart and lungs and can trigger nasty stuff like bronchitis, emphysema, lung cancer, heart attacks and arrhythmias. A boom in coal could increase the amount of ozone and particulate matter over European cities, where already between 80 and 90 percent of people are breathing air that's beyond dirty as defined by the World Health Organization.

HEAL is asking policymakers to consider putting a moratorium on new plants or use better pollution-scrubbing technology. At the very least, says the group's leader, Genon Jensen, the "startlingly high costs to human health should trigger a major rethink on EU energy policy."



http://www.theatlanticcities.com/neighbo...pe-report/4924/
_________________________

Top
#1192153 - 01/05/2013 10:31 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
Bill Illis Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 11/07/2010
Posts: 1003

Of course, we could get rid of coal-generated electricity.

Then Europe would lose millions of people from freezing to death.

Especially poor people as the rich people would find a way to use their money to stay warm.

The alternative would be to burn wood instead of coal.

But all the trees would be gone in the first winter. Europe would be completely deforested.

Poor people would not be able to afford the price of wood which would go up 10,000 times or so.

The anti-coal people seem to be against poor people (although they don't want to face that issue).

Solar doesn't work in high latitudes in the winter and wind fails at night when temperatures fall to their lowest level.

When 5 million people lived in Europe, it was possible to keep everyone warm with wood. But not today when there are 350 million plus.



Top
#1192210 - 01/05/2013 16:12 Re: Coal Fired Power - Dark and dirty side? [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
SBT Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2007
Posts: 14286
Loc: Townsville Dry Tropics
Another beat up by the lunatic green fringe Bill? Nasty coal fired power stations causing death and destruction across the whole of Europe, or may be not as it goes. I don't know about Turkey or Croatia but the rest of the EU have some of the strictest mandated air quality controls on the planet so who is right? This whinge group which claims we are killing thousands of people or the EU who was forced to adopt these stringent air quality measures?

They can't both be right so my money is not with the green enviro nutters from HEAL.
Just another self absorbed think tank trying to dictate their enviro nutter policies without checking to see if any other green environutters have already had a really, really big bite of that subject already.

So I wonder why is Japan either recommisioning or build 17 new coal fired power stations and Germany 11?
Could it be that renewables just can't cut it in the real world? Who would of thought that would ever happen? wink
_________________________
785mm Jan
799mm Feb
130 March
2019 Total 1714mm
2018 Total 822mm






Top
Page 13 of 25 < 1 2 ... 11 12 13 14 15 ... 24 25 >


Moderator:  Lindsay Knowles 
Who's Online
0 registered (), 41 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
Blinky_Bill, Blue Sky, cmonrain, hydzy79, Simon Clarke, V8R
Forum Stats
29947 Members
32 Forums
24194 Topics
1529242 Posts

Max Online: 2985 @ 26/01/2019 12:05
Satellite Image