Tag Archives: Coal

Georgia Power Away from Coal?

Walter Jones writes about how Georgia Power aims to rely less on coal:
For years, solar and wind were described as unsuited for the South’s weather conditions and geography, although Georgia Power is now taking another look at them in this year’s version of it’s integrated-resource plan, a document it updates every three years.
I suppose late is better than never. However, Georgia Power is turning more to nuclear and natural gas.

But why is it turning away from coal at all?

Stricter environmental regulations are also changing the economics of coal. Even without a “carbon tax” or “cap and trade” passing in Congress, the federal government is stepping up its existing authority over power plants. And an ongoing court case related to a proposed power plant owned by an independent company, Longleaf, could open the door in Georgia to regulation of carbon dioxide emissions. Any combination of those factors could lead regulators to force Georgia Power to shut down more of its older coal plants.

“The financial outlook for coal is grim,” Thompson said.

People are finally wising up that coal is bad for us, and the company sees that affecting its bottom line.

-jsq

Biomass Plant Hearing Today

You can ask questions and expect answers.

The Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Environmental Protection Division (EPD) Air Protection Branch issued a Press Release on April 12, 2010 announcing a meeting:

EPD will hold a question and-answer (Q&A) session and a public hearing on Tuesday, April 27, from 6:30 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. in the multipurpose room in the Valdosta City Hall Annex. The city hall annex is located at 300 N. Lee Street.
The subject is “on Proposed Biomass-Fired Power Plant Application Submitted by WireGrass Power, LLC”

You can also submit questions and comments in writing: Continue reading →

Encouraging New Energy Production Via Solar

While Georgia did little to deploy renewable energy, Texas has almost doubled its renewable energy source from 2004 to 2006:

How did Texas do that, and how can Valdosta and Lowndes County help Georgia catch up?

Some years back, Austin, Texas, which has been growing rapidly for decades, needed to find a way to produce more energy. Building a coal plant was not really an option for a city that had long sold itself as a home of green industry. Nuclear had a bad taste because in the 1980s Austin had been an investor in the South Texas Nuclear project, which had been late, over budget, never produced what it was supposed to, and had many political problems. So Austin settled on a new plan: instead of spending big bucks to build a dirty coal plant, use the same money to give rebates to homeowners and businesses for installing solar power. Big rebates: 75%, the largest, and among the first in the country. This made perfect economic sense, producing as much new energy as needed, without coal or nuclear, and distributed where it was needed.

Now Austin is trying a new wrinkle:

The Austin, Texas, city council has approved Austin Energy’s solar incentive program, which includes a new approach for commercial, multifamily and nonprofit customers. The new approach saves $2.4 million over the life of the program, according to the utility.
Continue reading →

Germany: As much new solar power as 3 large coal or nuclear plants

Germany leads the world in solar installation, according to Erik Kirschbaum in Reuters 23 Nov 2009:
Germany, the world’s leader in photovoltaic which turns sunlight into electricity, had 5.3 GW installed at the end of 2008, including a previous record 1.6 GW added in 2008.

That was about a third of the world’s total of 15 GW. Three GW installed this year would produce as much power as three large coal-burning plants or three nuclear power plants.

Remember, Stuttgart gets about as much sunlight as Pittsburgh. And that’s in the sunny south of Germany. Georgia gets as much sunlight as Cyprus in the Mediterranean or Algiers in Africa.

No New Coal Needed in Southeast: GaTech Study

The southeast doesn't need new coal plants for additional energy, because we can increase energy efficiency instead:
An aggressive strategy to replace aging equipment with more energy efficient products throughout the South would reduce the need to build more coal-fired power plants in the region through 2020, according to a Georgia Tech study released Monday. Advocates are taking the study, funded by the Energy Foundation and the Turner Foundation, to state legislators and regulatory agencies hoping it will bolster their calls for more incentives for energy efficient products as an alternative to new power plants.

“We’re not saying that new plants aren’t needed, because new plants can replace old clunkers that need to be replaced,” said Marilyn Brown, a Georgia Tech professor who co-authored the report. “But we don’t need to build for an expanded demand if the Southern states would begin to launch energy efficient programs.”

This isn't enough to decommission the existing coal plants; for that we'll need other sources of energy. But it's a step in the right direction.

Biomass: Twice the CO2 of Coal?

Dr. Thomas D. Bussing, Ph.D., former mayor of Gainesville, Florida, is among the numerous signatories of a Letter to the U.S. Senate from Environmental Groups (including SAFE) Regarding Biomass, which says in part:
When compared to coal, per megawatt, this burning [biomass and the like] emits 1.5 times the carbon dioxide (CO2), 1.5 times the carbon monoxide (CO, a toxic air pollutant), and as much particulate matter.
Georgia already has the country’s dirtiest coal plant, at Juliette, near Macon. Do we need still more CO2?

Maybe the Wiregrass biomass plant planned for Valdosta is somehow more efficient than the one near Gainesville. If so, it would be good to hear about that; I don’t recall the topic coming up at the Lowndes County Commission meeting in which this plant was approved.

Dr. Bussing elaborated in a recent letter:

The fallacy is in believing that plants take up all CO2 emissions. In fact plants absorb some, the ocean absorbs more (and as a consequence is becoming more acidic by the year), but a portion just stays and builds up in the atmosphere. That buildup is associated with global warming, and it doesn’t matter if the CO2 comes from coal, gas or biomass.
Thanks to Seth R. Gunning for bringing this up.