Environmental Mess

So it's been a while since I've posted my environmental freakishness. I've been busy. I like to do research before I go spouting off, so I don't look like a complete idiot, which takes time. Something of which I have little of anymore. sigh. One of these days I'll be independently wealthy and can do what I want, when I want :) Ahh, the American dream. ha.

Anyway, so I've recently heard of something that really got me ticked off. I don't even live there and I'm still mad about it. So, here it is. Down in Kemper, MS, a power plant is attempting to put in an IGCC plant to burn the lignite that is in the area. IGCC stands for Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle. It's newer technology, not quite perfected, but once it is, will be a blessing to the coal industry. It starts with gasifying coal, then removes impurities, then burns it. The process uses a lot less water than conventional pulverizing & burning of coal and carbon capture is a lot more feasible. If you want to learn more about it, google it, or look on the NETL website. This is beyond that. The area where they want the plant to "land" is home to 3000 acres of wetlands, almost 300,000 linear feet of stream and 20,000 acres of prime forest and small farms. All of which will be destroyed if this thing goes in. In order to put this plant in the company looked to the federal government for funding. In order to get those funds, the company had to complete and environmental impact statement. The record of decision for this project was.... wait for it.... finding of no significant impact, aka FONSI. uh, hmmm, really, you think so. But if you read the document, you have to wonder how they got that answer. The EIS states that the land disturbed would be 135-340 acres a year, on average 275, and after 3-5 years the amount of land destroyed would equal the amount of land restored. HA. Since I've done some research on that little area, i find that really hard to believe, since on average, the majority of the restoration projects don't occur, or they do not completely satisfy the terms of the original agreement. In other words, the restoration just doesn't cut it. And seriously, who the heck thinks they will be able to restore an area once they did a HUGE hole in the ground. really?! The EPA has said with the placement of the plant & the hole in the ground will adversely affect the stream ecosystem & hydrology. The downstream will change in that because of the removal of trees upstream, the water will warm. Uh, that means the species of fish changes too, along with all those other fun things you find in the stream. FEMA says that the plant COULD negatively impact the flood regime in the area. DUH!! Ya think? That's what we call covering your ass. Of course it will have an adverse affect on the flood regime in the area, they will be taking out wetlands. If you know anything about wetlands, they act as a sponge. The reason half the country floods now is because our dumbasses took out all the wetlands, so now the water just runs off, and doesn't soak up into anything. hmm, we are some smart people. sorry, got off on a tangent, can you tell this gets me fired up. So, now that we have discussed the flooding problem, lets move onto the wetlands. The wetland mitigation plan proposed by the company has been deemed insufficient. And lets get real here people. Mitigation really doesn't work. I've done the research on this, as much as we want to believe it works, in reality it doesn't. I haven't had time to read the huge document, over 200 pages, but I'm willing to bet that the mitigation is planned to take place far enough from the original location that it will no longer be beneficial to the area. Okay, so let me explain it like this. An area has native wetlands, that area benefits from flood control, in the very least. Now, remove the wetlands, the area becomes a sheet of concrete/dirt that the water just runs right off of. Flooding now is a major problem. The area of restoration, which didn't have wetlands before, but the ACOE (army corps of engineers) has deemed it suitable mitigation area (a bank), now has some measure of flood control. kinda. Studies, any long term ones (and since this whole mitigation banking thing is not old, long term is relative) indicate that the mitigation banks don't really work. The plants don't thrive, the water doesn't stay and the area returns to its former state. Okay, so that not such a bad thing really, since grassland or trees without construction is always a good thing. but. Now that the original wetland has been destroyed and the "new"wetland won't survive, we're down by 2 wetlands. Do you see what I mean? Now, onto the power company. They have "offered" the owners in the area lease agreements for their land. But they are trying to screw the residents. At least from what I've seen they are. They are leasing the land for 25 years, with the power company having the only option for ending the agreement. I'm guessing this is probably standard for power companies, since they don't want you to tell them to get the hell out when they see you destroying your once beautiful trees. but hey, whatever. They also retain ALL mineral rights to the property once the lease is over. Meaning, if anything is found once the lease is done, the power company gets it all. uh, yeah. They don't have to develop the land. They will pay a certain amount for leasing of the land, and if they get something out, then they'll pay royalties, or something like that (I was a little unclear on this part, but this is what I understood it as) but if they don't dig, and don't get anything out of the land, they don't pay anything other than the lease price. Sounds like a scam to me. Or at least a rip off. So now the Sierra Club is taking the DOE to court on something related to the EIS. I am unclear what it is, but I'm hoping they are able to keep it in court for a long time. This project is a disaster waiting to happen. Until we can figure out how to get coal outta the ground without destroying everything in sight we need to be careful where we get it from. We need better technology to burn the coal, since it is one of the biggest energy sources we have in the US, and we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. i guess that is the rant for the day. hope I gave you something to think about. have fun.

NEPA

I got this great new job. I'm working at a consulting firm and we do contract work for the government. Not a bad thing, maybe I'll even get to make a difference somewhere along the way. Small difference I'm sure :) So I'm working on NEPA stuff. That would be National Environmental Policy Act, for those non-governmental individuals. Something that I've wanted to point out is about the "categorical exclusion (cx)." Or even the idiots that try to use it to get around doing an Env. Assessment (EA) or an Env. Impact Statement (EIS). So, what is a CX? It's an "action that has been determined to have no significant effect on the human environment and for which there therefore, neither and EA nor and EIS is required." You can find that quote right in the NEPA document. So what the heck does that mean? Well, it means that there are things that federal agencies can do without having to fill out an EA or EIS. BUT, they have to report what they are doing, in the form of a CX. The stuff that falls into the CX category are things like routine maintenance, painting buildings, repairing roads, data gathering, etc. Ya get the drift? If there is any construction involved, generally an EA or and EIS is required. Now here's the fun part. There are several things that determine if and EA or EIS are needed, and believe it or not, human impact and historical impact are considered. Seriously!! If some federal agency or company paid by the federal gov't, wanted to put a new steam heating system down the middle of downtown Colonial Williamsburg, they'd have to fill out an EA or and EIS. Understand? If those same people wanted to put a wind farm in the middle of Central Park, NY they'd have to fill out an EA or EIS. And guess what? After that, the PEOPLE/PUBLIC get to comment on the proposed project. Yes, people, YOU have an impact on the crazy crap that the government does!! Okay, so I got a little off topic there. I was going to point out that some people try to get around the EA & EIS process cause they are lazy, or cheap, or both. An EA or EIS takes at least a year and can cost thousands of dollars, if not tens of thousands of dollars, depending on the project size. So there are companies that try to sneak things past the government checkpoints to get projects approved without appropriate study. And of course, I'm sure there are government jerks that pass things through as a CX cause they are getting a little something on the side. Which makes me sad. Cause really, what's more important? A little extra money now, or the fact that your kids generation will go extinct cause you pushed something through that you shouldn't have? hmmm, now there's a thought. But then, I guess, some people are just big jerks and care for nothing but themselves, so there isn't anything we can do.....

This place is SCREWED UP!!!

I'm taking one more class before I'm done with my degree. As I'm sure I've whined about! The class is about Environmental Impact Statements, and Assessments. Pretty much everything covered by the National Environmental Policy Act, aka NEPA. Anyway. I have to write a paper on wetland mitigation and what a joke it is. Well, actually I'm supposed to present both sides, and I will, cause I'm a geek and I like to get A's, so I'll give all the information I can find. HOWEVER!!!! All i've found up to this point is that it's more than a bad idea, it's a terrible one. jeez. I'm working on the paper and I come across a decision by the Supreme Court that was given in 2001. I can't believe I didn't look this up and get the entire scoop when I first heard about it. Too busy with other stuff I guess. Anyway, there is an area in Illinois that is habitat to a LARGE number of migratory birds. And some jackoff wants to, well it's probably already done, fill it..... with GARBAGE!!@!!!!!! Oh, yeah, like that is just a wonderful freaking idea. WHAT A BUNCH OF MORONS!!!!! Yes, lets put our CRAP in something that is actually beneficial to the environment. Granted, the only reason the area is there is becuase it was abandoned by some other idiot that dug it up for another purpose, which was a sand and gravel pit. BUTTTTTTTT. Since we have put everything in the animals way that we can think of, isn't it time we let them be and quit putting trash in their home. The reason it got taken to the supreme court was becuase the development company was denied permission to fill by the Army Corp of Engineers, the company said the engineers didn't have jurisdiction. The Supreme court agreed with the company. Thereby weakening Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Now 30%-60% of the nations wetlands are exposed to the threat of development. Cause people don't seem to think they are important and the place would look so much better with a dumbass development with cookie cutter ugly houses there. They don't realize that the reason the flooding that occurs on a yearly basis is so bad now is, um DUH, cause we've destroyed over 50% of the wetlands that used to cover the US. Probably more. And the reason our water quality sucks. yeah, same reason. Wetlands are a filters that clean our water. Remove the filter, GUESS WHAT HAPPENS?!!! I'm so sick about this, I can't believe the stupidity of some people. And it's not a minority, it's probably the majority of people that don't have a flippin clue and don't want to have a damn clue, cause that would mean they would have to change the way they do thing. Quit wasting energy, buying all kinds of worthless crap, and actually conserve. People just don't want to get it. They don't want to believe that we are slowly, BUT SURELY, killing our planet! They just want to go about their happy existance, living in their suburban hell and filling waterfowl habitat with garbage. what a bunch of morons. I'm still not done raving about this, I just can't seem to find anymore ways to call people idiots. so I'm done! for today.

The power of water

At the park in the area the sediment that has run off the land has settled in the lake. The Army Corps of Engineers has drained it and will be dredging it over the next year and a half.

Even though they have drained it there is still water flowing through the area. While the amount of water flowing through is small it's still pretty powerful. The lake was officially drained in September, this is the cutdown of the sediment since then. The pictures don't do it justice, the water has carried away over 2 feet of the sediment in the "river" area. The best part about this process is that it is going to cost the county over $3 million to dig out the lake. And on top of that, they haven't made any plans so that they won't have to dig it out again. "They" (city planners) do not seem to be concerned about controlling the problem, allowing for development to continue at an unabated rate. I'm still not sure why in the heck I'm getting into Environmental Engineering, I feel so inadequate, and that I will never be able to make a difference.

Hmmm, this keeps coming up? I WONDER WHY?!!

So, all I've heard today is how crappy this new health bill and how Obama doesn't know what the hell he is doing. And frankly it kinda pisses me off!! Look what the poor guy was handed!! Seriously, do you think he's going to be able to fix the horrendous mess that was left behind by idiot-boy in only 2 years?!! really, people, COME ON, use your heads for something besides a hat rack and read, investigate, quit believing the propaganda bullcrap that someone is feeding you. jeez!!! okay, i'm better now, enough of that tirade. So, like I've said, I was reading a great book, Hot Flat and Crowded, and something was mentioned in there about Bush Jr's idea that deficit's don't matter. Read the book, as well as The Pittsburgh Post Gazzette, they mentioned it in there, too. Anyway, it's the reason our country is in the trouble it is in today. Every other time we have gone to war, the American people have been taxed to pay for it. NOT THIS TIME, we've been in Iraq (for no reason) and Afghanastan for over 5 years, and our taxes have never gone up. Whos' paying for this? um, no one it seems, cause we are going further and further into debt to pay for it. Which would indicate to me, maybe we should leave. hmmm. (Now don't get me wrong, i love my service men & women and pray daily that they return safely. I just don't think they should have been sent over there in the frist place.) anyway. So, I found another place where the same thing is being said. "It's our OWN DAMN FAULT"!!!! (emphasis added by me, of course) Read this article and be enlightened. The great thing is, it's written by a financial guy, not an environmental freak, like me :) So, it's not just us environmentalists who think there is a serious problem. check it out.
www.dailyfinance.com The article is "OPEC's Business Model: Sit Back and Let the Money Flow In" by John Lazzaro. I tried to link it, but blogger won't let me today for some reason. I'll see what I can do later.

Packaging

One of the things I hate about ordering something on-line is the packaging. That actually goes with anything you get in the mail. They seem to have no rhyme nor reason as to why they package things the way they do. The UNITED STATES has one of the worst policies about recylcing packaging. Germany has one of the strictest. most of the European Union has some form of law that prevents wasteful packaging. Most of the packaging as well as the product in the box must be able to be returned or recylced. At least when it comes to major appliances, like TV's, refridgeratros, stoves, you get my drift. So from nike, I ordered the following, 2 shirts and 4 pairs of socks.

These are the items, rather thin little things, I think. Here are the two boxes that they came in. The picture doesn't do it justice. Just to see what would happen, I put EVERYTHING in the little box, including all the plastic that it was wrapped in, and the paperwork. It all fit rather well. There was even an inch or two on the top. So WHY did they have to back the blue shirt in the bigger box? That is my question! What a waste of resources! That huge box killed a couple hundred trees and for what?! ONE BLASTED shirt?!!! Give me a friggin' break people! This would be yet one more strike against Nike, in there already tarnished reputation. At least with me. Can't really stand anything they make. Anyway, I personally was able to reuse the box to pack away soem stuff that I needed to put in the attic, so the box didn't get wasted. But our town is famous for not recycling corrigated board (cardboard to all you non-recyclers). so that huge, UNNECESSARY box would have ended up in a landfill somewhere, if I hadn't reused it. Does anyone get this? jeez. maybe I should put this on my facebook page. who knows if a friend of a friend might see it, and be able to do something about it. hmm.

Interesting quotes

As I mentioned in the last post, I've been reading Thomas Friedman;s book "Hot, Flat & Crowded." I still maintain that this is an awesome book. As well as, a book that makes you actually think and go, "really? seriously? this is not good!" At least I would hope that someone reading it would actually think about what they are reading and maybe try to do something about it. Anyway, so the point of this post is that I have found several really great quotes in the book. These are quotes by big time people, that know what they are talking about when it comes to climate change. 1: By Ted Turner, founder of CNN; "We're too many people- that's why we have global warming. Too many people using TOO MUCH STUFF!" (emphasis is all mine, but he said that exact sentence) 2: From Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security, in Oakland, CA; "There are degrees of screwed. And no matter how bad it is, it could be worse or less worse. There is a huge difference between a two-foot sea level rise and a ten-foot. There is a big difference between a two-degree temperature rise and a five-degree temperature rise - and that is why thinking about manageable and unmanageable comes into play, becuase one scenario might kill ten million and one might kill a hundred million." love it, there are degrees of screwed, bet you didn't know that didja? And the best part it, there are people that don't believe ANY of this is going. Boy are they going to be surprised. Sometimes I wonder why I bother? Does anyone even care that we are slowly killing the only planet we have to live on? Oh, and that brings me to quote 3: from Bill Collins, one of the top climate modelers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California; "We're running an uncontrolled experiment on the only home we have." When I find more, I'll be sure to post them. I'm only a 1/4 of the way through the book. I do have a thesis to work on, ya know.