Letter to Editor by Curt Liska
During a recent interview I conducted, a claim was made that burning coal was the “right thing to do” for UK — a conclusion based solely on bottom line costs.
While the economics of renewable energy is an important factor to UK moving beyond coal, basing decisions entirely upon bottom line costs is apathetic to the context of the situation.
The context asserts burning coal is not only bad for our environment, but also for the health of our community. Respiratory diseases, autism and even deaths have been correlated to the air pollution from burning coal. Due to the high levels of mercury released into the environment, every stream in Kentucky has a fish consumption advisory warning.
But, if people insist on talking “bottom line,” let’s do so. Currently, UK’s heating and cooling bill burns a $50 million hole into the university’s budget, annually.
The environment around emissions regulations is one that is in considerable flux. If change looms on the horizon we may see increased emissions regulations, resulting in the need for UK to update their two coal-fired power plants that were grandfathered in under the Clean Air Act of 1976.
Estimates on bag houses alone average $20 million, which may not even solve the problem. If scrubbers need to be added as well, then we could see another $20 million price tag. And guess who will bear the brunt of these costs? However, there are ways around this.
Examples of renewable energy projects include Ball State’s geothermal project — one of the largest of its kind — that will heat and cool 40 buildings across 300 acres. The project, partly funded by the Department of Energy, includes a price tag of $70 million.
This will reduce Ball State’s emissions by 50 percent and eliminate the need of one coal fired power plant. The return on investment will exceed the initial investment after three years of full operation.
When considering bottom line costs, more than current financial aspects need to be included in the decision making process. UK’s coal-fired power plants are endangering the health of our community, while ensuring that tuition rates remain high for future students as the costs of burning coal continues to rise.
In the long run, moving UK beyond coal toward renewable energy sources is not only frugal for our future, but also ethically laudable.
Curt Liska
communications senior
I guess I do not understand because I support coal but could someone explain this to me. How is coal, if any solely responsible for elevated levels of mercury? Kentucky has roughly 40 coal producing counties and there sure as hell is a coal fired plant plant in every county. I am just using common sense. I am not a coal expert like Mr. Liska I am trying become educated by the anti coal activist. They are the true authorities on coal.
Pingback: Solar Tower – EnviroMission reduces green house CO2 emission « Home Repair – Maintaining and Remodeling Your House
Pingback: Long-term Outlook Needed with Coal « UK Beyond Coal Campaign
I am a little confused as to what it is you are asking exactly, however, I believe you are asking (a) how is coal responsible for elevated levels of mercury in the atmosphere, and (b) how can Kentucky be responsible for these elevated levels.
First, mercury enters the atmosphere in a variety of ways, some natural but many not. About 40% of mercury emissions come from coal fired power plants. Once in the air is transported naturally to rivers, lakes, and oceans. There it accumulates in fish, at concentrations recorded as high as 10 million times greater than that of the surrounding water. People are exposed to this mercury by eating fish with the greatest threat to woman and children as mercury, like lead, can cause brain damage. Scientist at the EPA have estimated that 1 in 6 children could be at risk of developmental disorders due to fetal exposure to mercury.
Second, there are about 1100 power plants responsible for 40% of mercury emissions. I don’t believe any one has claimed that Kentucky is responsible for all mercury emissions. But those power plants in the 40 coal producing counties are responsible for the fish consumption advisory warnings that are tagged on all Kentucky waterways.
You don’t have to be an expert to conduct due diligence on a subject before coming to a conclusion.