Per a recent study on campus, two-thirds of you are not aware that UK still operates four coal-powered boilers in two locations on campus, and even fewer are aware just how antiquated they are. Even for coal boilers, these things are dinosaurs — they were up and running before the Clean Air Act and were grandfathered in under EPA regulations, meaning that the emissions deemed unacceptable for other power plants are still allowed on campus.
The fact that the university still relies on such outdated technology is nothing short of ridiculous, and it’s past time we recognized the harmful effects this situation has for our campus, community and environment. A phenomenal new report from Dr. Shannon Bell’s sociology class details some of the harmful effects of these coal-fired power plants: soot collected from on-campus parking garages was found to contain arsenic, cadmium, cobalt and other carcinogens. Needless to say, this is not good.
While Kentucky is certainly a coal state (one need look no farther than the Wildcat Coal Lodge for proof of coal’s influence on our university), this historical legacy hardly precludes the need for modern-day solutions. The report suggests a number of steps that the university can take right away to begin addressing these issues, including signing a nationwide pledge to commit to more environmentally friendly policies (which almost 700 other universities have already done) and conducting feasibility studies to look at both alternative energy solutions and funding sources to make them happen.
It’s obviously unrealistic to think that the boilers could be switched off tomorrow, and no one is asking for that. But the process of finding alternative means for heating our homes and powering our campus is certainly a challenge we’re capable of meeting. Many schools in our region have already committed to substantially reducing their environmental impact and are leading the move toward a truly sustainable energy future. The University of Louisville has committed to reach climate neutrality by 2050 and already has stopped burning coal on campus. Ball State has found affordable ways to introduce geothermal power on campus, substantially reducing their energy consumption. If UK truly aspires to be a top-flight academic institution, how can we go on ignoring such a fundamental part of our world’s future when other schools in our region have proven that such solutions do exist?
The continued operation of these coal-fired boilers is antithetical to the nature of this university’s mission, which is supposed to be home to some of the brightest minds and most creative thinkers in the state. Given the overwhelming evidence against coal — the destruction of mountains, the rise of global temperatures, the release of these toxins into our environment — it’s beyond time we begin to consider the alternatives.
Sam Beavin is a chemistry sophomore. Email opinions@kykernel.com.
Informative, well balanced article. Looks like the UK students are much more forward thinking than the administration!
you dont want coal give back all the coal companys donations
but let me guess you still want coal money
@coalminer:
No, actually we don’t want coal, or the coal companies money. We protested against the University accepting it in the first place. Why do you defend an industry that destroys the environment of our state, that destroys the health of their employees, while the owners make enough money to go around building new dorms for basketball teams? I just don’t see why you care so much for an industry that doesn’t appear to care for you or your peers.
I, as a UK Student, am more worried about the second-hand smoke I have to breathe in on our “smoke-free campus.” I wonder how many students in that class are smokers. I’m not saying that coal is the best option, but it is really easy for people to say just get rid of it when they don’t know people who depend on coal to feed their families. Plus, it is the big cities in KY that benefit from all of the coal tax renevue. Trust me, they don’t send that money back to Appalachia. For as much coal as Appalachia produces it should be the richest region in the nation. I don’t think citizens of Lexington would be happy if they couldn’t use that money to fix the pot holes!
@Wildcat 19
As someone who is on campus just like you, I feel your hyperbole about second hand smoke is either a disingenuous shield from which to support the coal companies or a demonstration of your naive, paranoid thinking. Which could possibly be more harmful: Occasionally walking past a group of smokers in which you are exposed to second hand smoke for approximately 30 seconds, or living in an area where two, unregulated, unfiltered industrial power plants are pumping out known carcinogens that permeate the entire area 24/7. You also try to make an economic argument as if by not supporting coal, we are heartless to the plight of Appalachian families that are currently dependent on coal mining to provide for themselves. If an industry destroys the environment of the area in which it operates, and the health of it’s employees while extracting huge amounts of wealth from the region in which it operates, leaving it impoverished and scared, why should they be supported. What kills me is how you and so many other “Friends of Coal” conflate a scientifically sound attack on coal as a power source with a personal attack on yourselves, your heritage and/or livelihood. Where do you get this idea that it is the big cities that benefit from all the tax revenue from coal? When a pothole is filled in Lexington it is because I live, and work, and pay taxes in Lexington that fill the potholes. You want to blame the government, and us “big city, liberal, environmentalists” for extracting the wealth from Appalachia? I agree with you that the money from coal mining doesn’t go back into the Appalachian communities that the resources are extracted from, and I think it a criminal shame that as much valuable resources that are extracted from there, Appalachia remains one of the POOREST regions in the nation. But your idea that it is the government and the ‘big city folk’ that are responsible for this belies the ignorance inherent in your argument. The wealth is being extracted from the community by the very industry that you defend. An industry that takes the money and runs…to vaingloriously build unnecessary basketball team dorms, to enough political influence in this state to make sure that their business model will never be challenged, to send exorbitant profits to their out of state and even out of country owners, and to lobby and market themselves to people like you, so that the very people being screwed by them will be the very ones to defend their right to do so.
friendsofsol: scientific criticisms? lol, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. You talk about the UK plant releasing known carcinogens. True, but like all things, you’re exposed to harmful toxins, carcinogens (that shockingly aren’t from those evil dastardly coal plants) every single day. Amazing how we’re all not glowing or rotting in a ditch already.
Why? Because it’s all relative. Water becomes deadly if you drink too much of it, pro athletes, olympians and others have all died from ingesting too much water and over hydrating.
The point being, all the science that’s touted as showing the health consequences of coal have been debunked and shown to not only be vastly over blown, but full of holes and not effectively stand up to the scientific method. Coal is killing their employees and those around the industry and Americans all over the country, is little more than pushing the fear of “omg, coal is killing my family! We have to do something now!” lol
If you want to talk about the flow of capital and wages and “wealth” that is taken and generated from the coal mining process and the economic effects in Appalachia, there can be plenty to delve into and discuss and expand upon. Again, your stance makes you seem just as one sided about this subject as any other referencing coal.