Top Ten Reasons Coal is NOT dirty by WALT#1: “Clean” Coal Increases Rates of Disease

#1: “Clean” Coal Increases Rates of Disease

ALA reports vary greatly, their estimation of premature deaths range from 400 to 30,000. In reality they do not have a clue on the number of premature deaths if any are caused by burning coal. I seem to remember other past predictions, such as the ice age from the 70’s, global warming where millions of people living along the coastline would be homeless and the list goes on and on.
It is obvious that Hendryx is anti-coal, so any conclusions drawn from his so-called are bias in every meaning of the word. Hendryx admits in the Lexington Herald dated June 23 that “Technically it’s true that we don’t have direct environmental data that we can link in this study.” – WALT

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

Dirty Lie: Coal Combustion Waste Is Harmless

The coal industry and U.S. government would like you to believe that coal ash and other combustion byproducts are harmless–that they aren’t poisoning your drinking water, increasing your risk of reproductive disorders, birth defects, and cancers, and causing a multitude of other public and environmental health problems. The truth is that, by anyone’s definition, coal waste poses a monumental risk to your health and safety.

Coal ash contains concentrated levels of arsenic, chromium, lead, mercury, thorium and uranium. The waste from the combustion of coal also contains numerous toxic, radioactive and carcinogenic compounds. The cancer risks associated with exposure to coal combustion waste are equivalent to smoking a pack of cigarettes every day, breathing air with radon concentrations 20 times the level considered safe by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or drinking water polluted with 20 times the amount of vinyl chloride the EPA has set as the maximum contaminant level. The added cancer risk to kids who drink water contaminated with arsenic from coal combustion waste is 900 times higher than the EPA’s recommended level!

Despite the rhetoric of the coal industry’s high-paid spin doctors, the truth is U.S. coal-fired power plants generate more than 120 million tons of this so-called harmless solid waste every year, enough to fill a million railroad cars–a toxic train 9,600 miles long that would stretch between New York City and Los Angeles 3.5 times. All aboard!

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Eco Comedy, Opinion. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Top Ten Reasons Coal is NOT dirty by WALT#1: “Clean” Coal Increases Rates of Disease

  1. Citizen Harry says:

    Walt, you actually said that “why don’t we clean up all the streams” while you were ranting about how MTR doesn’t hurt them, and were only trickles that happened when it rained. I can’t figure out if you are actually turning “enviro”, or just plain “stupido”. Probably the latter, given all your other posts.

  2. Walt says:

    Harry you’re back, I was beginning to wonder if Rich and I were the only ones that frequent this site. Before you call anyone stupid, you should know what you’re talking about or maybe you should take enviro 101 “Lies we can spread about the coal industry”. FYI, enviro’s have always claimed that gullies which only carry water during rain events should be classified as a stream.

    You are right you’re probably not a genuine enviro, you lean more toward the anti coal loons.

  3. Citizen Harry says:

    FYI: a gully that carry’s water during rain events dumps directly into streams, rivers and the water table. But why would you be worried about a small gully once the entire forest, natural rock walls, and the mountain itself has been decimated? No big deal, right Walt? Hell, you can build a parking lot on it, and make your own concrete gullies around it for the future. And that’s right, there’s no pollution involved, so who cares if the rain washes all those imaginary pollutants down the mountain in whatever fashion is left. Hey, just like California we can get some good mud slides going! But won’t that affect all those people that are clamoring to live on the MTR sites after the coal companies are done with them? Right? It will all be flat so why worry about runoff?

    • Walt says:

      Huh??? A little advice Harry, when you get all worked up, just step back think about what you want to say and then respond.

  4. Jim says:

    Walt,
    I know lot’s of people who watch this blog, just so they can get a good look at what you say. It’s kind of like having a bad itch that won’t go away, you still have to scratch it. Don’t feel smug about being the only idiot that’s willing to humiliate himself in print. My friends don’t feel the need to argue with someone who’s moral fiber is aligned with very little social or natural world conscience, or with someone who is so full of trying to spread disharmony with hurtful speech. No one in his right mind would think that MTR is a good thing. I agree with the old posts that implied that you’re probably paid by King Coal.

    I can understand the stuff you write over and over and over again about keeping the lights on, etc. But this blog is about MTR, and there is absolutely no reason for it. You always skirt the issue of why it’s ok to pollute water, destroy forests, wildlife, and reduce the tops of beautiful peaks of Gods Creation into ugly pits of hell.

    Keep up putting your ideas down here! It helps to actually hear the voice of coal. It’s just as black, and at least we can keep our eyes on what lurks in the shadows. People who think like you.
    – Jim Svenson

    • Walt says:

      And you say that I spread hurtful speech, if you look close enough you will see that the spiteful dialog began with others first, now you come on here calling me “idiot”, “not in my right mind” etc. as my grandfather said “that’s like the pot calling kettle black isn’t it”.

      It appears you would rather align yourself, with those that spread exaggerated and misleading information to those that have little or no knowledge of our industry yes I can see where you have a considerable amount of moral fiber.

      For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone would be willing to toss aside nearly half of the country’s energy source, when there is no viable alternative to replace it with. Can you explain your logic?

      Am I paid by the coal industry? I only wish, but no I do this on my own time with no benefits from anyone.

      If you were so concerned about water pollution, then why don’t you show the same concern about raw sewage being dumped directly into local streams? Why don’t you show the same outrage with highway construction, or property development? Did you know that for every one mile of four-lane highway built in the mountain areas of Appalachia an average of 32 acres of surface land is disturbed (Virginia Department of Transportation) including significant amount of streams being filled in? What is the difference between surface mining and road construction? One glaring difference is that surface mines reclaim their highwalls, whereas highway construction does not. Where’s the outrage for this? I can honestly say I have never seen one environmental group protest a highway construction job the way they protest coal mining permits. Why do these limits only apply to Appalachia mines and not those located in Illinois, Indiana and out West? If you were truly concerned about water quality then you would be going after everyone and not just the Appalachian coal industry.

      It looks like your true colors are being exposed.

  5. Admin says:

    Hey Walt, this is the admin of this blog, Rich.
    I guess you’ve asked me enough times that I should reply in that the stats show that a lot of people read this blog every day. I think people are tired of arguing with you about the same old things you bring up every time, but I don’t know for sure.

    Environmentalists care about the earth, each other, and want to speak out to encourage a movement to change stuff like water pollution, air pollution, the destruction of the natural environment etc.

    Yes, us “environs” live in this world, and turn our lights on. My computer is powered up now, obviously. The difference I think between me and you, is that I believe there is a better way, and that big dollar concerns keep it from happening. We’ve had ways of getting away from fossil fuels for many, many years, but it isn’t allowed to happen because it’s existence makes too many powerful people too much money. Heck, Exxon invests most of it’s money outside of our country, and owns subsidiaries in the Bahamas, Cayman Islands, and Bermuda to shelter their dealings in Angola, Azerbaijan and Abu Dhabi. But that’s the American Way anymore. Get what you can, as fast as you can, without concern about the future. That’s why we “environs” are trying to say something about what we feel is wrong with the system as it exists now. The problem is we don’t have Trillions of dollars of our own to throw at the problem.

    I completely agree with you that there are many, many things that “Enviros” should be concerned about, and believe me, we are. This blog is concerned with just one of the crimes against nature we all have to deal with, so trying to switch our focus won’t work here.

    I have personal experience with seeing the depths of inhuman behavior that politicians, and CEO’s of big money concerns wreak on us. You seem to know all about it, and bring up other issues.

    Why you’re unconcerned with the way things are is beyond me. You are always debunking everything with numbers, statistics, and everything. But I have to say that it doesn’t concern me exactly how many tons of dynamite is being used to blow up the Appalachians, just that it’s happening at all. I grew up in Pennsylvania, and if a coal company came to “my” mountain that I looked at outside of my window for my entire youth, and decided that they would blow it up for the coal seams, I’d fight to keep it from happening. You obviously don’t live in a mountain neighborhood of where this is happening, or I think you’d be concerned also, and not write it off as something we all should just live with.

    So I guess what I’m saying here is that this blog is concerned with talking about the issue of moving towards new energy policies, and stopping outright rape of the environment right now. If you want to discuss how to move ahead and change the reason that politicians are more concerned with their jobs than their respective states, I’m sure we’d be all ears. But listening to you rant and rave about how we’re all bad people, stupid and wrong about the way we feel doesn’t probably stir too much excitement to have a dialogue with you.

    I don’t look forward to your reply that tells me how wrong I am about you, or why my own feelings about MTR are so outrageous, or how I am a hypocrite. But I’ll still continue to approve your comments.
    Rich

  6. Citizen Harry says:

    What he said…
    -Citizen Harry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s