EC December 2010

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

9 participants
31 discussions

Fwd: NEWS ADVISORY: U.S. Renewables Now Neck-in-Neck with Nuclear Power
by James Kotcon 27 Dec '10

27 Dec '10

Really interesting data on US energy consumption. Looks like biomass is one of the big sectors, but I suspect that the majority of that is ethanol and biodiesel. The key line is: “Members of the incoming Congress are proposing to slash cost-effective funding for rapidly expanding renewable energy technologies while foolishly plowing ever-more federal dollars into the nuclear power black hole,” said Ken Bossong, Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign. “The numbers clearly show this would be betting on the obvious loser while ignoring the clearly emerging winner in the energy race.” JBK >>> Ken Bossong <sun-day-campaign(a)hotmail.com> 12/27/2010 7:08 AM >>> SUN DAY CAMPAIGN 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite #340; Takoma Park, MD 20912 301-270-6477 x.11 sun-day-campaign(a)hotmail.com News Advisory RENEWABLE ENERGY NECK-IN-NECK WITH NUCLEAR POWER EACH NOW PROVIDE 11% OF DOMESTIC ENERGY PRODUCTION BUT NON-HYDRO RENEWABLES GROW 11.5% WHILE NUCLEAR OUTPUT DROPS For Immediate Release: December 27, 2010 Contact: Ken Bossong, 301-270-6477 x.11 Washington DC -- According to the most recent issue of the "Monthly Energy Review" by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), "nuclear electric power accounted for 11% of primary energy production and renewable energy accounted for 11% of primary energy production" during the first nine months of 2010 (the most recent period for which data have been released). More specifically, renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass/biofuels, geothermal, solar, water, and wind) accounted for 10.9% of domestic energy production and increased by 5.7% compared to the same period in 2009. Meanwhile, nuclear power accounted for 11.4% of domestic energy production but provided 0.5% less energy than a year earlier. Among the renewable energy sources, biomass and biofuels accounted for 51.95%, hydropower for 31.50%, wind for 10.52%, geothermal for 4.65%, and solar for 1.38%. Comparing the first three-quarters of 2010 against the same period in 2009, hydropower declined by 5.2% but geothermal expanded by 1.8%, solar grew by 2.4%, biomass/biofuels increased by 10.0%, and wind grew by 26.7%; combined, non-hydro renewables expanded by 11.5%. Preliminary data also show that fossil fuels accounted for 78% of primary energy production. Overall, U.S. primary energy production rose by 2% compared with the first nine months of 2009. “Members of the incoming Congress are proposing to slash cost-effective funding for rapidly expanding renewable energy technologies while foolishly plowing ever-more federal dollars into the nuclear power black hole,” said Ken Bossong, Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign. “The numbers clearly show this would be betting on the obvious loser while ignoring the clearly emerging winner in the energy race.” And according to EIA’s latest "Electric Power Monthly," renewable energy sources accounted for 10.18% of U.S. electrical generation during the first three-quarters of 2010. Compared to the same period in 2009, renewables - including hydropower - grew by 2.2%. While conventional hydropower dropped by 5.2%, non-hydro renewable used in electrical generation expanded by 16.8% with geothermal growing by 4.9%, biomass by 5.5%, wind by 27.3%, and solar by 47.1%. Non-hydro renewables accounted for 3.9% of total electrical generation from January 1 - September 30, 2010 -- up from 3.5% the year before. # # # # # # # # The U.S. Energy Information Administration released its most recent "Monthly Energy Review" on December 22, 2010. It can be found at: http://www.eia.gov/emeu/mer/overview.html. The relevant charts from which the data above are extrapolated are Tables 1.1 and 1.2. EIA released its most recent "Electric Power Monthly" on December 17, 2010; see: http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html. The relevant charts are Tables ES1.A and ES1.B. The quotation in the first paragraph of this release was originally posted by the EIA on its web page accompanying the release of the “Monthly Energy Review” but has since been removed without explanation. The original EIA posting can be found at the following two sites: http://ehsmanager.blogspot.com/2010/12/eias-primary-report-of-recent-energy… http://www.akbizmag.com/from-our-elected-officials.html. ======================= The SUN DAY Campaign is a non-profit research and educational organization founded in 1993 to promote sustainable energy technologies as cost-effective alternatives to nuclear power and fossil fuels.

1 0

Fwd: DEP Public Notice - County - Kanawha - Notice of Intent to Approve Permi...
by Duane330＠aol.com 27 Dec '10

27 Dec '10

Forwarded is the permit announcement for the Emerald Bilfuels plant set for Institute, WV in the Kanawha River valley.

1 0

Fwd: WVNS story: EPA Starts Clean Air Act Process for Controlling Greenhouse Gases
by Paul Wilson 27 Dec '10

27 Dec '10

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Public News Service <wvns(a)newsservice.org> Date: Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 8:50 AM Subject: WVNS story: EPA Starts Clean Air Act Process for Controlling Greenhouse Gases To: PaulWilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> Public News Service-WV December 24, 2010 EPA Starts Clean Air Act Process for Controlling Greenhouse Gases CHARLESTON, W.Va. - It's a move that promises to have quite an impact on West Virginia. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is starting the process under the Clean Air Act for controlling greenhouse gas emissions by the nation's 500 fossil fuel power plants. Advocates of the EPA action say it will create new jobs for West Virginians, but others are apprehensive about the effect on the state's coal industry. The assistant EPA administrator for air and radiation, Gina McCarthy, says it's too early to say much about what EPA's rules will look like, but says the agency will start by encouraging a phase-in of cost-effective technologies under already well-established Clean Air Act programs. "You will see measurable reduction. This is where there are the most significant and reasonable opportunities for us to have pollution reduction, and also to provide certainty to these industries." McCarthy says the agency will be flexible in how the rules will be applied, and will not place an overall cap on how much carbon utilities can emit. Pat Hemlipp is a spokesman for American Electric Power (AEP), one of the nation's largest consumers of coal. AEP supported cap-and-trade, which was blocked by Republicans in the Senate. He praises the EPA's approach, with reservations. "Especially, their recognition that any program should be as flexible as possible. But we remain concerned that the Clean Air Act is going to constrain how flexible the agency can be, because the Clean Air Act does not allow much flexibility." Critics of climate change regulations say they will damage the coal and electricity industries in West Virginia, and have questioned how expensive control technologies will be. McCarthy insists the technologies are ready and will be good for jobs in those areas. "They will be making investments in new control technologies, investments that will not only sustain jobs in the U.S. but actually grow jobs in the U.S." The rules will be drafted with industry input and public comments, and will start with new power plants or plants undergoing major changes. Click here to view this story on the Public News Service RSS site and access an audio version of this and other stories: http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/17660-1<http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/17660-1> --- To be removed from this list please send an e-mail to remove(a)publicnewsservice.org <remove(a)publicnewsservice.org?subject=remove>and put the word "remove" in the subject line. -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

1 0

New Coal-To-Liquids proposal in WV
by James Kotcon 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

I just saw this. An effort to get a CTL plant onto Weirton's property would be politically difficult to oppose. Weirton Steel has long had a history of support form organized labor in WV, and therefore has had political support that few industries would likely see. Just the name alone will create support for any proposal to bring back those jobs. This does not appear to be a well-funded proposition, yet. If the Steelworkers have signed on, that will create some momentum, and minimize labor conflicts. And if the Governor backs it, look for state subsidies. jim Kotcon >From the Wheeling (WV) News-Register, Dec. 10, 2010. Available at: http://www.news-register.net/page/content.detail/id/549692/Thousands-of-Job… Thousands of Jobs May Be on the Way Officials gather to discuss coal-to-liquids plant December 10, 2010 - By IAN HICKS Major players in a proposed coal-to-liquids plant say they are on the verge of resurrecting Weirton's industrial heritage and putting more than 1,000 people to work in the city. Officials with Weirton Energy, the company seeking to build the faculty, met with acting Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin and Delegate Pat McGeehan, R-Hancock, in Wheeling Thursday to discuss the project. If all goes according to investors' plans, such a plant could be operational within 18 months and reach full capacity in two to three years. According to Weirton Energy's chief engineer, Al Norman, the plant would represent a capital investment of about $2 billion and bring at least 1,100 jobs to the city, with the potential for that figure to top 3,000 in the future. The company has reached an agreement in principle to establish an "amalgamated" labor union under the current United Steelworkers Local 2911, according to union President Mark Glyptis. McGeehan said after meeting with Tomblin, he believes the governor is solidly behind the initiative. Tomblin's support, he said, will be key in clearing the final hurdle for this proposal to become reality - land acquisition. Weirton Energy wants to build the plant on property presently held by steelmaker ArcelorMittal. Though some of the facilities haven't been used since the late 1960s, the Luxembourg-based company has been reluctant to part with the property. Weirton Energy's attorney, Robert D'Anniballe, said the company is "exploring best opportunities" to acquire the land, though he did not go into detail regarding those opportunities. Company officials would not confirm they are seeking to garner the property through eminent domain; however, the Weirton Redevelopment Authority at an August meeting discussed the possibility of attempting to exercise that power on ArcelorMittal's properties at the north end of town. No specific development projects were discussed at that meeting. Norman called the mill property an "industrial graveyard" for which cleanup costs likely will top $100 million. ArcelorMittal is "faced with the immediate cleanup of this property if that plant shuts down," he said. However, Norman said Weirton Energy's plan would absolve the steel company from any environmental cleanup obligations and place that burden squarely on his company. He estimated it could save ArcelorMittal $30 million in annual operation costs. Norbert Keilbach, Weirton Energy's chairman of the board and chief executive officer, said the Weirton location is perfect because many of the components needed already are in place, including infrastructure, transportation and "a ready-made pool of competent labor and experienced labor." A stipulation of the union's contract with ArcelorMittal prevents the sale of those properties without union approval. Glyptis said he is in full support of the project, noting he would prefer the property be used in such a manner rather than sold piecemeal to businesses that rely on low-wage labor. Keilbach said many of the jobs to be created would pay $100,000 or more annually. McGeehan, who has made bringing a coal-to-liquids plant to Hancock County a priority during his term as a legislator, said industry has always been crucial to the area and it must be a part of the future for the Ohio Valley to thrive. "We can't afford to miss this opportunity, because there's never going to be another one like it," said McGeehan.

2 1

Fw: Updated Natural Gas Talking Points
by Jim Sconyers 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

Updated Sierra Club position FYI. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- We have posted some updated natural gas reform talking points on Clubhouse. Thank you to the Activist Network team members that helped provide feedback. http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/communications/talking-points/energy/natura… Let me know if you have trouble accessing these. -- Oliver Bernstein Senior Communications Strategist Sierra Club Phone: 512.477.2152 Cell: 512.289.8618

1 0

Fw: Institute for Southern Studies Report: Two years after Tennessee coal ash disaster, still waiting for federal oversight
by Jim Sconyers 22 Dec '10

22 Dec '10

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Emily Enderle <eenderle(a)EARTHJUSTICE.ORG> To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Wed, December 22, 2010 3:32:15 PM Subject: Institute for Southern Studies Report: Two years after Tennessee coal ash disaster, still waiting for federal oversight great article with an excellent table. SPECIAL REPORT: Two years after Tennessee coal ash disaster, still waiting for federal oversight By Sue Sturgis Today marks two years since a coal ash impoundment collapsed at the Tennessee Valley Authority's Kingston power plant in eastern Tennessee, sending a billion-gallon tidal wave of toxic waste into a nearby community and rivers. The disaster also pushed the issue of coal ash regulation into the public policy spotlight, with incoming Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson vowing to replace the existing patchwork of weak state regulations with federal rules to prevent a similar disaster in the future. But on the second anniversary of the Kingston spill, the American public is still waiting for federal protections from the hazards of coal ash -- with no idea when those might be in place. This week the EPA released its upcoming regulatory agenda, which addresses the final rulemaking for coal ash. The agenda classes the coal ash rule as a "long-term action," with the date of the final release "to be determined." "We are two years out from this environmental disaster with no certainty on when the final rules will be published," said Lisa Evans, an attorney with the nonprofit environmental law firm Earthjustice. "We don't think this is a good place to be." Following the Kingston disaster, EPA set out to count the number of coal ash dumps, tallying more than 600 impoundments and similar units at coal-fired power plants nationwide. More than half of those that have been rated are classed as high or significant hazards, meaning a failure could kill people or cause extensive property damage. But coal ash doesn't present a hazard only when impoundments collapse: It's been linked to 137 cases of environmental contamination in 34 states, with impoundments and other dumpsites leaching toxins to groundwater. An EPA risk assessment [pdf] found that people who live near coal ash impoundments and drink from wells have as much as a 1 in 50 chance of getting cancer due to arsenic contamination -- 1,800 times EPA's regulatory limit. Coal ash also contains other toxins including lead, thallium and radioactive elements. In May of this year, after a long delay and heavy lobbying by industry interests, the agency took the unusual step of releasing not one but two proposals for regulating coal ash. The stricter version favored by public health and environmental advocates would regulate coal ash as a special waste under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which governs hazardous waste. The other option embraced by the utility industry would treat coal ash like ordinary solid waste under RCRA Subtitle D. Under the stricter Subtitle C option, EPA has enforcement authority and the regulations are mandatory in every state. But under the weaker Subtitle D approach, EPA would issue "guidelines" that are not federally enforceable -- and that states may choose not to adopt. A recent EPA analysis identified 30 states that it predicts would not adopt the federal guidelines as law -- including disaster-stricken Tennessee. The following chart taken from comments on the proposed rules [pdf] by an alliance of environmental groups lists the coal-ash generating states that EPA expects would and would not adopt Subtitle D guidelines: The choice between Subtitle C and D also has significant environmental justice implications, since an analysis by the same environmental organizations found that communities near coal plants in the states that are not expected to implement the Subtitle D guidelines are more likely to be impoverished, non-white and to have a larger-than-average child population. "In other words," the groups noted in their comments, "a weak EPA rule would apply new safeguards for coal ash regulation in states where coal ash presents a relatively small, or even non-existent, environmental justice problem, while failing to add protections in states where environmental justice communities are heavily impacted by coal ash disposal." Another Kingston spill highlights hazards Following the release of the proposed rules, the EPA held seven public hearings around the country to collect comments. It also extended the comment period from August to November. The agency collected more than 400,000 comments -- an unusually high number that shows the public's intense interest in the issue. The continuing risk from the lack of strict federal oversight was underscored last week when another impoundment at TVA's Kingston plant -- this one holding a type of coal ash waste commonly used to make drywall -- sprung a leak into the nearby Emory River, which was devastated by the 2008 spill. TVA has plugged the leak but says it still does not know the exact cause. Following the discovery of the leak by TVA, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation ordered the utility to install a synthetic liner in the impoundment, which is now lined only with clay. But Evans questions why TDEC didn't require TVA to install a liner when the impoundment was constructed a year ago -- and why the agency has not imposed a Clean Water Act fine for the discharge into the Emory. The latest leak at the Kingston plant rattled residents of the nearby Swan Pond community, where the 2008 disaster damaged 42 homes and left people suffering from respiratory and other health problems. About 500 million gallons of spilled coal ash remains in the area today, with cleanup ongoing and expected to take another three years. "Are we really safe? Really?" Swan Pond resident Sarah McCoin asked the Chattanooga Times Free Press. Some of the affected residents filed lawsuits over the 2008 disaster. While about 90 suits have been dropped or dismissed, another 55 are pending in federal court in Knoxville, Tenn., with trials slated to start late next year. While TVA's board adopted a policy last year to convert all of its wet coal ash ponds to dry storage, that's expected to take at least a decade. In the meantime, Evans and other environmental advocates are hoping that EPA will release the final coal ash rule by the end of 2011. Once the federal rules are in place, states have as long as two years to revamp their own rules to comply with the new requirements. Some observers have noted that the closer we get to the 2012 election, the harder it will be for the Obama administration to buck the electric utility industry, which objects to strict regulation as too costly. The industry has considerable political clout, having invested more than $16.2 million in the 2010 federal election cycle alone, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. "Delay does not work in our favor," Evans said. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message to: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

Fw: From today's Knoxville News Sentinal
by Jim Sconyers 22 Dec '10

22 Dec '10

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Joshua Ulan Galperin <josh(a)CLEANENERGY.ORG> To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Wed, December 22, 2010 10:25:16 AM Subject: From today's Knoxville News Sentinal Josh Galperin Policy Analyst and Research Attorney Southern Alliance for Clean Energy PO Box 1842 Knoxville, TN 37901 (O) 865.637.6055 X 23 (F) 865.524.4479 josh(a)cleanenergy.org www.cleanenergy.org <http://www.cleanenergy.org/> Please think about the environment before printing this email. CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION / WORK PRODUCT: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to whom it is addressed, and may contain privileged and confidential attorney-client communications and/or confidential attorney work product. If you receive this message in error, please send a reply e-mail to the sender and delete the material from any and all computers. Unintended transmissions shall not constitute waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message to: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

Two News Items of interest to Mon river watershed denizens.
by James Kotcon 21 Dec '10

21 Dec '10

>From Don Strimbeck's daily news summary. JBK Grants offered to study impact of Marcellus shale drilling By Kim Leonard PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW Tuesday, December 21, 2010 The Colcom Foundation is offering nonprofit organizations $1 million in grants to study Marcellus shale development, and provide lessons and advice about environmentally sound natural gas drilling practices. Amid controversy and mixed messages about the effects of well-drilling, "Who can you trust? There is a great deal at stake," said John F. Rohe, vice president of philanthropy for the Downtown-based foundation that focuses on conservation and the effects of overpopulation. Colcom announced its Marcellus Environmental Fund on Monday to address the "accelerating environmental impact" of drillers boring into the deep Marcellus layer and fracturing shale to extract gas. "The foundation would like to see a higher sense of trustworthiness and integrity" as drilling expands, Rohe said. The main question is whether the industry follows safe practices, or whether Western Pennsylvania might repeat one of its past mistakes, such as uncontrolled coal mining, he said. Colcom has funded cleanups of old mining sites. Applications can be submitted until Jan. 14 for grants to be given out in February. A second round of proposals is due March 14, for awards to be distributed in May. The foundation, created by the late Cordelia Scaife May, hasn't specified a number of grants, or amounts to be given out. Money will go toward public education, environmental monitoring and identifying best practices for the industry, for example. "This is not designed to be anti-drilling," Rohe said of the grants. "Possibly, the primary beneficiaries of this fund are the responsible drillers." Kathryn Z. Klaber, executive director of drilling industry trade group the Marcellus Shale Coalition, said yesterday the industry "recognizes that an educated citizen and landowner are the best partners in developing this clean-burning, job-creating resource." Working with regulators and others, gas drillers have "enhanced well-casing standards to protect drinking water and backed a permitting fees increase, enabling DEP to hire additional inspectors at no cost to the taxpayer. To the degree that other organizations seek to contribute to this fact-based debate, we encourage that." Kim Leonard can be reached at kleonard(a)tribweb.com or 412-380-5606. Pittsburgh Tribune Review Chemical plant courted for West Virginia By Bloomberg News Tuesday, December 21, 2010 Bayer AG, the world's largest maker of polyurethane, is trying to persuade potential investors to build a chemical plant on company sites in West Virginia using ethane from adjacent shale-gas deposits. The Leverkusen, Germany-based company is in talks to lease or sell unused parts of two sites covering 1,460 acres for construction of a plant known as a cracker, Bryan Iams, a spokesman for Bayer in Pittsburgh, said yesterday. The cracker would convert ethane into ethylene, a key ingredient in plastics such as polyethylene. The Bayer properties sit atop the Marcellus shale formation, which according to Energy Department estimates is the largest known U.S. gas field. New drilling techniques are boosting production from shale formations, keeping U.S. prices of natural-gas low relative to oil. That's prompted chemical makers Dow Chemical Co., Eastman Chemical Co. and Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. to use more gas as a raw material. Chevron Phillips received preliminary approval last month from Texas regulators to reopen a cracker shut in 2008 at its Sweeny complex, according to a filing on the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's website. Eastman is opening a mothballed cracker in Longview, Texas, because it says low-cost gas has made the United States more competitive. Dow plans to use 30 percent more ethane, a component of natural gas, at its Gulf Coast crackers. "The burning question is what to do with all the ethane coming out of the Marcellus shale," said John Schirra, a senior account manager at U.S. chemical maker Ashland Inc. The Marcellus formation in Western Pennsylvania and northern West Virginia is unusually rich in natural-gas liquids including ethane, said Dennis Yablonsky, chief executive officer of the Allegheny Conference, a Pittsburgh-based economic development group. The region has no crackers, he said. "We are unabashedly trying to attract" the chemical industry, Yablonsky said in a telephone interview. "We have had positive feedback that the general premise does make sense." Proposals for getting Marcellus gas to the chemical industry involve piping it to crackers on the Gulf Coast, where the country's chemical industry is concentrated. Pittsburgh Chemical Day, an annual conference that brings together companies such as Bayer, Eastman and PPG Industries Inc., will focus its May 10 event on using Marcellus shale gas to bolster investment in the regional chemical industry, said Schirra, an organizer of the meeting. Bayer's sites in New Martinsville and Institute, W.Va., have access to rail, water and road transportation, Iams said. An ethylene plant adjacent to Bayer's West Virginia plastics or pesticide plants would cut its raw-materials costs and draw more manufacturers to the area, he said. It would cost at least $500 million and require about 4 years to build an ethane cracker capable of producing 1 million metric tons of ethylene a year, Hassan Ahmed, a New York-based analyst at Alembic Global Advisors, said in a telephone interview.

1 0

Fwd: TN Coal Ash bill
by James Kotcon 20 Dec '10

20 Dec '10

Attached are comments on EPA's coal ash rule from Tennessee. Of particular interest is Attachment 3 which is a bill introduced in the TN legislature last year to regulate coal ash. The comments identify eight issues that are covered in the bill that ought to apply to the so-called beneficial use disposal sites in WV. As far as I can tell, the Tennessee bill does not address the issue of adequate testing of coal ash, and appears to allow continued reliance on the discredited TCLP methods to test for toxicity of ash leachates. Does anyone see any other issues that need to be addressed? I hope to begin drafting some legislation over this coming week, and any comments (or help drafting) would be appreciated. JBK >>> Louise Gorenflo <lgorenflo(a)gmail.com> 12/13/2010 2:43 PM >>> Wallace Attached are the comments I wrote for the EPA Coal Ash regs. It describes our efforts to get a good bill passed by the TN legislature - and our failure. The attachments include a copy of the proposed bill. Louise Gorenflo TN Chapter 391-484-2633

1 0

Fwd: [Charleston Newspapers] Article - $80M in bonds OK'd for power plants
by James Kotcon 20 Dec '10

20 Dec '10

I have never fully figured out what these economic development bonds do, but they apparently dramatically lower the cost of borrowed money for coal-fired power plants. Soon as I get a "Round Tuit", I want to figure out what these actually mean and whether it is a good use of our time to fight this practice. See link to attached news article. If there is an economist, banker, business major, or just someone who can balance a checkbook, who wants to do some behind the scenes work over the next few months, let me know. We can figure out what these do and how to fight them. Jim Kotcon >>> <articles(a)cnpapers.com> 12/17/2010 7:01 AM >>> jkotcon(a)wvu.edu sent you this article ----- December 16, 2010 $80M in bonds OK'd for power plants ( http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201012160888 ) By Eric Eyre ( about:contact/revprler+jitnmrggr+pbz+return=/News/201012160888 ) The Charleston Gazette P>CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Appalachian Power received the go-ahead Thursday to issue up to $60 million in bonds that will help pay for landfill improvements and a scrubber on a power-generating unit at the John Amos Power Plant near Winfield. T ... Read more ( http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201012160888 ) -----

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC December 2010