I thought northern WV was not suitable for MTR - is that wrong?
Jim Sconyers jim_scon@yahoo.com 603.969.6712
----- Original Message ---- From: Regina Hendrix regina1936@verizon.net To: ec@osenergy.org Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:49:03 PM Subject: [EC] [Fwd: [fom] AEP scrubbers - one heads up for northern WV residents]
Well, this is not good news. Regina
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
Just wanted to give a heads up on something that is related to a big part of my thesis. The new scrubber installations at AEP plants will do what the AP article at http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1402498/scrubbers_to_clean_john_amos_e... says, it will shift state demand for coal from southern counties to northern ones. Over the past two years the number of northern strip-mines has declined, but the amount of production and # of employees per mine have increased, suggestion an expansion in size of northern strip-mines. So if you know of anyone up there living near coal seams, might wanna give them a heads up about this as it will surely cause an increase in stripping and MTR up there. Not to mention the other consequences coming from scrubber installation/operation and disposal of the by-products, which surely will be more than the "harmless gypsum" that this article suggests.
Of course, the shift isnt going to reduce MTR in the southern counties all that much, if at all. Only about 22% of coal produced in WV is burned in WV, and obiously much of that is from southern counties, so in my estimate, this will result in no more than a 5% shift of MTR production to northern mines, or about 2.5 million tons. Of course, that is significant in one major sense. 2.5 million tons approximates the annual production of a medium size MTR mine if I'm not mistaken. So, one mountain saved given current consumption and export conditions.
Those were rough calc's, dont quote me on those. if the coal is to be produced, its better that production is spread evenly across the state. the point is still to reduce the consumption of coal and get an outright ban on MTR. I've pasted the supporting quote for all of this below. -- Rory
Shifting Coal Demand Another outcome of the national push to scrub is a shift in demand from more expensive, lower sulfur central Appalachian coal to less expensive, higher sulfur northern Appalachian coal - or, in West Virginia, from southern to northern coal. Amos's scrubbers will go into operation during the coming two years: unit 3, the largest, in January 2009, unit 2 the following spring and unit 1 in spring 2010. The plant currently burns up to 8 million tons of coal a year, most of it from Boone County. Once the scrubbers are up and running, AEP will have the option of shifting to a less expensive coal.
While northern WV does not see a lot of MTR as such, we do have some pretty large strip mines. The difference is that it is a little easier to engage in reclamation that includes restoration to Approximate Original Contour. We also see a lot more deep mining (with associated subsidence, AMD, etc.). Keep in mind that deep mines still produce about two-thirds of West Virginia's coal.
Another issue is that the Club (along with OVEC, WVEC and others) was a named plaintiff in the NSR settlement with AEP in which they agreed to put scrubbers on their old plants and we agreed that this would settle our claims against them. Hence we may be constrained from complaining that AEP is now finally doing what we have been asking them to do since 1999. Of course, there is also the argument that putting scrubbers on these old plants will extend their life for many years, which is not necessarily a good thing in this age of greenhouse gases. So if you want to argue that the scrubbers is a needless massive investment when they should be shutting these plants down, I would be inclined to agree. But until we get new sources of electricity or install massive amounts of conservation, these plants will continue to enjoy a market advantage (at least until carbon emissions are limited), and they should be required to operate as cleanly as possible.
JBK
Jim Sconyers jim_scon@yahoo.com 5/27/2008 7:42 PM >>>
I thought northern WV was not suitable for MTR - is that wrong?
Jim Sconyers jim_scon@yahoo.com 603.969.6712
----- Original Message ---- From: Regina Hendrix regina1936@verizon.net To: ec@osenergy.org Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:49:03 PM Subject: [EC] [Fwd: [fom] AEP scrubbers - one heads up for northern WV residents]
Well, this is not good news. Regina
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
Just wanted to give a heads up on something that is related to a big part of my thesis. The new scrubber installations at AEP plants will do what the AP article at http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1402498/scrubbers_to_clean_john_amos_e... says, it will shift state demand for coal from southern counties to northern ones. Over the past two years the number of northern strip-mines has declined, but the amount of production and # of employees per mine have increased, suggestion an expansion in size of northern strip-mines. So if you know of anyone up there living near coal seams, might wanna give them a heads up about this as it will surely cause an increase in stripping and MTR up there. Not to mention the other consequences coming from scrubber installation/operation and disposal of the by-products, which surely will be more than the "harmless gypsum" that this article suggests.
Of course, the shift isnt going to reduce MTR in the southern counties all that much, if at all. Only about 22% of coal produced in WV is burned in WV, and obiously much of that is from southern counties, so in my estimate, this will result in no more than a 5% shift of MTR production to northern mines, or about 2.5 million tons. Of course, that is significant in one major sense. 2.5 million tons approximates the annual production of a medium size MTR mine if I'm not mistaken. So, one mountain saved given current consumption and export conditions.
Those were rough calc's, dont quote me on those. if the coal is to be produced, its better that production is spread evenly across the state. the point is still to reduce the consumption of coal and get an outright ban on MTR. I've pasted the supporting quote for all of this below. -- Rory
Shifting Coal Demand Another outcome of the national push to scrub is a shift in demand from more expensive, lower sulfur central Appalachian coal to less expensive, higher sulfur northern Appalachian coal - or, in West Virginia, from southern to northern coal. Amos's scrubbers will go into operation during the coming two years: unit 3, the largest, in January 2009, unit 2 the following spring and unit 1 in spring 2010. The plant currently burns up to 8 million tons of coal a year, most of it from Boone County. Once the scrubbers are up and running, AEP will have the option of shifting to a less expensive coal.
-
James Kotcon -
Jim Sconyers