|
Bleeding Heartland
It's what plants crave.
|
coal 
Thu Aug 26, 2010 at 11:38:02 AM CDT
|
The Environmental Integrity Project released a detailed report today on coal ash contamination in 21 states, including Iowa:
Days before the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) kicks off a series of regional hearings across the United States on whether and how to regulate toxic coal ash waste from coal-fired power plants, a major new study identifies 39 additional coal-ash dump sites in 21 states that are contaminating drinking water or surface water with arsenic and other heavy metals. The report by the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP), Earthjustice and the Sierra Club documents the fact that state governments are not adequately monitoring the coal combustion waste (CCW) disposal sites and that the USEPA needs to enact strong new regulations to protect the public. The report shows that, at every one of the coal ash dump sites equipped with groundwater monitoring wells, concentrations of heavy metals such as arsenic or lead exceed federal health-based standards for drinking water, with concentrations at Hatfield's Ferry site in Pennsylvania reaching as high as 341 times the federal standard for arsenic.
You can read the full report here (pdf file). It covers three coal ash disposal sites in Iowa: George Neal Station North (pages 26-31), George Neal Station South (pages 32-26), and Lansing Station Ash Ponds and Landfill (pages 37-40). Neal North and South are both in northwest Iowa's Woodbury County. Lansing is in Allamakee County, in the far northeast corner of the state. The report notes that "there are at least five public water wells within a five-mile radius" of all three Iowa sites. There are "25 or more private drinking water wells at or within two miles" of the Lansing site, which also threatens surface waters in the Mississippi River.
I posted a lengthy excerpt from the press release accompanying today's report (pdf file) after the jump.
The Iowa Independent blog has reported extensively on proposed coal ash regulations, as well as health problems caused when toxic substances leach from coal ash into groundwater.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Terry Branstad has said he would whole-heartedly support new coal-fired power plants in Iowa, and many Iowa politicians in both parties expressed regret last year when plans for new coal-fired power plants in Waterloo and Marshalltown were shelved. They should read this report and explain why a few dozen permanent jobs are worth creating more coal ash that will poison Iowans' drinking water for decades. Coal combustion in power plants is also "one of the nation's largest sources of air pollutants that damage cardiovascular and respiratory health and threaten healthy child development."
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 1116 words in story)
|
|
Thu Apr 22, 2010 at 07:41:21 AM CDT
|
I wish I had better news to share on Earth Day, but the Iowa Department of Natural Resources issued its annual State of the Environment report this week, and it's not encouraging for people who like to breathe air and drink water. From Perry Beeman's report in the Des Moines Register:
Last year culminated a three-year run in which air pollution exceeded health thresholds 125 times - up 33 percent from the previous three-year reporting period.
[Iowa DNR Director Richard] Leopold said that's disturbing as production was down at many factories because of the economy.
Most of the problem: fine particles from hog confinements, cars and power plants, whose emissions blend ammonia and sulfuric or nitric acid in the air.
Fine particulate matter, also known as PM 2.5, has been linked to many life-threatening illnesses and causes thousands of premature deaths every year. That's another reason to be thankful that utility companies abandoned plans to build new coal-fired power plants in Waterloo and Marshalltown last year. (Side note: could someone please inform the three "pro-life" Republican gubernatorial candidates that coal combustion is hazardous to human health? Terry Branstad, Bob Vander Plaats and Rod Roberts all favor building more coal-fired power plants in Iowa.)
As for the other major contributors to poor air quality in our state, the Iowa legislature has done little about air pollution from confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) beyond passing a time- and money-wasting odor study bill in 2008. Nor have our state's leaders done enough to fund alternate modes of transportation, which could reduce vehicle miles per capita traveled by car (and the associated fine particulate emissions).
The DNR's report showed statistically insignificant improvements in Iowa water quality, but not enough to lift us out of the "poor" category. While new "antidegradation rules" on water quality may protect some Iowa waterways from getting worse in the future, we have a long way to go to make our lakes and rivers safe for recreation and other uses.
Public demand for usable waterways is increasing; the DNR's report showed that more Iowans are using state parks, boating and buying fishing licenses. It's therefore baffling that the DNR is proposing to reduce protection for 408 Iowa stream segments this year. The Iowa Environmental Council has much more background on this issue here. Public comments to the DNR are needed by April 30, and it only takes a few minutes to send a message to the relevant DNR official (click here for contact information and talking points).
For those who like to fish: please be aware of the DNR recommends eating fish from certain lakes and rivers no more often than once a week because of elevated mercury levels. Coal combustion from power plants is the main source of mercury pollution in our waterways.
Share any relevant thoughts or Earth Day plans in this thread. I see that the Sierra Club of Iowa, Moveon.Org and 1Sky are organizing a rally outside Representative Leonard Boswell's office (300 Locust in Des Moines) at noon today to urge Boswell to oppose various "dirty air" bills proposed in Congress. They are asking people to "dress in rain gear, such as raincoats, rain hats, umbrellas, galoshes, etc., to make the point of increasing severe weather due to climate change."
There's also an Earth Day Trash Bash cleanup event in downtown Des Moines this afternoon, followed by a celebration in the Simon Estes ampitheater. Here's a description of last year's cleanup.
|
|
Discuss
:: (6
Comments)
|
|
Tue Mar 09, 2010 at 14:29:53 PM CST
|
|
Over the past few months we've asked for your help in achieving federal energy reform. Thank you so much! Unfortunately, powerful interests continue to block any progress in Congress. So, we need to shape our energy future right here in Iowa right now. The Iowa Senate is considering SF 2314/HF 2399, legislation that would require MidAmerican Energy to conduct a feasibility study on nuclear power using ratepayer money. Though it also provides incentives for utilities to switch existing coal-fired power plants to other fuel sources, it does nothing to increase energy efficiency or renewable energy sources like wind and solar.
The Iowa Senate may debate the bill today. We've done the research - nuclear is a wasteful, ineffective approach to our energy and climate crises. Iowa needs to prioritize clean, domestic energy sources that will help businesses, farmers, and homeowners now – wind energy, solar energy, energy efficiency. Contact your state senator today and tell him or her to vote no on SF 2314/HF 2399 unless it is balanced with policies to promote renewable energy and energy efficiency. You can find your senator and contact info here. If you know your legislator, you can call the Senate switchboard: (515) 281-3371. Contact:
Eric Nost, Environment Iowa
enost@environmentiowa.org
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
Mon Jan 11, 2010 at 20:49:47 PM CST
|
|
Over at the Mother Jones blog, Kate Sheppard, David Corn and Daniel Schulman compiled a list of "Obama's Five Worst Nominees." Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner doesn't make the cut, which surprised me until I read the short bios of appointees who are likely to put corporate interests ahead of the public interest. In alphabetical order:
William Lynn, for whom the president made an exception to his policy on lobbyists in government. Lynn was the chief lobbyist for defense contractor Raytheon before becoming deputy secretary of defense in the Obama administration.
William Magwood, a "cheerleader for nuclear power" who has "worked for reactor maker Westinghouse and has run two firms that advise companies on nuclear projects." Obama nominated him for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Scott O'Malia, who was apparently suggested by Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell. O'Malia "was a lobbyist for Mirant, an Enron-like energy-trading firm" and lobbied for weakening the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, to which Obama appointed him.
Joseph Pizarchik, who helped form policies in Pennsylvania to allow disposal of toxic coal ash in unlined pits. Obama named him director of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
Islam Siddiqui, whom Obama appointed to be the chief agricultural negotiator for the U.S. trade representative. Jill Richardson has been on this case at La Vida Locavore; see here and here on why Siddiqui is the wrong person for this job.
I wouldn't suggest that this rogue's gallery is representative of Obama appointees, but it's depressing to see any of them in this administration.
In the good news column, Obama has decided to renominate Dawn Johnsen to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, along with five other nominees who didn't receive a confirmation vote in the Senate last year.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Fri Jan 08, 2010 at 14:13:59 PM CST
|
|
Following up on my review of news from the first half of last year, I've posted links to Bleeding Heartland's coverage of Iowa politics from July through December 2009 after the jump.
Hot topics on this blog during the second half of the year included the governor's race, the special election in Iowa House district 90, candidates announcing plans to run for the state legislature next year, the growing number of Republicans ready to challenge Representative Leonard Boswell, state budget constraints, and a scandal involving the tax credit for film-making.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 5535 words in story)
|
|
Fri Jan 08, 2010 at 08:08:56 AM CST
|
|
I expected 2009 to be a relatively quiet year in Iowa politics, but was I ever wrong.
The governor's race heated up, state revenues melted down, key bills lived and died during the legislative session, and the Iowa Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in Varnum v Brien became one of this state's major events of the decade.
After the jump I've posted links to Bleeding Heartland's coverage of Iowa politics from January through June 2009. Any comments about the year that passed are welcome in this thread.
Although I wrote a lot of posts last year, there were many important stories I didn't manage to cover. I recommend reading Iowa Independent's compilation of "Iowa's most overlooked and under reported stories of 2009," as well as that blog's review of "stories that will continue to impact Iowa in 2010."
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 5197 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jan 07, 2010 at 14:56:38 PM CST
|
|
Following up on the diary I posted this morning, this post compiles links to Bleeding Heartland's coverage of national politics from July through December 2009. Health care reform was again the number one topic. I wish there had been a happy ending.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 3389 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jan 07, 2010 at 07:52:32 AM CST
|
|
It took me a week longer than I anticipated, but I finally finished compiling links to Bleeding Heartland's coverage from last year. This post and part 2, coming later today, include stories on national politics, mostly relating to Congress and Barack Obama's administration. Diaries reviewing Iowa politics in 2009 will come soon.
One thing struck me while compiling this post: on all of the House bills I covered here during 2009, Democrats Leonard Boswell, Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack voted the same way. That was a big change from 2007 and 2008, when Blue Dog Boswell voted with Republicans and against the majority of the Democratic caucus on many key bills.
No federal policy issue inspired more posts last year than health care reform. Rereading my earlier, guardedly hopeful pieces was depressing in light of the mess the health care reform bill has become. I was never optimistic about getting a strong public health insurance option through Congress, but I thought we had a chance to pass a very good bill. If I had anticipated the magnitude of the Democratic sellout on so many aspects of reform in addition to the public option, I wouldn't have spent so many hours writing about this issue. I can't say I wasn't warned (and warned), though.
Links to stories from January through June 2009 are after the jump. Any thoughts about last year's political events are welcome in this thread.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 3702 words in story)
|
|
Mon Dec 07, 2009 at 14:07:09 PM CST
|
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today finalized its proposed finding that carbon dioxide and other global warming pollutants threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations, setting the stage for regulating the pollutants under the Clean Air Act. The landmark announcement comes as world leaders kick off two weeks of negotiations in Copenhagen on a global climate treaty.
“This is the most significant step the federal government has taken on global warming. The Clean Air Act is tried and true. It has a nearly 40-year track record of cost-effectively cutting dangerous pollution to protect our health and environment. EPA can now put this proven law to work as one critical tool in the fight against global warming,” said Eric Nost, fellow at Environment Iowa.
More than two and a half years ago, the Supreme Court ordered the EPA to determine if global warming pollution threatens public health or welfare – a conclusion supported by a worldwide scientific consensus. Today’s action puts EPA on track to take long-overdue steps to reduce global warming pollution from cars, coal-fired power plants, and other large pollution sources under the Clean Air Act.
The announcement comes nearly a year after proposals to build new coal-fired power plants in Marshalltown and Waterloo were canceled. The plants would have emitted millions of tons of carbon dioxide each year.
“The EPA's decision is definitely the next step in confronting Iowa's contribution to global warming. The Senate also must act to set overall pollution-reduction goals and to accelerate the move to clean energy, but it’s up to EPA to crack down on pollution from cars and mega industrial polluters like the state's fleet of aging and inefficient coal-plants. By improving energy efficiency and transitioning to clean, renewable energy sources like wind and solar, the U.S. and Iowa can both cut pollution and create new jobs,” said Nost.
“We applaud President Obama and EPA Administrator Jackson for complying with the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision and embracing the basic facts on global warming that scientists around the world have acknowledged for years,” concluded Nost.
The following is the timeline leading up to today’s decision:
- 1999: EPA was first petitioned to regulate global warming pollutants from new cars and light trucks under the Clean Air Act.
- 2003: The Bush EPA denied the petition.
- April 2007: The Supreme Court found, in Massachusetts v. EPA, that global warming pollutants are pollutants as defined by the Clean Air Act, and held that EPA mustdetermine whether these pollutants from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.
- December 2007: The EPA prepared a proposal finding that global warming pollutants endanger public welfare, but the Bush White House did not allow the proposal to be released.
- April 2009: The EPA released its proposed finding, which the agency is finalizing today.
###
Environment Iowa is a citizen-funded environmental advocacy organization that works to protect the state's clean air, clean water, and open spaces.
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 11:15:04 AM CST
|
For Immediate Release: November 24, 2009 Contact: Eric Nost, Environment Iowa | 515-243-5835; cell: 319-621-0075 | enost@environmentiowa.org New Report: Iowa’s Power Sources Outdated, Under-regulated Des Moines — Iowa is home to some of the nation's oldest and most polluting coal-fired power plants, according to a new analysis of government data released today by Environment Iowa. Half a year after a proposal for a new coal plant in Marshalltown was canceled and over one year after a similar proposal for Waterloo was denied, a group of environmental groups are calling for tougher regulation on existing power plants. (Report available at http://www.environmentiowa.org) “Building new coal plants in Marshalltown and Waterloo would have been disastrous. Now we need to make sure that we clean up those plants that we've already built,” said Environment Iowa state associate Eric Nost. “They are outdated and under-regulated. Old coal-fired clunkers ought to have to meet modern emissions standards.” Nationally, the report shows that America's supply of electricity is dominated by old plants, and that the oldest and dirtiest facilities often go hand-in-hand. Power plants first built three decades ago or more produced 73 percent of the total global warming pollution from power plants in 2007. Older power plants on average emit more carbon dioxide per unit of energy than newer ones. Though it supplies the majority of Iowa’s electricity, coal is the most polluting of all fuel sources. The state's largest and most polluting coal plant - the Walter Scott Jr. Energy Center in Council Bluffs - released nearly ten million tons of carbon dioxide into atmosphere in 2007. Parts of the facility date back to 1954. Coal-fired plants like the Walter Scott Jr. Energy Center currently do not have to meet any carbon dioxide pollution standard, meaning that they can function as an unchecked contributor to global warming. Such plants comprise the nation’s single largest source of global warming pollution. The growing impacts of global warming will pose serious threats to Iowa, particularly on the agricultural sector as rainfall declines and warmer temperatures evaporate moisture in the soil more quickly, leading to lower yields. To avoid the worst effects of global warming, science shows that the U.S. must cut its global warming pollution by 35 percent by 2020. “Although numerous studies have shown that Iowa’s important agricultural sector has a great deal to lose if nothing is done to stop climate change, groups opposed to taking steps to curb global warming emissions have used a strategy of focusing on energy cost increases for farmers, businesses, and residential consumers, and emphasizing potential job losses in energy-intensive industries,” said Neila Seaman, director of the Iowa Chapter of Sierra Club. “It is imperative that Iowa’s U.S. Senators use their power to ensure a strong Clean Air Act and pave the way for the regulation of carbon dioxide.” The Senate is slated to consider legislation in the next few months to establish the first-ever federal limits on global warming pollution and bolster incentives for clean energy sources like wind power.In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a rule to require coal plants and other large industries to use available technology to cut their global warming pollution when new facilities are constructed or existing facilities are significantly modified. “We urge Senators Harkin and Grassley to ensure that the Senate passes an energy bill that requires coal plants to meet modern standards for global warming pollution, making room for more clean energy projects, like wind and solar power. We need more jobs building wind farms, installing solar panels and weatherizing homes, not more pollution,” concluded Nost. ### Environment Iowa is a citizen-funded advocacy organization working to protect the state's clean air, clean water, and open spaces. |
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:34:20 AM CST
|
|
Politicians in both parties have complained that proposed federal climate change bills are "unfair" to Midwestern states, which rely largely on coal to generate electricity. Utility companies and corporate groups have tried to reinvent themselves as defenders of the public interest against those who would unjustly "punish" consumers living in coal-dependent states.
Physicians for Social Responsibility released a report this week on "Coal's Assault on Human Health." This report should be required reading for all members of Congress, especially Senator Tom Harkin and other Democrats who have demanded more subsidies for coal-burning utilities in the climate-change bill. From the executive summary (pdf file):
Coal pollutants affect all major body organ systems and contribute to four of the five leading causes of mortality in the U.S.: heart disease, cancer, stroke and chronic lower respiratory diseases. [...] Each step of the coal lifecycle--mining, transportation, washing, combustion, and disposing of post-combustion wastes--impacts human health. Coal combustion in particular contributes to diseases affecting large portions of the U.S. population, including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke, compounding the major public health challenges of our time. It interferes with lung development, increases the risk of heart attacks, and compromises intellectual capacity.
In yesterday's Des Moines Register, Lee Rood highlighted some of the extra burdens Iowans bear because of coal-fired power plants. Follow me after the jump for more.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 357 words in story)
|
|
Tue Nov 17, 2009 at 06:00:00 AM CST
|
|
Few problems require federal action more urgently than global warming. I admire the members of Congress who have been trying to address this issue. House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman tried to get the best deal he could. Senator John Kerry has tried to keep things moving in the upper chamber. Senator Lindsey Graham is getting tons of grief from fellow Republicans because he admits that climate change is a problem.
I want to support these people and their efforts to get a bill on the president's desk. Unfortunately, the time has come to accept that Congress is too influenced by corporate interests to deal with climate change in any serious way. Pretending to fight global warming won't solve the problem and may even be counter-productive.
This depressing post continues after the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 979 words in story)
|
|
Fri Jun 26, 2009 at 10:33:00 AM CDT
|
|
All week I've been trying to decide what to write about the upcoming vote on HR 2454, the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES). The U.S. House is scheduled to vote today, so I better not delay any longer.
Some arguments for and against the bill are after the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 1025 words in story)
|
|
Mon May 11, 2009 at 09:08:17 AM CDT
|
For those who are still upset that new coal-fired power plants will not be built near Marshalltown and Waterloo, I recommend reading Jason Hancock's recent article at Iowa Independent:
People who live near near sites used to store ash or sludge from coal-fired power plants have a one in 50 chance of developing cancer, according to a just released government report kept from the public for seven years by the Bush Administration.
The data, compiled by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 2002 and released Thursday by the watchdog groups Earth Justice and the Environmental Integrity Project, suggests that environmental contamination from the storage sites could last for a century or longer. [...]
Coal ash, also known as fly ash, is the waste produced by burning coal. The nation's power plants produce enough ash to fill 1 million railroad cars a year, according to a 2006 report by the National Research Council. Coal-burning power plants in Iowa produce 20,000 to 30,000 tons of coal ash every year. The Hawkeye State also imports coal ash from Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana.
As the new study shows, neighbors of coal ash storage sites have an elevated cancer risk even when those sites are functioning normally. Occasional catastrophes like last December's huge spill in Tennessee add to the contamination problems, but even if all accidents could be prevented, heavy metals and other pollutants would still leach into groundwater at many sites.
I've written before about the respiratory problems and premature deaths caused by fine particulate matter, and coal-fired power plants are a leading source of that kind of air pollution.
Now we have proof that solid waste from coal-fired power plants endangers human health too.
Iowa is fortunate not to have two new coal-burning facilities under construction. Those would have been a 50-year investment in the wrong direction, adversely affecting air quality, water quality and of course greenhouse gas emissions.
There is still no such thing as clean coal.
Iowans will be better served by meeting our demand for electricity through clean renewable production as well as conservation and energy efficiency measures.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Sat Apr 18, 2009 at 08:13:12 AM CDT
|
|
The Republican caucus in the Iowa Senate is the smallest it's ever been in this state's history, but they let us know this week that they are not entirely irrelevant. On Tuesday all 18 Republican senators blocked Governor Chet Culver's appointment of Shearon Elderkin to the Environmental Protection Commission. The 32 Senate Democrats supported Elderkin, but nominees need a two-thirds majority (34 votes) to be confirmed.
The following day, Senate Republicans unanimously blocked Gene Gessow's appointment as head of the Department of Human Services. Also on April 15, two Senate Democrats joined with the whole Republican caucus to reject a second term for Carrie La Seur on the Iowa Power Fund board.
Senate Republican leader Paul McKinley released statements explaining each of these votes, but I doubt those statements tell the whole story, and I'll tell you why after the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 1680 words in story)
|
|
Tue Mar 31, 2009 at 08:00:45 AM CDT
|
|
David Yepsen published his final column in the Des Moines Register before starting his new job as director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University. It reprises some themes from many previous columns, such as the need to create a world-class education system and thriving economy in Iowa, with fewer layers of government.
As often happens when I read one of Yepsen's columns, I wonder why he ignores some obvious paths to achieving his admirable goals. For instance, he wants Iowa to "set the goal of having one of the highest per-capita incomes in the country within 10 years." Is this the same columnist who never met a labor union he liked? It reminded me of how Yepsen periodically slams the excessive influence of big money in politics, but won't get behind a voluntary public financing system for clean elections.
In Yepsen's final column, one passage in particular caught my eye:
Let's set a goal to have the cleanest environment in the country within 10 years. The cleanest air. The cleanest water. The best soil- and energy-conservation practices.
We've had education governors. We've had sporadic focus on growing the economy. For some reason, we've lacked a similar focus on the environment. Creating a clean environment will create green jobs, but it will also make Iowa more attractive as a place to live and do business.
"For some reason"? I think most of us have a pretty good idea why improving air and water quality has never been a high priority for Iowa leaders. Follow me after the jump for more on this problem.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1257 words in story)
|
|
Sat Mar 07, 2009 at 07:57:06 AM CST
|
|
Governor Chet Culver made two appointments to the Iowa Utilities Board this week. He named Rob Berntsen as the IUB's new chairman, replacing John Norris. Norris stepped down from the IUB in order to serve as chief of staff for Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.
Culver also reappointed Krista Tanner as one of the IUB's three members. Culver appointed her in 2007 to serve out the remainder of someone else's IUB term, which expires at the end of April. Now she will serve out the remainder of Norris's term, which ends in April 2011.
The governor named Berntsen for the full six-year term that begins on May 1 and expires in 2015. (The third IUB member, Darrell Hanson was appointed by Culver in 2007 for a term that expires in 2013.)
Join me after the jump for more background on the new IUB chairman, along with some speculation about what can we expect from the board.
|
|
There's More...
:: (3
Comments, 877 words in story)
|
|
Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 10:23:46 AM CST
|
Here's some good news for the environment and public health:
Interstate Power and Light on Thursday canceled plans for a $1.8 billion coal-fired power plant in Marshalltown, citing the economy and uncertainty over state regulations. [...]
"At the end of the day it's economic condition, uncertainly regarding future regulatory and legislative treatment of environmental issues, meaning greenhouses gases," said spokesman Ryan Steensland.
Other factors were terms placed on the power plant by the Iowa Utilities Board, including a 10.1 return on equity for investors. "It would have made it very challenging to attract the capital necessary to build these types of investments. The cost and the return laid out by the board just did not wet the appetite of the investment community to move forward with this project," Steensland said.
Economic concerns prompted a different company to pull the plug on a proposed coal-fired power plant near Waterloo earlier this year.
Thanks to all the environmental and public-health advocates who have worked so hard for years to defeat both coal plants, including the Sierra Club, Plains Justice, the Iowa Environmental Council, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Community Energy Solutions, the Iowa Renewable Energy Association and Iowa Interfaith Power and Light.
I am still annoyed that the Iowa Utilities Board approved an application to build the Marshalltown plant last spring, but at least the IUB's recent ratemaking decision helped doom the project.
Please disregard my action alert regarding public comments on the DNR's draft air quality permit for the Marshalltown plant.
UPDATE: At Century of the Common Iowan, noneed4thneed points out that the coal plant would have created 85 permanent jobs as well as providing a lot of temporary jobs during its construction. I sympathize with people who are upset about losing those jobs. However, I do not support making a 50-year investment in the wrong direction on energy production, which would also result in more respiratory illness, mercury pollution and higher utility bills for thousands of Iowans, all for the sake of some jobs in the Marshalltown area.
|
|
Discuss
:: (11
Comments)
|
|
Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 09:24:23 AM CST
|
|
Today is the last day to submit public comments to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources concerning draft water quality rules ("Antidegradation rules").
Background information and talking points can be found on the websites of Sierra Club Iowa or the Iowa Environmental Council. Submit your comments to Adam Schnieders, Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Wallace State Office Building, 502 East 9th Street, Des Moines, Iowa 50319-0034, fax (515) 281-8895 or by E-mail to adam.schnieders@dnr.iowa.gov. Contact Adam Schnieders at (515) 281-7409 with questions.
While you're on the Sierra Club Iowa page, look on the left-hand side for talking points about the draft air quality permit for the proposed coal-fired power plant near Marshalltown. As I wrote in this post, there are some big problems with the permit, and it's important for as many Iowans to weigh in as possible with public comments. The DNR recently extended the comment period for that air quality permit until May 18, but it's not too early to send in your letter.
Last week Blog for Iowa published an excellent letter on the draft permit by Paul Deaton, who chairs the Johnson County Board of Health. Read his letter as well as the Sierra Club talking points for some ideas, but remember to use your own words when writing to the DNR.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Sun Mar 01, 2009 at 21:06:11 PM CST
|
|
There's a lot going on the next two weeks, so I put all the details after the jump.
Please post a comment or send me an e-mail (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com) if you know of an event I've left out.
I noticed on the Iowa Environmental Council's newsletter that they are looking for a new program director:
The Iowa Environmental Council is in the process of establishing an air quality program area. The Council is seeking an individual to conduct research, engage in coalition building and public education and advise the Council on policy opportunities available to protect Iowa's air quality. For job requirements, description, salary information and how to apply, go to: www.iaenvironment.org, and click on "job opening" on the gold sidebar. Please share this information with others.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 2047 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[Bleeding Heartland Logo]](http://www.bleedingheartland.com/upload/logo.jpg){kind=logo}
