Skip to comments.State, Bridgeport wrestle with tough issue: Coal, or no coal?
Posted on 07/13/2012 12:38:47 PM PDT by matt04
As the nation sheds the concept of clean coal for plentiful and even cleaner natural gas, environmental activists are hoping they can push Connecticut to abandon coal as a power source.
Theyve seized that opportunity this summer as the owner of Connecticuts one remaining coal-fired power plant, the Bridgeport Harbor coal plant, applies to renew its five-year operating permit with the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. The plant is owned by the New Jersey-based PSEG Power.
But DEEP is expected to issue a permit renewal in the coming weeks, although officials say they may tighten standards for operation of the plant after receiving volumes in public comment.
And while economics have already contributed to a rapid decline in the stations activity, its unlikely the Bridgeport plant will shut down anytime soon.
Some of the Bridgeport movement has been spurred on by the Sierra Clubs national Beyond Coal campaign, which has worked to tighten emissions standards for coal plants and prevented new ones from being built. The campaign recently hired Bridgeport native Onte Johnson to head its local community outreach efforts, and the number of public comments submitted to DEEP regarding the plants permit renewal was far greater than in a typical response to such a renewal, officials said.
Still, the plant is technically in compliance with all state emissions standards, which are stricter than the national standards in many cases. And Silvestri, the PSEG environmental engineer, said that Connecticuts pipelines arent robust enough to support a complete switch to natural gas.
(Excerpt) Read more at ctmirror.org ...
I highly doubt Onte Johnson knows anything more about coal than the talking points provided by the Sierra Club.
I know it’s not legal, but I have the fond desire to see the various utility companies refuse service to those who wish to harm them and their customers through unreasonable and punitive regulations.
Of course there are those who will twist the language as to what the definition of unreasonable means... Sigh...
Still it is a nice thought.
I have always like the idea of making them pick what sources of power they want to use ie:
We will deliver power generated by the following sources only:
___ Natural Gas
When the liberals only pick wind and solar all they get is wind a solar. When it gets dark and not windy, their power is shut off. And they have to wait, say two months to change it.
***Some of the Bridgeport movement has been spurred on by the Sierra Clubs national Beyond Coal campaign, which has worked to tighten emissions standards for coal plants and prevented new ones from being built.****
And where did the Sierra Club get the money to lobby against coal? From the NATURAL GAS INDUSTRY! $25,000,000.
This logic is why a convicted felon got like 70% of the vote in some KY counties during the presidential primary.
Not Bad... Not bad at all. And with the Smart-Meter technology they are forcing on us it would be fairly easy to do too.
I live near the Bpt coal plant. Years ago, eco zealots shutdown 6 coal fired plants they labeled the sooty six on the grounds that it causes asthma. Now Ct electric rates have tripled and asthma rates are the same.
Wasn’t then AG Blumenthal involved in getting that accomplished?
Wasnt then AG Blumenthal involved in getting that accomplished?
Dunno. Would have to look it up. Blumenthal ran an eco zealot anti energy campaign while AG. A power cable was laid across the sound to provide power to Long Island but Blumenthal prevented it from being powered up because at one point in the New Haven harbor the cable wasn’t buried deep enough. A fed court intervened and briefly the power was turned on with no negative effects. Later Blumenthal successfully got it turned off and the investment squandered.
Blumenthal is a Spitzer.
The big difference? Blumenthal likes boys.And Spitzer never claimed to be a war hero.