Citizens Groups in Michigan mobilize against Coal

[greenman3610]

5 new coal plants proposed for Michigan



http://www.nemcei.org/

We are citizens of Presque Isle County and neighboring areas. We see that the environmental risks here are not only for our children, but for many other peoples children, and the generations of children yet to come.

We seek to educate on the present and future effects of a coal burning power plant in Rogers City and beyond. We have great concern about public health risk stemming from the degradation of land, water, and air.

http://www.midlandcares.org/
This site contains a wealth of information about Renewable Energy Resources, Industry and Corporate Leaders promoting Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, the extremely negative Health, Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts of the Fossil Fuel Industries, and current issues facing Midland and Michigan.


http://www.mecprotects.org/pr10_10_07.htm

LANSING—Ten local, state, regional and national public interest groups today formally petitioned Michigan to begin regulating emissions of CO2 from coal-burning electric power plants. The petition is supported by this spring’s landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing the federal government to declare carbon dioxide a pollutant because it contributes to global warming.

The groups also requested that the state declare a moratorium on building new plants or expanding existing ones until the new rules are in place. Coal-burning power plants collectively are the nation’s largest emitters of CO2.

The request was filed with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality on the eve of what, if unchecked, could become a massive, unprecedented “coal rush” in Michigan. In the past year, a number of in-state and out-of-state energy companies announced proposals for at least five new coal-powered plants in the state—in Rogers City, Midland, Alma, Bay City, and Manistee.

[Demeter]

1. Couldn't These Plants Be Designed Clean, With Scrubbers?

Or liquified coal?

[greenman3610]

2. They all have scrubbers

Scrubbers remove a great deal of flyash and SO2, and NO2, the
acid rain producers. They can also reduce, but not eliminate the
toxic metals like mercury, which will still be emitted in the
hundreds of pounds each year from each plant. (mercury is
a potent neuro toxin that is poisonous in extemely minute
quantities)
One issue is that the ash that has been removed must be
dumped somewhere, potentially threatening ground
and surface waters with toxic contamination.
The need for any of these plants has not
been credibly established.

There will be no provision to sequester CO2 unless a
state or federal law mandates it, and each plant will
emit in millions of ton quantities.
It is imperative that the message be sent that full-on
CO2 producing power plants are completely off the
table. That is the message behind the request to
DEQ. The Supreme Court has defined CO2 as a 'Pollutant".
The state is mandated by law to issue regulations on
"pollutants". Period.