Mountaintop removal sp 09: Difference between revisions
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
====Other Energy Alternatives==== | ====Other Energy Alternatives==== | ||
=====Nuclear Power===== | =====Nuclear Power===== | ||
[[Image:Nuclear Energy.jpg|thumbnail]] | [[Image:Nuclear Energy.jpg|thumbnail]] | ||
According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) [http://www.nei.org/keyissues/reliableandaffordableenergy/], nuclear energy is the lowest cost producer of base load energy. Nuclear energy is not subject to unreliable weather or climate conditions, unpredictable cost fluctuations, or dependence on foreign suppliers. Furthermore, NEI states that nuclear plants produce nearly 20 percent of the United State’s electricity and has the ability to provide a larger share of the US energy market. While nuclear power is appealing to the NEI, environmentalist group Greenpeace [http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/nuclear] is against nuclear energy. In their own words, “Greenpeace has always fought - and will continue to fight - vigorously against nuclear power because it is an unacceptable risk to the environment and to humanity.” In addition, Greenpeace has three main concerns about nuclear energy – the safety of nuclear power, the radioactive spent fuel rods and their storage, and weapons proliferation.[http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/nuclear]. | |||
=====Wind===== | =====Wind===== | ||
Revision as of 16:50, 27 April 2009
Mountaintop Removal Mining
History
Political Climate & Laws
Technology Used
(Andrei's part-reminder to myself)
Economic Policy
Monetary & Job Benefits
Health Effects
Ecological Effects
Alternatives to Mountaintop Removal
While mountaintop removal mining is a one of the most profitable methods of extracting coal, there are less environmentally damaging methods of mining. The four less environmentally damaging methods of coal mining are shaft mines, slope mines, drift mines and open-pit mining. Additionally, there are numerous other forms of energy that can be substituted for coal as an energy source.
Coal Mining
(Andrei's part - reminder to myself)
Other Energy Alternatives
Nuclear Power
According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) [1], nuclear energy is the lowest cost producer of base load energy. Nuclear energy is not subject to unreliable weather or climate conditions, unpredictable cost fluctuations, or dependence on foreign suppliers. Furthermore, NEI states that nuclear plants produce nearly 20 percent of the United State’s electricity and has the ability to provide a larger share of the US energy market. While nuclear power is appealing to the NEI, environmentalist group Greenpeace [2] is against nuclear energy. In their own words, “Greenpeace has always fought - and will continue to fight - vigorously against nuclear power because it is an unacceptable risk to the environment and to humanity.” In addition, Greenpeace has three main concerns about nuclear energy – the safety of nuclear power, the radioactive spent fuel rods and their storage, and weapons proliferation.[3].
Wind
The report, The Long-Term Economic Benefits of Wind Versus Mountaintop Removal Coal on Coal River Mountain, West Virginia [4], examined the economic benefits that wind power would have in West Virginia. It calculated the local economic benefits based on number of jobs, earnings and economic output. In addition, the study examined costs due to increased death and illnesses from mountaintop removal mining and the cost of local environmental problems in the future. In addition, it discusses that wind power is not without environmental impact and that the wind turbines will directly affect birds and bats and possibly affect the local wildlife. The report concluded that wind power is preferable to mountaintop removal in Raleigh County. The study claims that the economic benefits of mountaintop removal would end 17 years after mining operations ceased, while the environmental and social costs of mountaintop removal would continue to last. In economic terms, mountaintop removal mining provides $36,000 per year in coal severances paid to Raleigh County, whereas a wind farm would generate $1.74 million in local property taxes annually.
According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA)[5], wind power “can be harnessed to be a non-polluting, never-ending source of energy” to meet the world’s energy needs. Furthermore, the AWEA states that in good wind areas over 25 years, a large wind turbine project may offer cheaper energy than any other new power plant. In addition, concerns about the reliability of wind power are not supported with current evidence. In Demark, where over 20% of its energy comes from wind, there has been no loss of reliability of the electrical grid and there has been no need for expensive equipment or energy storage.
References
(Andrei's references- they are in order of citation- NOT ALPHABETICAL - NO ONE edit my sources, thank you!) I have them in this order, so put your sources above in their own separate "section" that way all citations here are in the order that they appear on the page. When we a ready to turn them in - the sections will be separated and we can put numbers in front of the source like Wikipedia does on their pages)
Nuclear Energy Institute (2009), "Reliable and Affordable Energy" http://www.nei.org/keyissues/reliableandaffordableenergy/
Greenpeace, "End the Nuclear Age" http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/nuclear
Downstream Strategies (2008), "The Long-Term Economic Benefits of Wind Versus Mountaintop Removal Coal on Coal River Mountain, West Virginia" http://www.coalriverwind.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/coalvswindoncoalrivermtn-final.pdf
American Energy Wind Association (2007), "Wind Power Today" http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WindPowerToday_2007.pdf
Alternatives to mountaintop removal image. http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/zencmed/targets/illus/ilt/T629100A.gif
Authors
Applestein, Cara
Morgan, Arleigh
Rogers, Kelly
Vernon, Andrei
