Posted on 07/29/2004 5:04:48 AM PDT by I got the rope
Kerry has voted against the use of coal to produce electricity as a senator.
When he went to W Va to campaign, his voting record against the use of coal came out.
Now it appears that as usual he is flip flopping.
Of course he can't do this. Terrazilla promised that the Omnipotent Kerry would lower the temperature of the world. We know that burning coal and petroleum according to the whacko greens/libs causes global warming. So if he plans to burn coal, according to his votes in the past and his liberals, he will cause massive global warming.
So many people seem not to care, but aside from whatever kickback issues there are, locking up so much clean coal is contrary to producing cheaper, more reliable energy sources for all Americans.
Coal plants are much cleaner today than they were in the 70s.
What is the square footage of YOUR cave --Neandrathal
Does anyone have the link where we can find out who the contributers are to the DNC? I've been looking for it all day.
Welcome to FReeRepublic. This is very true and one of the main reason why utilities don't want to build them. They are required to add million of dollars of pollution control equipment like electrostatic precipitators, SO2 scrubbers, and now low-NOx burners. On top of all of this you have to get rid of all the ash that remains. Mewzilla may have hit on something. We should follow the money if the rats are adding this to their platform.
I raise my own food on a 6 acre plot of land and use electricity just like everybody else. You don't seem to be able to understand the connection between those coal fired plants and your own survival.
I am surrounded by 4 nuke plants . I don't need coal . I grew up in Northeast Pa . ( coal region) and remember the building shaking as they blasted in the mines underneath my school (50's). We are also placing 30 wind generators off the Atlantic City coast this year ..
BTW I am NOT a tree hugging liberal . I live three miles from a coal generation plant run by Conective and it is allowed to burn the lowest grade ( high sulfur) content because of its coastal location. The wind doesn't always blow out to sea .
On top of that, we get hit by all the crap in the air coming in from the midwest as airflow patterns determine our pollution rating. I have to pay federal surcharges because New Jersey gets clobbered by air pollution contamination that we don't even produce .
I'm also pi$$ed because my tomato crop is 20 days late this year .Got to blame that on mother nature and a crappy Spring .
Today 52% of the capacity for generating electricity in the United States is fueled by coal, compared with 14.8% for nuclear energy. Although there are economic justifications for this preference, it is surprising for two reasons. First, coal combustion produces carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that are suspected to cause climatic warming, and it is a source of sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides, which are harmful to human health and may be largely responsible for acid rain. Second, although not as well known, releases from coal combustion contain naturally occurring radioactive materials--mainly, uranium and thorium.source---snip---
The fact that coal-fired power plants throughout the world are the major sources of radioactive materials released to the environment has several implications. It suggests that coal combustion is more hazardous to health than nuclear power and that it adds to the background radiation burden even more than does nuclear power. It also suggests that if radiation emissions from coal plants were regulated, their capital and operating costs would increase, making coal-fired power less economically competitive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.