Western Railroad Discussion > More regulations on Coal

Link
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/science/earth/epa-proposes-tighter-soot-rule.html?_r=0

jc76 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Link
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/science/earth/ep
> a-proposes-tighter-soot-rule.html?_r=0


But before you blame the EPA solely for this, note that they are acting under a court order.

So some judge took it upon himself to dictate his own views on everyone, subverting the democratic process.

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR

Jeffrey R. Holmstead, who led the E.P.A.’s air quality office in President George W. Bush’s administration and who now represents business clients, took a more sanguine view of the agency’s action than many other industry spokesmen.

He said the impact of the new rule would depend on how the E.P.A. chooses to enforce it. “Normally, a new standard means a rash of new regulations, but E.P.A. claims that virtually every area of the country will meet the new standard without the need for new regulatory requirements,” he said in an e-mail. “If so, then maybe the new standard won’t cause the type of economic disruption that we’ve seen in the past.”

BobE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> “Normally,
> a new standard means a rash of new regulations,
> but E.P.A. claims that virtually every area of the
> country will meet the new standard without the
> need for new regulatory requirements,” he said
> in an e-mail. “If so, then maybe the new
> standard won’t cause the type of economic
> disruption that we’ve seen in the past.”

Then if so, why bother having the regulation in the first place?

If anybody bothered to actually read the article you would have learned that the regulation is targeted at soot, not coal. Further, two of the major metropolitan areas mentions, Houston and Los Angeles, don't burn much coal at all. But far be it from me to get in the way of a rant against Obama, Liberals, the EPA, the Sierra Club, or anything else that gets in the way of our precious trains.

I'm currently in Beijing. When I sneezed last night it came out black. Gee, I wonder what I'm breathing here? The snow on the ground is grey - everywhere - not just near streets.

But the coal trains run on time

John Gezelius
Tustin, CA

> BobE quoted:
> --------------------------------------------------
“If so, then maybe the new
> > standard won’t cause the type of economic
> > disruption that we’ve seen in the past.”
>


Realist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> Then if so, why bother having the regulation in
> the first place?


So that things don't get worse. Duh.

BobE

Dirty air in China is all the more reason to export cleaner Western US coal.......It cleaned stacks here and it will there too

Posted from Android

John:
Thanks for the perspective on an alternate world without environmental regulations.
Industrial energy is continually evolving, from animal muscle to steam (in turn from wood to coal to oil and gas) to electric, etc.
We've seen this in railroad locomotives.
Change is inevitable, our best hope is to manage it for the best future outcome for all.
In all of this the RRs are a key player, being the current "green" choice for most transportation.
If research finds ways to sequester CO2 then coal will still be regulated as to mercury, soot, NOX, SO2, etc. and that is good for all of us.

john1082 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> I'm currently in Beijing. When I sneezed last
> night it came out black. Gee, I wonder what I'm
> breathing here? The snow on the ground is grey -
> everywhere - not just near streets.
>
> But the coal trains run on time


Beijing does have a lot of soot, much of which comes from the many diesel-powered transportation vehicles around town, plus local heating systems in large apartment buildings that lack very sophisticated air pollution controls. Plus there are some many coal-fired power plants in the surrounding area that even if they do install up-to-date air pollution control equipment -- which I've been told by utility reps in China that they do -- the country still has air pollution problems because there are so many power plants. And level of pollution control -- multiplied by 2 billion inhabitants -- is going to be a big number.

jc76 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dirty air in China is all the more reason to
> export cleaner Western US coal.......It cleaned
> stacks here and it will there too
>
> Posted from Android


China doesn't want - or care - about clean coal. They want MORE coal. What they do lack is met coal and they have to bring that in for steel and related products. If it isn't met coal then it is just more coal for the electrical plants. Not clean coal. More coal.

John Gezelius
Tustin, CA

Most on this list and even the oldest probably didnt see how bad things were in places like Pittsburg, PA. I was there in the late 60's and they were in a massive building cleaning project to remove the soot. We are so much better off health wise for clean air. The visible stuff was easy to deal with by comparision to that we cant see. Industry and the consumer can deal with changes if they are done slowly. Today tho we have people also concerned about the gobal warming issue...like pissing in the ocean in my opinion.
Roger Beckett

They may want more coal, but by default or on purpose US Coal from the West will help clean the air.

Posted from Android

The soot regulations are projected to save 15,000 lives annually. That can't be all bad especially if you are or know one of these people.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/blackberry/p.html?id=2301150

Posted from Windows Phone OS 7

What is clear is that most of the posters don't remember or know about the poor air quality across the US up until the late 60's.

Perhaps the most lasting contribution to the US came from the Nixon administration. His administration created the EPA and the Clean Water Act. In my view, the Clean Water Act rates in the top 5 pieces of legislation passed by Congress in the history of the US.

You can now swim in the East River.

In S.F. Chron this a.m., newrule came out as more severe diesel particulates restrictions

Steve Donaldson
Pacific Grove, CA

SteveD Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In S.F. Chron this a.m., newrule came out as more
> severe diesel particulates restrictions


Is this in addition to the "clean diesel" fuels already on the market? My understanding is there are a significant number of older trucks, farm equipment, and some smaller electrical generators that still burn the old, high pollution diesel products. The "old smokies" that leave a scum of soot and grease on your car if you're behind them when they accelerate.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SteveD Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > In S.F. Chron this a.m., newrule came out as
> more
> > severe diesel particulates restrictions
>
>
> Is this in addition to the "clean diesel" fuels
> already on the market? My understanding is there
> are a significant number of older trucks, farm
> equipment, and some smaller electrical generators
> that still burn the old, high pollution diesel
> products. The "old smokies" that leave a scum of
> soot and grease on your car if you're behind them
> when they accelerate.

Its not what they burn, it is how they burn it. New Tier 3 & 4 compliant engines due a much better job of burning the fuel that goes into them, as well as filters etc to clean it going in and coming out as exhaust.

jst3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Its not what they burn, it is how they burn it.
> New Tier 3 & 4 compliant engines due a much better
> job of burning the fuel that goes into them, as
> well as filters etc to clean it going in and
> coming out as exhaust.

No, it is both. In the past we had a lot of "high sulfur" diesel in this country. It was cheap to refine, and produced almost its own weight in thick black smoke when burned. Hollywood loved it. LA commuters didn't. If you were on a freeway eastbound about sunrise and coming down a hill, you could see a "snail trail" lump of brown air that was centered on the freeway, spreading out to start covering the whole valley.

At least the SQAMD in California outlawed high sulfur content diesel some time back, and it made a HUGE difference in the amount of filth in the air. Now, trucks and the like can still make huge clouds of black or brown smoke from unburned or partially burned fuel, but nowhere near the continuous streams of solid black they used to make with high-sulfur fuel. The scrubbers and the like the EPA is mandating should clean this stuff up too, though at a considerable cost in efficiency and maintenance.

China doent have the environmental laws we do. Burning western US coal will have an immediate impact on the environment for the better. This is even more true when you talk Colorado-Utah and Northern mines such as Signal Peak. Much of this coal is Super Complient medium-high to high BTU coal with very low pollutants. Enviormentilists that want to stop the export of this product are in my opinion harming the environment not cleaning it up.

Posted from Android