For those who paddle the Columbia River or the PNW, or who simply believe in water and air quality:
A Chinese-financed methanol refinery has been proposed for a site in Kalama, Washington. It would be the world’s largest, right on the banks of the Columbia.
This industry’s environmental record is horrendous, if not criminal. History shows that accidents will happen, placing human and wildlife populations at extreme health risk while seriously degrading air and water quality.
Data from multiple sources demonstrates how this refinery and the Kalama site is a disaster in the making, including:
Risks posed by toxic pollutants that are natural byproducts of the refinement process
A high volume of airborne particulates that would make the air immediately around the refinery dangerous to breath
The region’s high probability of major earthquakes
You can find a good video explaining the issues associated to this project, and links to additional information about fracking, methanol refinement, the additional shipping traffic this refinery would mean for the Columbia, and the positive likelihood of accidents here: http://columbiariverkeeper.org/our-work/methanol/
The paper mill about a mile away from that site puts a thousand times more pollutants into the air and I’m pretty sure that if it were being proposed now days, it wouldn’t get built. But l’m glad it did get built, because I worked there for over 37 years and made a very good living.
Methanol Refinery pollution… … that stuff for gasoline, required in the name of clean environment to be burned in our cars? Kinda makes you wonder about pollution from the Prius factory too.
@magooch said:
The paper mill about a mile away from that site puts a thousand times more pollutants into the air and I’m pretty sure that if it were being proposed now days, it wouldn’t get built. But l’m glad it did get built, because I worked there for over 37 years and made a very good living.
So now that you don’t need them to make a living anymore, you’d be happy to see that environmental disaster of a paper mill get closed down for good now that we know better?
Not to pour fuel on the fire, or anything… But is it sound logic that something is good because it creates jobs, regardless of the cost?
I’m geographically far away from this, and don’t have a direct stake in it. But we are all affected by things like this, near and far.
Actually I said nothing at all about shutting the paper mill down and I didn’t say it was a disaster. The proponents of the methanol plant claim it will be nearly pollution free, so yes the paper mill does produce a thousand times more, but even it complies with state environmental standards.
The methanol plant would not be producing it as a fuel, but as an ingrediant for plastic production in China.
My point is that there is more than one side to this story. I have no dog in the fight, so it makes no difference to me. What I do know is that folks who need a well paying job will be lined up for the jobs.
@magooch said:
Actually I said nothing at all about shutting the paper mill down and I didn’t say it was a disaster. The proponents of the methanol plant claim it will be nearly pollution free, so yes the paper mill does produce a thousand times more, but even it complies with state environmental standards.
The methanol plant would not be producing it as a fuel, but as an ingrediant for plastic production in China.
My point is that there is more than one side to this story. I have no dog in the fight, so it makes no difference to me. What I do know is that folks who need a well paying job will be lined up for the jobs.
I wasn’t trying to put words in your mouth. Rather, I was asking a provocative (and leading) question.
Indeed, people will line up for well paying jobs, just like you did. In fact, people will even line up for poorly paying jobs. But to believe that something is justified primarily due to the jobs it creates is a recipe for disaster if I’ve ever seen one.
I presume you folks use paper and plastic. It doesn’t magically fall out of the sky, nor grow on a bush. There is no such thing as a pristine perfect environmental industrial process to produce all the stuff that we consume, so unless you live in a cave and wipe your behind with leaves, etc…
@magooch said:
I presume you folks use paper and plastic. It doesn’t magically fall out of the sky, nor grow on a bush. There is no such thing as a pristine perfect environmental industrial process to produce all the stuff that we consume, so unless you live in a cave and wipe your behind with leaves, etc…
You presume correctly. I have never claimed innocence.
Still though, just because it is the status quo doesn’t mean we can’t question it. I think I’m at least one step ahead of many, in that I think and talk about things I don’t think are right. Most people don’t.
@magooch said:
I presume you folks use paper and plastic. It doesn’t magically fall out of the sky, nor grow on a bush. There is no such thing as a pristine perfect environmental industrial process to produce all the stuff that we consume, so unless you live in a cave and wipe your behind with leaves, etc…
In Port St Joe, Fl the old timers used to tell me about when the mill was running there were more pogies in the bay. A 6 ft kingfish would often come up out of the water after the pogies and get stuck on the paper mill dock. Now the mill is closed and the kings don’t come around as much and the ones that do are smaller. Of course there are more pogie boats fishing for pogies (menhaden). Hence fewer pogies I suppose.
Of course too, my doctor over there reported a lot of cancers in long time residents.
Well instead of signing a petition to stop a plant that makes something needed for plastic. Why not reduce your plastic consumption. Don’t buy that new plastic kayak. Keep using that old one you have. Don’t use plastic bags at the stores bring your own reusable bags. BUT if all you do is sign a petition against this plant your still part of the problem. Me Iam still going to buy that new kayak. Keep an eye on this new plant. Raise money to do testing to see if there releasing more toxins than there supposed too. Now that would be helpful rather than sign this petition.
Since the current administration has clearly stated their intentions to neuter, if not dissolve, the EPA and drastically roll back clean air and water regulations, don’t count on there being the same standards for “supposed to” toxin emissions limitations that we’ve come to rely upon to protect us and the environments we live and play within. Just sayin…
The one ray of hope in the impending deregulations is that more responsible corporations have gradually discovered that clean plants are better for business. I would also point out that great progress has been made in producing plastic materials from sustainable materials with less or non-toxic residuals.
When people accuse me of being “anti-progress” for my activism against the expansion of the natural gas and other related industries I try to make them understand that it is not gas and chemical production per se that I am objecting to, it is the way that we squander such resources by using them inappropriately and the inefficient means in which we extract them. I just retired from working for a decade in the infrastructure engineering business and have an educational background in Geology, so I’m not just parroting sound bites – I know quite well how this all works.
There are certain products that can only be made with natural gas, for instance, including synthetic fertilizers and specific chemical components. Natural gas is therefore a critical resource and also a finite one, as is evidenced by the current need to resort to unconventional means to extract the remaining plays of it. Therefore, it should be recognized as such and conserved for the most important purposes. Presently, extractive means are ridiculously wasteful – some end up burning off or releasing as much as 50% of the product. I know mining engineers in the frack gas industry and they will acknowledge this is the case.
Furthermore, burning NG for energy production is a waste when such power generation can be provided through alternative and sustainable means. The calls for “energy independence” as justification for the frack gas boom are disingenuous at best, since a large proportion of the volume is being sold off the Asia and Europe, rather than left in reserve for future domestic usage. If we REALLY want to assure long term national security we should ramp back gas mining until we have improved the technology so that we get closer to 100% capture efficiency. And we should reserve using it as a resource primarily for those purposes for which no practical alternative currently exists.
It is an economic “false flag” to claim we can’t have good paying jobs or economic prosperity without allowing industries to pollute at will and basing our infrastructure on increasingly scarce fossil fuels. Constructing the alternative energy infrastructure has been one of the fastest growing job sectors of the economy in recent years. And by “alternative”, I mean solar, wind, tidal bore, biodiesel and geothermal, even advanced technology nuclear. China and Europe are way ahead of us on all of this.
I realize I’ve diverged from the ethanol plant focus that started the thread, but I think it’s important for people to realize that not everyone who protests against certain types of industrial development has naive, unrealistically utopian objections, It’s time more of us understood that “dinosaur” technologies are not in our best interests.
@willowleaf said:
Since the current administration has clearly stated their intentions to neuter, if not dissolve, the EPA and drastically roll back clean air and water regulations, don’t count on there being the same standards for “supposed to” toxin emissions limitations that we’ve come to rely upon to protect us and the environments we live and play within. Just sayin…
I doubt everything will be polluted more. I do think years and years of environmental studies before you can get a permit to build something will be shortened.
@PaddleDog52 said:
I doubt everything will be polluted more. I do think years and years of environmental studies before you can get a permit to build something will be shortened.
… that stuff for gasoline, required in the name of clean environment to be burned in our cars? Kinda makes you wonder about pollution from the Prius factory too.