Niagara Applies For A Coal Hand-Out
by John Laumer, Philadelphia on 12. 6.06
We recently wrote about excess hydropower from Niagara falls, and speculated on the prospects of having green businesses be attracted to the Buffalo area to take advantage of the the Falls' renewable energy output. Ironically, there now seems to be a local movement in favor generating electricity thereabouts with coal. In Monday's Buffalo News we read that that the prospect of 'free money' from the Federal Government is making "clean coal" power generation look attractive to some local officials. In spite of the report of un-used hydropower in the local area, a Niagara County comissioner has placed a resolution on the County Board agenda which "...calls on Buffalo Niagara Enterprise, a Buffalo-based regional organization that promotes new businesses, "to assist Niagara County and Choose Niagara Now in using all their expertise to bring this clean coal plant and all of its jobs to Niagara County."" Buffalo News also reports that "AES Corp. is bidding in a statewide competition to win the $1 billion plant for its property in Somerset. Choose Niagara Now, a special lobbying group [is] boosting AES' bid..." Of all the places that might request a billion dollar subsidy for a coal fired plant, this would be about the last place we'd expect to raise their hand, so to speak. Perhaps this is an illustration (in a national sense) of what Amory Lovins termed a "perverse governmental incentive" for energy management. Reminds us, a bit, of making a big Homeland Security grant to some small town fire department in an agricultural region.
In the interest of keeping things constructive, and, absent any obvious irony, here's a an alternative idea.
Ask the US Department of Energy for the project money, with the caveat that it be used for a far better purpose. In Phase I, use the billion dollars in taxpayer subsidies that had been allocated for a "clean coal" plant, to instead upgrade the existing Niagara hydro-facities, installing higher efficiency turbines with enlarged flow capacities. Use any leftovers from Phase I to plan, engineer,and begin work on a Phase II, for the purpose of greatly expanding the Falls' total hydroelectric generation capacity, diverting all the water that normally goes over Niagara Falls into a new hydro complex for most of the year. Because tourist season is late spring through early fall, that would leave most of the year to crank out vast amounts of additional carbon neutral power without losing any tourism business. The Canadians might complain anyway, but we have a solution.
Offer a portion of the new capacity to Canadian utilities, for free, and another portion, for free, to any business which will locate or expand in the Western NY State service area, for a pre-agreed to period. Then sweeten the green pot even further with an offer of free electricity, for as long as the Niagara River flows, to any manufacturer of plug-in hybrid, or electric vehicles that builds a plant in the area, as well as to their customers while they use an electric or plug in hybrid within the service area.
If, after all that, there is any excess capacity, and we think there probably would be, export it at market rates and use some of the profits to execute carbon trades, plant trees, upgrade pollution controls at existing coal fired boilers, and so on.
Image credit/descriptor: World Coal Institute via BBC News, Clean Coal Technology (CCT) Schematic Diagram
But look at the diagram! The beauty of this kind of power plant is that the exhaust gas goes *down*. It's totally clean!
John:
Welcome to the surreal nature of Upstate politics. News up here actually reports strong public opposition because the issue's framed as taking cheap, green power away from residential consumers (who pay among the highest rates nationwide) to give it to larger, industrial interests. That's a huge issue, as a primary economic incentive program here, Empire Zones, is essentially a huge public give-away to large corporations, with some out-of-state power companies being the biggest "offenders".
There's a reason why our incoming governor Spitzer compared Upstate NY to Appalachia, and we're among the most depressed or areas in the nation! Not to mention the rumors that Spitzer already plans to obliterate most green advances that Pataki started (apparently Pataki's wife believes strongly in sustainable causes).
I know NY's at 19.3% power from renewable sources, with contracts (100% wind) for the remaining 5.5%, to achieve Pataki's renewable portfolio goal of 25% renewable energy by 2013, if I remember right.
Tough call. It's so convoluted and opaque up here, that it's hard to find the reality...other than more renewable energy is always a good thing!
Why is destroying a natural wonder considered green?
have you been to Niagra Falls? there's not a thing "destroyed" about it...
They only run at about 40% capacity and if John's suggestions were carried out wouldn't run at all for most of the year.
Another idea would be to put water turbines for wheels just under the surface before the falls. Far enough down so they don't impede the flow or are visible, then let the falls go wide open.
JC, I'm with you there (especially in other Upstate rivers and hydro-spots) but agree with MDPDB. I'm not sure Niagara Falls seems all that natural anymore.
Another huge issue is community equity. Apparently, NYS sold its hydro-interests a few years back, and along with them, essentially government rights to the private companies to control (i.e., bully) the small property owners along the banks of these rivers.
Gotta love NY.
Look over the exhibits at the Fall's visitor center and you'll see that Niagara has long been "destroying itself", having moved many miles upstream over the millenia. Its functional beauty is that no dam is needed: power is made from the natural "head" of the falls, which remains roughly constant over time. A remarkable situation; and exploited, so far, without much ruining the view.
It's also important to realize that Niagara's power is, in majority, atrributable to the massive Great Lakes Watershed outside of NYS. (A minority of Niagara's power is from runoff stemming from within NY State.) The notion that this green power, "made" in NY, should only be used to advantage in NY is specious until you consider the gift this power offers in return to the world's climate. Supporting a portion of the NYS economy, it can obviate the need for coal, similar to how hydropower resources do for the Pacific NW states. Viewed in this light, optimizing it's use for producing green power is counter-destructive of nature on a grand scale (Greatl Lakes residents benefit by the climate change mitigation result). Bypassing this opportunity in a move toward coal instead is ___ (adjective of your choice).
"Why is destroying a natural wonder considered green?"
It's not being destroyed in any way whatsoever. Besides even if it was do you think you will get to enjoy it longer if we use it's renewable energy or put a coal plant in instead which will contribute to global warming.
So what do all of you people plan to do about this.... aside from bitch that is. I am willing to stand up and fight, Are you? There is no such thing as "clean coal." This is our air, and we have a right to breath. This is our water and we have a right to not only have a healyth drink, but also eat a fish or two from time to time without worries of Hg contamination. This is OUR WORLD and we DO have a say! NO MORE DIRTY POWER! NO MORE DIRTY AIR! I WANT TO DRINK MY TAP WATER! IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THOSE WITH MONEY DON'T CARE!
Remember to vote, vote these assholes out of office, and vote in people that will fight for green power.
Make a lot of noise... "thay" don't like it.... so it can only be good.
=== author's response follows ====
Your outrage is felt. While TreeHugger writers do not lobby for specific laws or regulations, and do not support or oppose specific candidates up for election, we do try to provide perspectives outside the normal one-off issue analysis one gets in mainstream media.
Hence, this post offered a conceptual alternative to "clean coal" that could resonate with those interested in adding jobs, sparking economic growth, expanding the green power segment, preserving clean air and water, and mitigating climate change. The trick is to find a way to have a County commissioner pick up this theme and have it resonate with his/her constituency and in State government. Many times people do not even realize that alternatives exist. It is probably not a cooincidence that a recent survey showed most residents of the Buffalo area never even visit the Falls. Why would we expect them to be thinking actively about expanding power from it?
It's not being destroyed in any way whatsoever. Besides even if it was do you think you will get to enjoy it longer if we use it's renewable energy or put a coal plant in instead which will contribute to global warming.
I was talking about the suggestion to divert all the water going over the falls to a hydro plant...
diverting all the water that normally goes over Niagara Falls into a new hydro complex for most of the year.
That is destroying the falls. I don't agree with the coal plant idea, but I also don't think the falls should be shut off. Something can/should be designed to use the current of the river, not the falling water potential. Then any swift moving river could be used to generate electricity.
wow!!!!