Florida Power & Light Wants to Build Two Monster Coal Pollut
From the article: * 5000 acres
* two 980 MW coal plants * 14 million tons of carbon dioxide into the air every year. * projected mercury output of 180 pounds annually, or about seven times as much as what is produced by a larger power plant in Martin County. * Restoring the Everglades is now estimated to cost at least $11 billion, a hefty but necessary public investment. * supply electricity to about 650,000 homes throughout South Florida.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/16716580.htm
Posted on Sun, Feb. 18, 2007
The last thing the River of Grass needs By CARL HIAASEN
Once upon a time, a kid could catch a stringer of bass anywhere in the Everglades, and fry up the whole batch with nothing to fear.
Now the bass are getting loaded with mercury, and signs posted on the shores of freshwater canals and lakes warn anglers that eating too many fish can be perilous.
It's not a good omen when poisonous chemicals start showing up near the top of the food chain. For that reason, Dan Kimball, the superintendent of Everglades National Park, worries a lot about mercury.
Kimball recently wrote to the state Department of Environmental Protection about a huge coal-burning power plant that Florida Power & Light wants to build on the western side of Lake Okeechobee.
The superintendent said that mercury emissions from the proposed Glades Power Park facility ''will increase . . . the risk of toxic effects to both humans and wildlife.'' He also expressed concerns about the inevitable degradation of air quality.
Kimball's not the only one with hard questions about Glades Power Park. The Everglades Coalition is mounting a campaign to fight the project, which must be reviewed by numerous state and federal agencies before it's approved.
Last year, plans for a similar FPL facility were unanimously rejected by the St. Lucie County Commission, largely because of pollution issues.
Glades County commissioners are much more enthusiastic, anticipating 300 new jobs and a $21 million boost in property-tax revenues.
Using pulverized coal is one of the dirtiest ways to produce electricity, and a major source of the greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, that cause global warming.
FPL says that Glades Power Park will be one of the nation's cleanest- burning facilities, equipped with advanced devices that will keep the pollution output substantially below state and federal limits.
That's nice to hear, but it's also worth remembering that every utility in the United States makes basically the same righteous promise whenever it's seeking approval for a new plant. This is not an industry with unassailable credibility.
Glades Power Park would be built on 5,000 acres of what is now sugar- cane fields near Moore Haven. There would be two 980-megawatt units, the first of which would go online in 2012. FPL says the plant would ultimately supply electricity to about 650,000 homes throughout South Florida.
Critics acknowledge that Glades Power Park would run cleaner than many existing plants, but they also point out that -- according to FPL's own estimates -- the stacks would belch as much as 14 million tons of carbon dioxide into the air every year.
No less disturbing is the projected mercury output of 180 pounds annually, or about seven times as much as what is produced by a larger power plant in Martin County.
Mercury being highly concentrated, very small amounts can dangerously affect fish, birds and wildlife over large areas.
Some people wonder why FPL has chosen a pulverized-coal system over coal gasification technology, which is more costly but much less harmful to the water, air and natural habitats.
In an ''integrated gasified'' cycle plant, coal is converted to gas at high temperatures, then cooled and cleaned in a turbine. Contaminants such as mercury, sulfur and nitrogen oxides are removed before the fuel is burned, and significant amounts of carbon dioxide and other emissions can be trapped and stored.
Tampa Electric Co. operates a coal-gasification plant, but FPL says a similar system wouldn't be efficient or reliable at an operation as large as Glades Power Park.
The proposed site is about 40 miles north of the Big Cypress National Wildlife Refuge, and 70 miles from what remains of the Everglades. That's close enough to require FPL to follow rigid U.S. restrictions on smokestack emissions near national parks.
Fortunately for Floridians, the review process for new utility plants is lengthy, and there will be time to demand not just assurances from FPL, but answers and even options.
Restoring the Everglades is now estimated to cost at least $11 billion, a hefty but necessary public investment. The project remains an uphill struggle -- scientifically, technologically and politically.
The last thing that the River of Grass needs at this critical period is a giant coal-burning plant near its headwaters. Such a thing cannot possibly be operated without long-term impacts, downwind, downriver and high in the atmosphere.
This is the start of a long battle, and there's cause to be worried even if you don't like fish for supper.
It's the same air, same water, same problem.
Ours.