Finally some optimistic news about the proposed ORCF plant that Baard Industries is planning to build near Wellsville. A little over a week ago I was getting kind of down on the prospects since we haven't heard much lately but that has taken an upturn since this past Sunday.
In Sunday's ER there was story in which John Baardson himself was ensuring us that the plans are still very much alive. Once again he vouched that Baard intends to be a very responsible manufacturer and they find that the product - coal-to-liquid fuels (CTL) - will be a well worth the efforts and expense to produce. Again he emphasized that the area is ideal.
Then yesterday Tom Giambroni of the MJ gave us news that the Ohio EPA has issued an air pollution control permit and scheduled a public hearing at the high school on September 10. The permit issued is not an authorization to start building. According to what I read on the OPEA web site is that they find the plans acceptable and are now ready to proceed to the next step in the process. That would be the public hearing. The effective date on the permit won't be entered until after the hearing and the time period allowed for input of comments. It was interesting to note from what I saw on the EPA site is that they stated that the OPEA is more restricted on what they find permissible than the Federal EPA. The folks in Columbus find that Baard are well with-in those standards.
Then this morning Tom gave us another bit of news that the Sierra Club plans to target Baard and the ORCF. Tom said that in a news release from Nachy Kanfer members of the Sierra Club plan to "turn out in droves" at the next hearing. The news release must have been sent to selective recipients. I couldn't find it anywhere on-line. The only mention of it was in Tom's story. You would think the Sierra Club of Ohio would plaster that all over their web page and to other news sources.
From what I have read and heard so far is that the Sierra Club is more concerned with coal and the methods of mining it. That's a horse of a different color but I guess they are trying to get more news exposure with their intent to target the ORCF planned facility. Skimming through the pages of the OEPA permit I was very impressed with what Baard is willing to do and the restrictions that will be part of the permit. So far all I've heard from the ultra conservative environmental activists is vague threats. Tom quoted a lady from Wintersville that simply stated that the Ohio Valley has enough coal burning plants. She said we don't need any more. Then George Peya from their Salt Springs group is quoted as saying we have not educated ourselves about long term effects from this plant. He threatens us with doom and gloom predictions of being buried in soot and coal dust. Not one of that club's members have offered to back up their claims with any results from scientific data or comparative studies done anywhere in the world. All we heard so far is vague innuendos of problems I'm convinced will not take place. Sure there will be some changes on that hilltop but it will be progressive and beneficial for us tri-state residents. Believe me there have been very many that have educated themselves about this proposed plant and the effects on our region.
Matt Stewart made the comment that Baard doesn't care about us and with that I disagreed. If he were to say that the Sierra Club doesn't care about us I would be inclined to go along with that. Nachy Kanfer commented he is against the use of coal. I got the impression that they would like to see it left in the ground until the end of time. Coal in itself is not the culprit. It's the way it's been used over the course of history that has caused problems. However, as time moves on, man has found ways to use this God given natural resource with out harming us or our surroundings. With all the dust collectors, suppressant controls, covers, filters and screens proposed I have serious doubts that the conversion of coal to fuel will have any ill effects from our valley to anywhere across the world. You'll have to convince me otherwise with other than doom and gloom predictions. You'll have to prove that Baard's plans won't work with other than saying "listen to what I'm saying".
Baard has been warning us that the nay sayers will be coming every since that meet&greet dinner last fall at the EL Country Club. In a piece I wrote in June '07 I mentioned it too. That came from recalling the theatrics that went on with the WTI protesters. I was hoping it wouldn't happen here but it looks like it's gearing up to it.
One permit has been issued with a final ok. The second one is expected in the weeks ahead and the third one is approaching the final stages. It was reported that if they can break ground this year the plant should be operational by 2012. If you want to peruse the OEPA stuff you can find it at http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/transfer/pti_list.html#orcf. It's all there.
For those that want to oppose the plant I say bring it on. We may be a small river village community but you'll have to do better than what you've done so far to dim my optimism. The people at WTI years ago brought in actor Martin Sheen to help with their protests. I wonder if they got any entertainers lined up for this?
I hate to tell you "I told you so" but it looks like the next hearing will be interesting.
ole nib
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Ole Nib: I found your blog, on this subject, thoughtful and pretty much on target with my thinking. However, when you refer to the Sierra Club as “ultra conservative environmental activists” I believe your use of “conservative” is wrongly placed. In my opinion, one could construe that you meant to leave the impression that this group is in support of Republican ideals. This couldn’t be further from the reality of the situation. The Sierra Club, to the best of my knowledge has never, past or present, supported any Republican. The Sierra Club can only be considered as ultra liberal.
I also am hopeful this plant will be built, however, what I am waiting to see is how the politics of all this plays out. Based on all the meetings to date, all the elected Democrats in our area, local; state; and national levels, have expressed support for the Baard project. At the same time they are all supported by the Sierra Club.
With the Sierra Club threats starting, it will be interesting to watch if all these Democrats flip due to pressures from the Political Action Committee of Sierra. We all know PACs are extremely influential on how elected officials will actually cast the necessary vote when the time comes. Lets just hope this isn’t all done for show.
I'll be there Nib, wouldn't miss it. I cant wait for the dirt to start moving. One would have to be crazy not to welcome this with open arms. I for one, love the smell of burning coal. It's like huney buns from Grandmas oven.
It is good to get all points of view. Why would you not want to? If this is such a great and safe thing then why worry who says what or who comes to speak. First and foremost Baard is about the money. We are talking about our kids, our parents and everyone we care about including ourselves so lets do some research and not be afraid or have hostile attitudes to people with different opinions. We need every bit of information we can get, be it good, bad or ugly.
nib, I have to agree with you. The problem with our country is that we are losing our manufacturing capability to other countries because no one wants to have factories in their town. They complain about the economy then they complain when a company wants to build. The Ohio river valley is ripe for industry due to the river and access to major highways. The Port Authority realizes this and markets the area then people complain about it. Regulations have changed and I beleive that industry can be built that won't affect our health or environment and it will be good for our economy.
Again, very well-written post. Thank you.
Hmmm, I guess I'm just not sure why you are so convinced that the Baard plant will be environmentally friendly. You say you leafed through the pages of the draft air permit (which is more than most other people have done, so kudos). Do you have experience evaluating complicated monitoring and reporting requirements? Are you familiar with how limits on air contaminants should be set in order to adequately protect human health? Or are you relying on some trusted independent evaluation (i.e., not what John Baardson promises) that I'm unaware of?
You may have noticed, in going through the permit, that no limits were set on carbon dioxide emissions. In other words, the only reason to believe that Baard will sequester its carbon is their executives' say-so. Ohio EPA won't require it. Lined up against that claim, of course, is practically every single energy executive in the country, who all admit that carbon sequestration won't be commercially deployable in a decade, let alone four years from now. Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Energy (one of the country's largest utilities) said a couple months ago that carbon sequestration had been sold by the coal industry as a 'magical solution,' but the only problem is, they have no clue if they'll ever be able to do it. That doesn't seem like Baard is so interested in being forthright with the public.
Another one of Baard's frequent claims is that they're going to sell their fuel product to the Department of Defense. This is a particularly false claim, and Baard knows it: the 2007 Energy Security and Independence Act explicitly prohibits the federal government from buying liquid coal fuel or any other fuel with a higher carbon emissions ratio than petroleum. That prohibition is in section 526 of the law - feel free to look it up. Let me repeat: this is a federal law that Baard proposes to simply ignore. They won't be able to sell that fuel to the Department of Defense. Maybe they can unload it somewhere else, but again, my point is that they're not being honest with the public.
They haven't been honest on the issue of coal prices - almost tripled since last year (so much for 'cheap' and 'available'). They haven't been honest on the issue of energy independence - liquid coal can't possibly replace our petroleum needs any time soon. For one thing, our infrastructure to transport coal is already stretched beyond capacity. Why then are you so sure that Baard's being honest when they tell you there won't be severe local health impacts?
Maybe you don't trust the Sierra Club's word either, and I respect that. But I take issue with your portrayal of us as ultra-conservative eco-radicals compared with the shining paragon of humility and honesty that is Baard Energy, LLC. Remember that Baard has profit at stake here. You don't think they would say anything to hoodwink the public into sending all that cash into their bank account in Vancouver? The Sierra Club is a non-profit organization, on the other hand, and unlike Baard, we have hundreds of members throughout Columbiana, Jefferson and nearby counties who are concerned about the impact to their health. My comments here are intended to represent their views, not necessarily my own (I grew up in Columbus and live there now). What does Baard have at stake? Will John Baardson be living in Wellsville for the next forty years?
Finally, you mentioned you would like to see something other than 'vague' claims. I would be more than happy to speak with you and share the studies we have done on other 'clean coal' plants. On Baard specifically, we are in the process of commissioning an independent financial and technical analysis, and when that is complete it will be released to the public. As always, feel free to contact me for more information, and thank you for providing this forum for honest discussion.
Nachy Kanfer
Sierra Club National Coal Campaign - Ohio
(614) 461-0734
nachy.kanfer@sierraclub.org
Nancy,
It also seems to me that there are many prosperous river front towns with rail system. But Wellsville is the perfect spot. I wonder why? Desperation? Mindset? Apathy? I'm sure Baard would never take advantage of such a dirt poor desperate for jobs situation. Corporations run this country and it is easy to see why.
Wiz - "Ultra liberal"? In my opinion someone "ultra liberal" would be behind this plant 100%. A conservative would not. They want things unchanged. It was reported that the Sierra Club is going to "target" Baard in hopes to get the plans for the ORCF plant nixed.
I.I. - the man's name is Nachy, not Nancy. It's N-A-C-H-Y.
Nachy - No, I have no experience or education with monitoring or reporting requirements. However, I trust the OEPA does. They don't have a nickel in it and they are an independent agency. They review and consider all sides of the issue and proceed from there. So far they have found everything acceptable and are moving forward with the permitting process.
You say Baard has no idea how carbon sequestion works since it has never been done. In my research I found that it is being accomplished in Canada, Algeria and Scandinavia. Regulation of industrial produced carbon dioxide emissions is being considered but so far it is not required. Baard has shown they are willing to take the extra step to do this even though they are not required. Are you familiar with this area? We're rich in old oil fields, deep mines for coal,clay & salt and sand stone deep underground. We have abundant resources for carbon sequestion.
You mentioned the '07 Energy & Security Act restricting our armed forces from using a CTL fuel. Obviously this is being considered for a change especially if there were a domestic source. There have already been independent studies done that show CTL fuel emits no more or even less CO2 than gasoline from petroleum when it is used.
Our transportation infrastructure in this area is ideal and underused at present. The increased use expected for the ORCF plant would not be a problem. It's already in place and would not be another expense to consider.
I don't recall the folks from Baard saying anything about coal prices. They have mentioned the availability. Northern Appalachia coal is now going for $149/ton. In 2001 it was $53/ton. Prices on commodities have been historically cylindrical. It all depends on the demand. It may come down or even increase. It's the cost of doing business. I'm sure the Baard people have well considered this.
Baard is not telling us there won't be any health impacts with this plant. The OEPA is doing that after reviewing the plans. You're question was misleading. Are you implying that the august professionals at the OEPA are misleading us? Do you question their integrity?
Radicals? Not once in my post did I use the word radical. That was your wording. I don't equate the word activist with radical. Are you trying to tells us something? Was that a Freudian slip to alert us?
Your comment seems to be intent to sully the good name of Baard. I've been following this develop from the get go and have yet to find anything other than to show that Baard is a reputable, honest company. Any government funding they receive will have to be used for which it was given or it will have to be returned.
What earthly difference does it make where John Baardson resides? If and when this plant gets started I suspect he will be in the area quite a bit.
I am increasingly sure this plant will be environmentally safe unlike anything else. Do any of the "clean coal" plants that you mentioned compare anywhere close with all the safety precautions incorporated in the ORCF plans?
No, the fuel produced by the ORCF plant won't be the answer to this nations dependence on foreign oil but it is certainly a step in the right direction. Together with other proposed alternative sources we, as a nation, will be edging toward that answer. By the way, I heard an energy expert say the other evening that to supply the city of New York with electricity it would require the whole state of Connecticut be covered with wind mills. Wind mills,solar, CTL and drilling for new sources of petroleum oil in this country are all needed. Just one or two of them will not be enough. Proving to be safe the ORCF facility will help fill a niche toward that goal.
The public hearings are an open forum for all to state their concerns and ask their questions. I personally look forward to hearing and considering what the Sierra Club members have to say.
Will you be there on the 10th?
ole nib
Nib and others,
As an owner of multiple businesses(no spell check), it makes me smile to read some of Mr. Kanfer's comments. I understand that the purpose of his comments were to show that Mr. Baardson is not truthful, but.......is anyone doubting his acumen as a business man?
It makes no sense to me to charge Baard with wanting to make a profit.(his paragraph 6) Then claim that his cost of goods(coal) is too expensive(para 5) AND he can't sell his finished product(para 4). I am just guessing that someone that is going to invest 5.5BILLION dollars...probably has a plan to get raw product and probably has an idea of whom he will sell it to.
If this is not the case, the Ville is getting in bed with one of the dumbest rich businessmen I have ever seen. OR, our favorite activist, Nachy Kanfer, is so single minded that he will ignore and write anything to prove his point.....commom sense be damned.
TED
Ole Nib: I am confused by your response to my comments. You said…."ultra liberal would be behind this plant 100%.” If this was the case why is Sierra, who are “ultra liberal”, planning on as you stated “It was reported that the Sierra Club is going to "target" Baard in hopes to get the plans for the ORCF plant nixed.” With these statements you must be suggesting that the Sierra Club is “conservative”, are you? Before you answer let me remind you the Sierra Club has never, to the best of my knowledge, ever supported Republican candidates.
In addition, I would remind you the Democrats are the ones against off-shore oil drilling, not the Republicans. And I repeat, it is the Democrats who the Sierra Club endorses. So, in my opinion, your statement that…."ultra liberal would be behind this plant 100%.” is completely incorrect. As you can probably tell, I am standing behind my original comment I made on Wednesday.
Wiz - You're kidding, right? Do you really believe the Sierra Club is liberal? You're relating liberal/conservative beliefs with political parties. That doesn't wash. There are liberal Republicans and,on the same token, there are conservative Democrats.
A lot of PACs hedge their bets on who to back with trying to go with who they think will be winners in the next election. You, in your infinite wisdom, realize that, don't you? Right now it looks like the Democrats will be in the White House in January. If as you say the Sierra Club is putting their money behind the Democrats I would be willing to bet they are hedging those bets.
I have a feeling that the Democrats reluctance to go with Bush's plan for off-shore drilling is due more to politics than using common sense. In my opinion they simply don't want any credit going to the opposition in finding solutions to the energy crisis.
In briefly reading some of the Sierra Club history I am convinced that they are anything but liberal considering some of their causes they backed over the years.
Come on Wiz, you're pulling my leg, aren't you, you rascal.
nib
wiz: are you serious? I mean really, this is not about your favorite sport..bashing liberals. What the hell is wrong with you?
Hi everyone,
The Sierra Club has been known to support some Republicans on occasion (such as Jimmy Stewart down in southeast Ohio), but there's no question that it mostly endorses Democrats. Most of the Club's conservation-related work, however (the National Coal Campaign is one example), is 'non-political' - at least in the sense that we cannot support or oppose specific candidates for office or specific proposed legislation.
Ole Nib - thanks for your response. I'll be at the hearing on the 10th, and I hope you'll come up and introduce yourself! That goes for all the commenters here. I'll be wearing a name tag, and I'm a friendly guy.
Nachy
P.S. After reading over what I previously posted, I did not mean to imply that John Baardson is a dishonorable man. That was unnecessary. I do think that Baard as a company has been misleading the public, for reasons stated, but I did not intend to make a personal attack. Apologies to anyone who read my comment in this way.
Post a Comment