Risk Reduction – A Good Investment Second in a two part series:

There are costs to human well being at every stage of fossil fuel extraction, use and disposal. There are also alternatives that provide energy and more jobs than fossil fuel technology can today.

I wrote extensively about air pollution, water pollution and green house gas emissions in the supporting documentation for a position statement on fossil fuel published on Shoreline Solar Projects website. The sources cited include the Environmental Protection Agency, American Lung Association, Harvard Professor Dr. Paul Epstein and the US Energy Information Administration.

The information cited is still relevant today. What was not included were some of the human stories behind the statistics.

In "Coal Ash the toxic threat to our health and environment" by Physicians for Social Responsibility and Earth Justice daylights a dire picture of the impact of the waste generated from coal fired power plants.

Coal might seem like a problem confined to eastern United States but Puget Sound Energy obtains 36 percent of its energy from a coal-fired power plant in Montana. 

Coal Ash is not regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency. Coal ash contains arsenic, boron, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, molybdenum, thallium and selenium all of which cause serious biological disorders pain and death.

Included in their in depth report was the profile of R. G.Hunt and his family. "R.G. Hunt lives in Waterflow, New Mexico on land his family owned for four generations." Up until the mid 1970's the family drank from a well on the property. His sheep "grazed nearby and drank from natural springs and an arroyo (a dry creek bed that runs during the rainy season)." 

In 1972 the San Juan Power Plant was built next to Hunt'sland and began using the dry arroyo to dump their waste. Coal ash was buried in the nearby streambeds.

In 2009 Hunt gave informal testimony to the US House of Representatives Subcommittee on Energy and Environment. "By 1975 after the dumping of the coal ash began, my family started to get sick. I was diagnosed with heavy metal poisoning with extremely high arsenic, iron, lead, and selenium levels. I was so weak I couldn't stand or work, and wasn't expected to live."

Though Hunt survived, he and his wife and children suffered from indigestion, diarrhea, nausea and vomiting and had problems with mental focus and comprehension. Their children's "hair began to fall out, and their eyesight worsened. The children's teachers reported that the kids also had difficulty with simple tasks of concentration and comprehension."

"Once we stopped using the well, we began slowly, to improve." They were sick for more than ten years.

Hunt's 1,400 sheep slowly sickened and died from the lack of safe drinking water. "Within two years I lost my entire sheep herd and took outside jobs, rather than risk selling contaminated meat to my customers."

Although the utility company was fined and ordered to line the ponds, the utility arranged to bury their fly ash in unlined pits in the neighboring San Juan Coal Mine. "As a result, fly ash and scrubber sludge continue to contaminate the Hunts arroyo and ground water. 

Part of what is disturbing about this account is the loss of potable water in an arid part of the country and the lack of ability to enforce clean water laws.

This kind of scenario is played out repeatedly all over the country in connection with various types of fossil fuel extraction and consumption. Those in poor areas are more likely to suffer from the effects of fossil fuels. That is because corporations are more likely to build a facility in communities that do not have the resources to file law suit against them or have lax enforcement of environmental standards. 

Part of Alabama for example is known as "Cancer Alley"because of the 156 industrial facilities including oil refineries and toxic waste dumps concentrated in a 107 mile stretch between Baton Rouge and NewOrleans. 

The good news is there are alternatives to this depressing present state of dependence on fossil fuel. 

R. Christopher Mathis, an Asheville, North Carolina-based consultant on building performance made the claim at the BEST# 2012 conference in Atlanta that "A 30% improvement in U.S. building efficiency would reduce energy bills by $75 billion in 15 years and eliminate the need for 80 new nuclear power plants over the next 20 years. And 30% is easy." 

Remember I mentioned that Puget Sound Energy gets 36% of its electricity from a Coal fired power plant in Montana? Through efficiencies and alternative energy Washington could become a truly coal free state by eliminating the need for coal generated electricity.

"Nationally, about half of all our electricity is gobbled up by buildings and houses. That's twice as much as industry, and almost twice as much as the transportation sector."

Locally there are multiple community solar projects coming online and other collaborative organizations like the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies. Such efforts are helping communities to integrate sustainable energy practices into every day life while fostering business growth.

"Crowdfunding" offers a way for small businesses to invest in clean technology that will help them save money, reduce their dependence on fossil technology and expand their operations. I will cover this in more depth in another posting.

When enough businesses and individuals make such changes, the risks to society as a whole are reduced due to the cumulative effect of decoupling from finite resources.

When policy at the Federal and State levels are put in place that create incentives and regulations to encourage a shift away from finite resources, the market responds with greater investment in renewable energy.

The Environmental Protection Agency released a proposal to limit the amount of carbon pollution allowed by new fossil energy Power Plants. Patterned after laws already in place in California, Oregon and Washington. 

"Achievable standard is in line with investments already being made and will inform the building of new plants moving forward."

The EPA is currently looking for public comment before finalizing the proposal.

Even if the EPA decides to back track from its proposal, the high cost of power from fossil energy and its finite nature make it impractical over the long term. You can read more about the justification for this position in a recent Smart Planet article.

So there is really no practical alternative left to us except to transition away from fossil fuel. The more quickly industry and property owners can do so the less risk to our remaining ecosystems and the humans who depend upon them.