Skip to main content

View Diary: Koch Brothers Storing Oil Sands Waste on Bank of Detroit River (64 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Just looks like another coal pile from afar (5+ / 0-)

    Like the one at the Wyandotte power station (and right next to the city park), most people wouldn't realize how toxic it is.

    Though coal piles are not much better, just too common of a eyesore.

    I am surprised they didn't just lease Zug Island (Delray Detroit) for that pile - as toxic as it is around there already.

    Ohh, that's right, the Koch's don't care where they dump their crap - industrial, political, or otherwise.

    Conservatism is an obsession with the past ... with little regard for the future.

    by RUNDOWN on Sat May 18, 2013 at 09:13:11 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Indeed. (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      native, RUNDOWN, dougymi, duckhunter, 6412093

      Petroleum coke isn't any worse than coal (it's on average even a bit cleaner).  That's not so much saying that petroeum coke is clean, it's more of a comment on how dirty it is to burn coal.

      As a comment that will be less popular here on DK... burning wood is also as dirty as burning coal without scrubbers.  It's really an atrocious fuel source in terms of air quality and it bothers me to no end when I see people propose it as an alternative.  But that is neither here nor there.  :Þ  In general, burning solids is really dirty.

      •  That is why backyard fireplaces and chimineas..... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ginny in CO

        irk me.

      •  Yes and no (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        blueoasis, KenBee

        This is a pet peeve of mine, also.  I've testified against many word burning power plants and compared the pollution to coal burning power plants.

        Wood can produce more nitrogen oxides and particulates, than even "scrubbed" coal, but wood won't emit nearly as much sulfur oxides as coal.

        Orly, it isn't evidence just because you downloaded it from the internet.

        by 6412093 on Sat May 18, 2013 at 02:29:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  It's worse than coal (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KenBee, Ginny in CO
        Petcoke is like coal, but dirtier. Petcoke looks and acts like coal, but it has even higher carbon emissions than already carbon-intensive coal.

            On a per-unit of energy basis petcoke emits 5 to 10 percent more carbon dioxide than coal.
            A ton of petcoke yields on average 53.6 percent more CO2 than a ton of coal.
            The proven tar sands reserves of Canada will yield roughly 5 billion tons of petcoke – enough to fully fuel 111 U.S. coal plants to 2050

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site