Coal Emissions--scary stuff!

Coal Emissions--scary stuff!

PostBy: Ken L On: Wed Dec 20, 2006 2:39 pm

I began burning coal last year because of the price of oil, the fact that my furnace's heat exchanger had a hole in it and I can't afford yet to buy a new furnace, and finally because I had this coal/wood stove that was in the house when I bought it. I have been concerned about the emissions that result from burning coal and have just found a study that speaks to this issue. I'm sorry to say I find it very disturbing. Here is the site's address. http;//www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

For example,here are a few bits of info that I read there. There is more radioactive energy released from burning coal than the energy created by its consumption. Also, people that live near coal fired electricity plants are exposed to more radiation than people that live near nuclear plants. There isn't any technology used to collect any of these emissions and coal plants are not regulated and are allowed to send all of this pollution into the atmosphere. There are many volatile materials in coal ash also so be very careful you don't breath a lot of it. I had no idea that coal had radioactive elements in it among other dangerous gases. Of course any fuel we use has dangerous levels of emissions but this was a real eye opener. Just an FYI for you all. Ken L
Ken L
 

PostBy: coaledsweat On: Wed Dec 20, 2006 3:10 pm

Your house, if it is wood, stone or brick probably emits about the same radiation as does ANY fossil fuel.
However, we all know how clean nuclear power is.
coaledsweat
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

PostBy: rouxzy On: Wed Dec 20, 2006 3:59 pm

I work in a nuclear plant and am well aware of different sources of radiation. You'll pick up more dose in your cellar from radon then you will living next door to a power plant. Also if you put a mantel from a gas lantern or a ceramic plate, (yes like the ones you eat off of), it will set dose meters off. Hanging out in your back yard enjoying the sun you will pick up dose. The list goes on and on. Be careful what you read, hear or see for information. All information can be twisted to mean what ever the author wants it to.
Tom
rouxzy
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mark III
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut / Anthracite


PostBy: Richard S. On: Wed Dec 20, 2006 4:52 pm

rouxzy wrote: All information can be twisted to mean what ever the author wants it to.
Tom


Unfortunate but true, being that the author works for Oak Ridge it's to his benefit that the article lean towards nuclear. Do you think they would have published if it was otherwise? I'm not argiung one way or the other but always look at the source... I rarely trust any report that I see because it's always slanted towards whatever the source is.
Richard S.
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

Coal Emissions

PostBy: Ken L On: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:54 am

You guys all make great points, especially about the bias the author potentially has. I hadn't caught that he worked for Oak Ridge. What I'd really like to know is what actually goes out of our heating units and not an electricity generating plant. I have a 1981 stove and am wondering if the US Gov. has emission regulations with coal heating units. Anyone know if manufacturers are subject to any and if so what?
Ken L
 

PostBy: Richard S. On: Thu Dec 21, 2006 11:47 am

I didn't even fully read it but I'm sure he makes some valid points, but again I find more often than not articles such as that conveniently leave out pertinent information that would support the other side.. for that you have to go the opposing view who of course leave all the good points about the opposition out of their arguments... :P Round and round she goes...

As far as comparing your heating unit to a power plant I don't think there is any comparison. If you were both burning the same fuel then undoubtedly your heating unit would create more emissions pound for pound of fuel because there are no environmental controls. Having said that power plants are burning bituminous coal not anthracite, common sense tells me bituminous is far less environmentally friendly. Don't quote me on that I don't have any studies to point to, I've looked numerous times and can't find anything specific to anthracite.

As far as regulations go I'm not aware of any federal regulations but I'm sure there are areas of the US that it would be on a state or local level. Some places won't even let you light a bar-b-que's or run a weed whacker let alone burn coal for heating.

--------------

Just my .02 cents about nuclear, true it's very clean BUT the waste it does produce doesn't go way for what amounts to forever. Until there is national plan in place for what they are going to do with all the waste currently stored at the hundreds of facilities across the nation I really think it should be put on the back burner.
Richard S.
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

Re: Coal Emissions

PostBy: Richard S. On: Thu Dec 21, 2006 12:32 pm

Ken L wrote:I have a 1981 stove and am wondering if the US Gov. has emission regulations with coal heating units. Anyone know if manufacturers are subject to any and if so what?


I PM'd Jerry from Leisure Line about this, I'm sure he'll have an answer for you.
Richard S.
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

PostBy: coaledsweat On: Thu Dec 21, 2006 12:47 pm

I'm not sure about the Feds but some states do. In Connecticut the CT-DEP only approves Anthracite coal for home heating, Bituminous and others are forbidden.

The reason is it is a much cleaner fuel (pollution/smoke).
coaledsweat
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

Re: Coal Emissions--scary stuff!

PostBy: coaledsweat On: Thu Dec 21, 2006 6:57 pm

Ken L wrote:For example,here are a few bits of info that I read there. There is more radioactive energy released from burning coal than the energy created by its consumption.


I've figure it out! It's a plot!
I just reread the first post and caught this. Just a rough calculation, my boiler puts out 1,500,000 BTUs in a day. Thats a lot of energy. So....

It's the coal stove guys getting out of warranty stuff (do coal stoves ever break?).

Or?

The terrorists....

Because we'd all be dead in a week or two after switching to coal if this were true. :o
coaledsweat
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

PostBy: FedFire47 On: Fri Dec 22, 2006 2:20 am

I have no government study to back this up but let me tell you what my training as a firefighter tells me. There are 3 types of radiation: Alpha, Beta, and Gamma. Alpha being stopped with a piece of paper (common in all facets of life i.e. smoke detectors, microwaves, etc.) Beta being stopped with distance (usually less then 2 ft) and also clothing. Gamma being the big one (X-rays, those dreaded nuke plants, and weapons)

The spy that was killed in Russia recently was killed by an Alpha emitter. Large doses of Alpha over a period of time if ingested will kill you. Alpha radiation to be ingested has to be physically on your food or whatever it is that you are ingesting. Coal ash, plants, emissions, whatever you may say is an Alpha emitter. In my professional opinion in order for it to hurt you would have to physically be inhaling the fumes from the furnace or the ash for extended periods of time on purpose for it to have any effect.

What it basically comes down to is that this particular radiation is in the enviornment already and you get a dose of it everyday. For an Alpha emitter to have a tremendous effect it would have to be a deliberate act so like the Coalman said don't believe everything you read.
FedFire47
 

PostBy: coalkirk On: Fri Dec 22, 2006 8:42 am

I don't think there is a major risk from coal emmisions, however, when I empty my ash pan and handle coal ashes, I wear a dust mask. There is some nasty stuff in coal ash that you don't want to breathe. An ounce of prevention.
coalkirk
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Harman VF3000
Coal Size/Type: antrhcite/rice coal

PostBy: Yanche On: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:17 pm

I wear a respirator when handling my coal and ashes. I know I'm overly cautious but I just don't like all the junk when I blow my nose after handling coal. The coal that I'm burning is stored inside in a heated space is particularly dusty. It had been in long term storage outside uncovered where falling leaves mixed in. Since I typically add five to seven 25 pound coal hogs at a time it can get quite dusty. If you use a respirator be sure to read the maintenance cleaning instructions.

Yanche
Yanche
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Alternate Heating Systems S-130
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea

PostBy: mjwood0 On: Fri Dec 22, 2006 3:53 pm

Yanche wrote:I wear a respirator when handling my coal and ashes. I know I'm overly cautious but I just don't like all the junk when I blow my nose after handling coal. The coal that I'm burning is stored inside in a heated space is particularly dusty.


I'm quite thankful that the bagged coal I've gotten thus far has been oiled. I've had no dust at all from the coal and I'm starting to get a nice oiled coal bin from use. Should keep rust down.

The ashes are another thing entirely. I've got a metal garbage can outside that I put them in and it seems that no matter how I plan with the wind and everything, I still get ash all over. Perhaps a dust mask isn't such a bad idea. :wink:
mjwood0
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Leisure Line
Stove/Furnace Model: Econo

PostBy: rouxzy On: Fri Dec 22, 2006 4:15 pm

I agree with the dust mask because wheather it is coal dust or sheet rock dust, too much and that's a bad thing. Coal Man as far as nuclear wastes goes. What people do not understand is that the spent fuel is the only thing that has a very long half life. Nuclear wastes can include a simple pair of cotton gloves that a worker wore that contains very little dose. This waste can become harmless as quick as in a couple of hours. The most dangerous part of the nuclear industry is ignorance, and I don't mean that in a duragatory way toward you or anybody else on this board. Our government does nothing to inform us of the nuclear of coal industries because it would show they are taking sides and may lose votes.
Tom
rouxzy
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mark III
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut / Anthracite

PostBy: FedFire47 On: Fri Dec 22, 2006 4:47 pm

rouxzy wrote:What people do not understand is that the spent fuel is the only thing that has a very long half life.


25,000 years from my last class. Now they want to start trasporting it all to a mountain in Nevada. Typical government operation to allow nuclear energy then have absolutely no plan to store the waste that will be here for another 25,000 years. I had to say that again so everyone knows I'm not making a mistake. All that waste will be radioactive for 25,000 years. I'm sure when they initiate their plan to transport it they will leave the poor truck drivers out to hang with no security so the stupid ass terrorists will attack the truck and have enough juice to make themselves a couple of nukes. In case anyone doesn't know that is where the nuke energy for weapons comes from depleted uranium or spent fuel rods as was referred before.

One more side note and I'm way off topic here but I gotta say it. I just completed my Weapons of Mass Destruction refresher last week. The government is absolutely sure now that the former Soviet Union had 4 suitcase nuke bombs go missing and all spent fuel rods from a nuke facility as well. Ever see the movie The Day After?
FedFire47