My previous post about this incident was mainly an overview of what happened, and a brief overview of the lack of "clean coal" plants despite a massive marketing and advertising campaign. As a followup to that, news is out today that lawsuits are beginning to be filed against the Tennessee Valley Authority. You can read about the first of what should be many at Democracynow.org .

Unfortunately however, the $165 million lawsuit was filed by land developers, who are claiming that the land was devalued by the coal ash spill. While it is good that such a lawsuit is filed to hopefully influence the Tennessee Valley Authority to rethink their waste containment and treatment, there will certainly be more people affected and injured by this spill than 4 land developers. I would much prefer to see the people's homes that were affected by the disaster as well the fisherman and surrounding communities that use the now contaminated water source to take part in the lawsuit, hopefully their day in court that will come later.

So far the lack of mainstream media coverage has lead to conflicting reports on the toxicity of the water and the air quality (TVA is claiming that water and air quality is safe, while the EPA has found arsenic levels in the water to be 149 times the safe level, which is not at all surprising). However, if indeed the water quality of the Emory River (which the spill dumped into, and as a main tributary to the Tennessee River could affect fish populations and water quality for a massive amount of people), is as toxic the EPA thinks, there will be a lot more people effected than just the 4 real estate developers by this massive spill.



Regardless of who profits from a lawsuit, the bottom line remains the same. If our country is going to solve our energy problems, coal is simply not the answer. The threat of similar accidents combined with the inherent environmental damage caused by extraction and the non existence of plants that can recycle their emissions (thus making them "clean") will hopefully be enough for the new administration to say no to the further construction of coal plants.

To join in to support the United Mountain Defense (a local volunteer environmental group that is on the scene assisting with clean up) go here , and join in petition of a complete and restitutive cleanup by the TVA.

As our country looks forward to a new administration taking office in just a few short weeks, there are several daunting challenges that we face as a nation. The main one being our the state of our economy. The past year's economic free-fall can be directly tied to many of our nations other problems, such as the continuing occupation of Iraq (due to our dependence on foreign energy sources), the enormous trade deficit with China, and our lack of a manufacturing sector. President elect Obama has promised to try and reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources (such as oil) during his first term, and in order to do so, he plans to focus on developing alternative energy sources. By creating new "green jobs" in alternative energy fields, a couple of those issues would be addressed. New labor positions would be created, providing work for those laid off from our manufacturing sector (as our car industry continues a slow meltdown despite a much belated bailout), and hopefully as these new sources become more economically viable, there will be less dependence on foreign oil and oil in general.

Unfortunately however, Obama has discussed exploring several energy options that will have extremely damaging effects on the environment. The main culprits being supposed "clean coal" and off shore drilling. I will save a discussion of off shore drilling for another time, but simply put, there is no such thing as clean coal. Clean coal is simply a marketing term that is designed to sell the use and expansion of coal plants in the U.S. . The version of "clean coal" that they are talking about is cleaner relative to the old way of processing coal, which is perhaps the dirtiest source of energy we currently use, but is in no way "clean". The only "clean" coal plant is still a prototype planned for Illinois and is nowhere near completion. Funded by G.W. Bush in 2003, it was still in the developmental planning phase at the cost of 1.8 billion dollars in 2008 when funding was cut. There is not yet either the money, nor the technology to create a zero emission coal plant, and even if there were, coal still will never be a long term energy solution as it is a finite resource that causes massive environmental damage in its extraction from the earth. The earliest estimate of when a zero emission's coal plant could be online is 2020.

For some quick facts about "clean coal" go to
ThisisReality.org

And to view the Coal Industries promotional site:
Clean Coal USA


Now, with that background in mind, just last week,in a story buried beneath the headlines of most major news outlets, there was a major coal ash spill in eastern Tennessee as more than a billion gallons of coal ash spilled from a containment pond at a Tennessee Valley Authority coal plant contaminating over 300 acres of land. The plant sits on the Clinch River which is a tributary of the Tennessee River, and EPA testing has already shown high levels of arsenic and heavy metals in the water and there is fear that the area drinking wells may be contaminated as well. The spill is much worse in size than the famous Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, and should show this country (if the story ever gets adequate media coverage) that there is no such thing as "clean coal", no matter how it is processed.

For more information on the disaster:
CNN Article

Video Footage:
YouTube
Knox News.com