The two lawsuits filed in Mecklenburg and Wake counties Friday cite groundwater pollution at all 12 of the plants and illegal seepage from ash ponds at most of them. Among them are Allen on Lake Wylie in Gaston County and Marshall on Lake Norman in Catawba County. The suits say ash violations, if not corrected, “pose a serious danger to the health, safety and welfare of the people of the state of North Carolina and serious harm to the water resources of the state.”
On the surface this seems to be a good thing, but the across-the-board nature of these filings raises some questions. Will the court be asked to look at the problem as an "average", where relatively clean sites make the dirty ones seem less so? Or is this move merely preemptive in nature, to keep others from filing suits:
Riverbend has been portrayed in recent years as a looming menace. Nothing could be further from the truth. The employees who operated the station for more than eight decades did so with dedication to safety, environmental stewardship and operational excellence. Since Riverbend’s retirement, barely a trickle of water returns to Mountain Island Lake from the plant’s ash basins.
Are some of those unpermitted discharges? That’s a technical legal question.
Are they impacting the water quality in Mountain Island Lake? Absolutely not.
In a proposed order that will be open for public comment for 30 days, Duke agrees to assess the sources and extent of contamination at Riverbend and at its Asheville power plant. Duke would be fined $99,000 if the order becomes final. “We must know the extent of any contamination before a meaningful corrective action plan can be carried out,” said Jamie Kritzer, a spokesman for the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
Really? You're going to rely on (and apparently are dependent upon) the company responsible for the pollution to yell you how bad the pollution is, before you can come up with a "meaningful" plan? What part of "conflict of interest" do you not understand? It's not unlike asking a criminal to prosecute himself, frankly, and is so far off the mark from what the public expects from the DENR that it boggles the mind.
Submitted by scharrison on Thu, 06/20/2013 - 11:52am
And Jesus said unto his flock, "Yeah, we were going to have some fish too, but there's something wrong with them."
The Southern Environmental Law Center filed the notice, which is required under the Clean Water Act, on behalf of Cape Fear River Watch, the Waterkeeper Alliance and the Sierra Club. They say the lake is contaminated by selenium, an ash element that can cause reproductive problems in fish and wildlife. Contaminated groundwater, they claim, threatens the water supply of a low-income community.
The fact that SELC has to bring legal action to mitigate this is a shame, especially since Duke Energy has known about the negative impact of selenium for decades:
Submitted by scharrison on Sat, 05/25/2013 - 10:29am
When it comes to clean water, there's no such thing as a safe short cut:
In March, the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) filed a lawsuit over coal ash pollution seeping from ponds at a power plant in Asheville, N.C. owned by Duke Energy's Progress subsidiary. This week, DWQ amended that suit to address similar issues at Duke Energy's Riverbend plant on Mountain Island Lake, which provides drinking water for over 750,000 people in the Charlotte area.
While it might be a truism to say, "We shouldn't be worrying about coal waste because we shouldn't be burning coal anymore", the fact is, we are, and will continue to do so to some degree for many years to come. That being said, coal proponents love to talk about how cheap it is to burn coal. But you know what? Costs are accrued during the whole cycle, and that includes disposal of the toxic wastes. Skimping on that not only creates a false cost formula, it can change the chemical formula of our water, too:
Submitted by scharrison on Fri, 04/19/2013 - 8:11pm
I guess this means I can Google my ass off and not feel guilty (get your mind out of the gutter, people):
Google said it is committed to using renewable energy at its data centers — the reason it plans to participate in a new program Duke Energy is developing for large customers that want to buy renewable energy. "As more of the world moves online, demand for Google's services continues to grow — and we want our renewable energy options to grow with it," he said. Google said it operates some of the world most efficient data centers, and in 2007 made a voluntary commitment to become carbon neutral.
We'll have to wait and see if the Victorian Era NC GOP will try to put the kibosh on this, but it looks like Duke Energy is all for it, so... If they (or Americans For the Prosperous) do decide to oppose it, there will need to be some serious explaining:
Duke Energy reported a profit of $1.792 billion to the federal government in 2012 which, at a rate of 35%, should have resulted in a federal tax liability of $627 million. Nonetheless, as a result of its use of creative tax avoidance techniques it actually enjoyed a federal tax rate of negative 2.6% and received a rebate of $46 million.
For the five years between 2008 and 2012, Duke reported a total profit of just over $9 billion. Again, however as a result of tax avoidance techniques, its effective federal tax rate for this period was -3.3% (i.e., negative 3.3%). In other words, Duke received a net federal tax rebate for the five-year period of $299 million.
On Tuesday, Duke named John Fremstad of Orlando, Fla., to head its data-center recruiting efforts. The program has been an enormous success in North Carolina, where Duke (NYSE:DUK) has been a major player in closing 15 data-center deals.
I'm not sure squandering our resources should be described as an "enormous success", and I'm pretty sure other residential customers would agree with me:
BlueNC is a labor of love. Views expressed by any particular community member are simply that: the views of that particular member. If you have questions or concerns about the content you see here, please contact us.