Reuters, V. Y. (2016, July 20). Nuclear developers have big plans for pint-sized
power plants in UK.The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2016/08/22/business/22reuters-britain-nuclear-smr.html?_r=0

This article talks about nuclear subsidies that are very important for New York’s “Clean-Energy Plan.” The plan is to withdraw half of its electricity from renewable and clean energy sources such as solar power and wind by depending on new technologies. However, as the idea plans to go public, the discussion of new technologies have been “overshadowed” of something old, which are nuclear power plants.

I think this article is important because it addresses multiple financial and environmental issues. Focusing on the environmental issues, this article does a good job of stating that the replacement of nuclear plants with gas-powered generators releases more greenhouse emissions, leading to pollution. This article relates to environmental science because it talks about the different ways nuclear-powered plants and gas-powered plants treat the environment.

Thomas, S., & Croft, A. (2016, August 22). Nuclear Developers Have Big Plans
for Pint-Sized Power Plants in UK. Retrieved August 28, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2016/08/22/business/22reuters-britain-nuclear-smr.html?_r=0

This article is about power plants in London, in which the main topic is aimed the lack of mini-nuclear power plants that could solve “Britain’s looming power crunch.” In these kind of power plants, small modular reactors (SMR) utilize existing or new nuclear technology in order to produce about one-tenth of the amount of electricity produced by well-known businesses and companies. According to critics, the big issue is that it might be very expensive, and that it is not worth the cost.

This article completely leaves out the conversation of pollution. The critics mentioned in the article did not even talk about the effects of pollution, only the cost of the nuclear power plants. The fact that they do not even address the state of pollution underscores the lack of general human concerns for the consequences of the environment. When people read this, they will not even think about the negative effects of the plants because it wasn’t even talked about in the article.

Hirstenstein, A. (2016, July 20). These Clean Energy Projects Pollute More Than Coal Power Plants. Retrieved August 28, 2016, from
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-21/these-clean-energy-projects-pollute-more-t han-coal-power-plants

The main topic this article addresses is a kind of power plant that supplies a steady supply of clean energy from the natural heat of Earth: Geothermal plants. However, it was found evident that, in Turkey, some of these wells pollute the atmosphere as much as coal-fired power plants. The main substance emitted from these power plants is carbon dioxide. A graphic showed how much Turkey’s geothermal plants pollute the air compared to coal, lignite, and natural gas, revealing that lignite produced the most grams of carbon dioxide out of the three.

This article is related to environmental science because it calls into question the reality of different kinds of “environmentally friendly” power plants. Clearly stated in the article, the geothermal power plants were presented to be “clean” and “renewable”, however they were proved to be just as polluting as coal-fired power plants. I think this article is great because it is able to disprove the fact that “clean” power plants are not so clean after all.

Bayar, T. (2016, June 22). Romania coal power plants violating EU law says
report. Retrieved August 28, 2016, from http://www.powerengineeringint.com/articles/2016/06/romania-coal-power-plants-violating-eu-law-says-report.html

This article talks about how Romania is defying the European Nation’s emissions law on releasing a coal-fired plant fleet. Bayar reported that, “The report found that, of Romania’s 11 coal-fired power plants, only two have avoided exceeding EU emissions standards while the rest have continued to operate illegally.” Five plants of the eleven had failed to reduce EU-mandated levels including other thermal plants that happened to be suspended by the European Guard.

Again, this brings up the conversation about power plants being an environmental issue due to the fact that it can cause widespread pollution across the world. I think that the actions of the EU tackling this power plant fleet is very important because of the long terms effects of pollution.

Williams, D. (2016, August 15). World Bank considers financing of Kosovan coal-fired power plant. Retrieved August 28, 2016, from http://www.powerengineeringint.com/articles/2016/08/world-bank-considers-financing-of-kosov an-coal-fired-power-plant.html

This article mainly discusses the debate of whether to implement a coal-powered plant in Kosovo. Their government says the plant is essential to the territory’s energy security. This plant is aimed at alleviating energy consumption in public buildings and demonstrating economic viability of energy investments. In order to approve the investment towards the power plant, requiring to meet all relevant environmental, social, and technical analysis.

I believe that implementing a power plant in Kosovo is not a good idea because of the amount of pollution it may induce on the world. This is an environmental issue because some people build useless power plants for their own financial benefit. This one in particular is aimed to reduce energy consumption and demand within the main population, however that can backfire because of the environmental pollution it can cause. Yes, it can save energy, but everything these days comes at a cost with a certain consequence. This plant, in my opinion, is just not worth the kind of damage it can do to our atmosphere.

Kemp, J. (2016, November 14). Old and worn out, U.S. coal-fired power plants easy prey for

gas: Kemp. Retrieved November 20, 2016, from,

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-coal-kemp-idUSKBN13920C

This article discusses how Obama’s administration is to blame for the closings of coal-fired power plants. More than 400 power units have been closed down, and about 33,000 jobs have been lost. This is hazardous because coal now only accounts for about a third of generated electricity in the United States. People blame Obama because of the “war on coal,” and that he is fighting for solar powered energy instead of coal and gas powered energy. It is going to get worse for coal-fired power plants, as their numbers are currently declining, according to the article.

I am happy that the coal-fired power units are being closed down because it help reduce air pollution. With fewer power plants, it would be much easier to save the environment and prevent further damage to the air we breath. I understand the tragedy of all those lost job, however I believe that they should find a job that is still local where they spend their efforts in doing something more environmentally friendly. These critics of Obama need to realize that his actions are for the greater good, and will pay off in the long run.

Hopkins, J.S. (2016, November 18). Maryland’s plea to EPA: Make out-of-state power plants run

pollution controls. The Center for Public Integrity. Retrieved November 20, 2016, from      

https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/11/18/20475/maryland-s-plea-epa-make-out-state-power-plants-run-pollution-controls

This article talks about the implementation of nineteen new power plants across the east coast, including three in southwest Indiana. The state of Maryland was outraged, and made a plea to the EPA, begging coal-fired power plants to run their control equipment throughout the summer. Ten of the nineteen stated power plants were reviewed and identified as “super polluters,” because they were ranked within the top 100 of U.S. industrial sites for toxic material emitted into the air. I believe Maryland has the right to do so because these power plants are of great danger to the air.

I think that they should not implement these power plants because they can cause great damage to the environment. This world already has polluted the air enough, and we already have an abundance of coal-fired power plants, so why build and install more? It’s a waste of time, money and land, and they can use that money for better purposes that actually save the environment rather than destroy it.

Funk, J. (2016, November 8). FirstEnergy to sell or close power plants if Ohio, Pennsylvania do

not return to regulated rates. Retrieved November 20, 2016, from,

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2016/11/firstenergy_to_sell_or_close_p.ht

This article bases its central idea about a power plant company being sold in Cleveland, Ohio. The company is called FirstEnergy, and they are seriously considering selling their business due to tough competition, unless the states of Ohio and Pennsylvania support them and regulate them in setting prices or creating a “regulation-like structure for them.” That company just cannot afford to compete with today’s power prices. The prices of gas-fired power plants and wind powered farms have decreased dramatically, and FirstEnergy just cannot keep up. Without the support of Ohio and Pennsylvania, they cannot continue their business.

I think this is just an act of incompetence in the business world. Business leaders are expected to keep up with the immense competition, however FirstEnergy clearly did not demonstrate this. After reading the entire article and based off the reasons for their closure, I think it is almost entirely their fault for running out of business. Since they could not keep up with the competition, they had to call support from someone else so that they can keep up with the competition.

Cosier, S. (2016, November 17). Could power plant waste help cut water pollution? Science.

Retrieved November 20, 2016, from

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/11/could-power-plant-waste-help-cut-water-pollution

This article talks about how Dan Johnson’s farm, based in Cambellsport, Wisconsin, receives a lot of river water, where it “ trickles through his crop fields, then beneath a small white structure where a pump sucks up small water samples.” The point of this article is to conduct an experiment to see if power plant waste can actually cut down on water pollution. Polluted runoff on Johnson’s farm is high, which is why they are testing this. The results from nearby coal plants found that gypsum helps phosphorous levels remain constant within his soil.  

I personally thought that power plant waste was nothing but a toxicant to this world, just like other human produced waste products. After reading this article and trying to piece together the experiment, I was astonished to find that something that pollutes the world can be environmentally beneficial.

Cassell, B. (2016, November 14). Gas-fired power plants make progress in fall 2016. Electric

Light & Power. Retrieved November 20, 2016, from,

http://www.elp.com/articles/2016/11/gas-fired-power-plants-make-progress-in-fall-2016.html

This article consists of many project highlights that all discuss power plant issues and business affairs. One project highlight that stood out to me the most was the one about The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. Last December 7, they proposed an “air permit for a new natural gas-fired combined-cycle electric power plant for Indeck Niles.” This plant will be featured with the latest technologies that employ higher temperatures to achieve optimal efficiency methods.

I think that this method with new technologies is very useful when it comes to taking forward steps in saving the environment. I think it is really cool to see power plants striving towards environmentally efficient methods, especially with the levels of air pollution the human race has caused. To be honest, I think that it takes a lot of money and work to achieve this, and not very many people will cooperate in taking these steps. However, I still think it can be done.