Deep Geothermal Energy – From the winds of the Jetstream to the Bowels of the earth

I haven’t updated this particular topic area for awhile. I think this may hold the future for us all. Deep drilling for geothermal heat rates 3 pages in the New York Times Online. My. Maybe the rich and powerful are starting to get it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/business/energy-environment/24geotherm.html?pagewanted=1&%2359&_r=2&%2359;em&%2359;amp

Deep in Bedrock, Clean Energy and Quake Fears

Published: June 23, 2009

BASEL, Switzerland — Markus O. Häring, a former oilman, was a hero in this city of medieval cathedrals and intense environmental passion three years ago, all because he had drilled a hole three miles deep near the corner of Neuhaus Street and Shafer Lane.

 

 

Multimedia

The Danger of Digging DeeperInteractive Graphic

The Danger of Digging Deeper

 

Enlarge This Image

Christian Flieri for The New York Times

An earthquake halted Markus O. Häring’s geothermal project in Basel, Switzerland.

Green Inc

A blog about energy, the environment and the bottom line.

Share your thoughts.

He was prospecting for a vast source of clean, renewable energy that seemed straight out of a Jules Verne novel: the heat simmering within the earth’s bedrock.

All seemed to be going well — until Dec. 8, 2006, when the project set off an earthquake, shaking and damaging buildings and terrifying many in a city that, as every schoolchild here learns, had been devastated exactly 650 years before by a quake that sent two steeples of the Münster Cathedral tumbling into the Rhine.

Hastily shut down, Mr. Häring’s project was soon forgotten by nearly everyone outside Switzerland. As early as this week, though, an American start-up company, AltaRock Energy, will begin using nearly the same method to drill deep into ground laced with fault lines in an area two hours’ drive north of San Francisco.

Residents of the region, which straddles Lake and Sonoma Counties, have already been protesting swarms of smaller earthquakes set off by a less geologically invasive set of energy projects there. AltaRock officials said that they chose the spot in part because the history of mostly small quakes reassured them that the risks were limited.

Like the effort in Basel, the new project will tap geothermal energy by fracturing hard rock more than two miles deep to extract its heat. AltaRock, founded by Susan Petty, a veteran geothermal researcher, has secured more than $36 million from the Energy Department, several large venture-capital firms, including Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, and Google. AltaRock maintains that it will steer clear of large faults and that it can operate safely.

But in a report on seismic impact that AltaRock was required to file, the company failed to mention that the Basel program was shut down because of the earthquake it caused. AltaRock claimed it was uncertain that the project had caused the quake, even though Swiss government seismologists and officials on the Basel project agreed that it did. Nor did AltaRock mention the thousands of smaller earthquakes induced by the Basel project that continued for months after it shut down.

The California project is the first of dozens that could be operating in the United States in the next several years, driven by a push to cut emissions of heat-trapping gases and the Obama administration’s support for renewable energy.

:}

IN Australia where it holds huge potential, as it does on the whole ring of fire.

http://thinkgeoenergy.com/archives/1832

Australia opens round 2 of the Geothermal Drilling Program


Enlarge ImageAustralia opens the second round of the Geothermal Drilling Program and Australia’s Minister for Resources and Energy, Martin Ferguson AM MP invites geothermal companies to submit applications for funding under this round of the A$50 million (US$39.8 million) program.

Written by: lxrichter
Picture: Habanero, Drilling Rig, Geodynamics (source: Geodynamics)
Reported today, Australia opens the second round of the Geothermal Drilling Program with “The Minister for Resources and Energy, Martin Ferguson AM MP inviting geothermal companies to submit applications for funding under Round 2 of the A$50 million (US$39.8 million) Geothermal Drilling Program, which opened today.

Round 2 funding will provide grants of up to A$7 million (US$5.6 million) on a matching-funding basis to support the drilling of deep geothermal wells and help finance geothermal proof-of-concept projects.
Geothermal energy producers pump water below ground (sometimes as deep as 5 kilometers (3.1 miles)), where it is heated by ‘hot rocks’. The heat energy is then used to generate electricity.

Ferguson said: “Geoscience Australia estimates that if just one per cent of Australia’s geothermal energy was extracted it would equate to 26,000 times Australia’s total annual energy consumption. “Geothermal energy is a renewable energy source with enormous potential in Australia; however, the Government recognizes technical development costs are high.

“The Australian Government is pleased to be able to support drilling at the first stage of development as part of its A$4.5 billion (US$3.5 billion) Clean Energy Initiative.

“Geothermal energy is important because it has the capacity to produce baseload power, diversify Australia’s energy supply and increase our energy security.

“The Australian Government has set a target for 20 per cent of Australia’s electricity generation to come from renewable sources by 2020; a policy which will likely require an additional 45,000 gigawatt-hours of electricity generation from renewable sources.

:}

HOT Rocks Rock

Feds Form 5695 That You Use To Claim The Big Ticket Items In The Stimulus Package

I know that this is an obvious ploy for google numbers but I am the original google whore. I tried to get the PDF file from the Feds converted to a Word file so we could become the goto site for such things but I failed miserabley…(psss. it jam band friday –http://www.youtube.com )

All I succeeded in doing was getting the instructions but I think even they are instructive. In fact I will put the locations of the forms 5695, 3800 and 8910:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f5695.pdf

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8910.pdf

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f3800.pdf

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8OgkjcW0g4

There was a comedian whose whole stick was to read the tax code in a very high minded and serious tone and used to cause audiences to roar. This was the case because we have all had our tax code moments, because we can imagine little people in offices dreaming this shit up, and because we can see people taking advantage of it.

General Instructions

Section references are to the Internal Revenue Code.

What’s New for 2008 Nonbusiness energy property credit expired. You cannot take the nonbusiness energy property credit for property placed in service in 2008.

Credit expanded. You can now include costs for qualified small wind energy property and qualified geothermal heat pump property in figuring the residential energy efficient property credit.

What’s New for 2009 Nonbusiness energy property credit available. The nonbusiness energy property credit will be available for property placed in service in 2009. The credit is available for items such as high-efficiency heating and cooling systems, water heaters, windows, doors, and insulation. The amount of the credit will be limited by the amount of any nonbusiness energy property credit you took in 2006 or 2007.

Qualified solar electric property. There is no limit on the amount of qualified solar electric property costs when figuring the residential energy efficient property credit.

Purpose of Form

Use Form 5695 to figure and take your residential energy efficient property credit, including any credit carryforward from 2007. :}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zkEppr68PM

Apperently you can not be a human and take advantage of this but if you are a Home well you are in like Flin.

Who Can Take the Credit

You may be able to take the credit if you made energy saving improvements to your home located in the United States in 2008. For credit purposes, costs are treated as being paid when the original installation of the item is completed, or in the case of costs connected with the construction or reconstruction of your home, when your original use of the constructed or reconstructed home begins. If less than 80% of the use of an item is for nonbusiness purposes, only that portion of the costs that are allocable to the nonbusiness use can be used to determine the credit.

Home. A home is where you lived in 2008 and can include a house, houseboat, mobile home, cooperative apartment, condominium, and a manufactured home that conforms to Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards.

You must reduce the basis of your home by the amount of any credits allowed.

Main home. Your main home is generally the home where you live most of the time. A temporary absence due to special circumstances, such as illness, education, business, military service, or vacation, will not change your main home.

Special rules. If you are a member of a condominium management association for a condominium you own or a tenant-stockholder in a cooperative housing corporation, you are treated as having paid your proportionate share of any costs of such association or corporation.

Subsidized energy financing. Any amounts provided for by subsidized energy financing cannot be used to figure the credit. This is financing provided under a

federal, state, or local program, the principal purpose of

which is to provide subsidized financing for projects designed to conserve or produce energy.

Residential Energy Efficient Property Credit

You may be able to take a credit of 30% of your costs of qualified solar electric property, solar water heating property, fuel cell property, small wind energy property, and geothermal heat pump property. This includes labor costs properly allocable to the onsite preparation, assembly, or original installation of the property and for piping or wiring to interconnect such property to the home. This credit is limited to:

                      $2,000 for qualified solar electric property costs,

                      $2,000 for qualified solar water heating property costs,

                      $500 for each one-half kilowatt of capacity of qualified fuel cell property for which qualified fuel cell property costs are paid.

                      $500 for each one-half kilowatt of capacity of qualified small wind energy property for which qualified small wind energy property costs are paid (not to exceed $4,000), and

                      $2,000 for qualified geothermal heat pump property costs.

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byjPd28KegM

I could let this stuff go with out comment but then that is nearly impossible. So if I spend money to cut down my neighbors tree so I can get my solar access back, is that tax deductible?

Qualified solar electric property costs. Qualified solar electric property costs are costs for property that uses solar energy to generate electricity for use in your home located in the United States. This includes costs relating to a solar panel or other property installed as a roof or a portion of a roof. The home does not have to be your main home.

Qualified solar water heating property costs.

Qualified solar water heating property costs are costs for property to heat water for use in your home located in the United States if at least half of the energy used by the solar water heating property for such purpose is derived from the sun. This includes costs relating to a solar panel or other property installed as a roof or a portion of a roof. To qualify for the credit, the property must be certified for performance by the nonprofit Solar Rating Certification Corporation or a comparable entity endorsed by the government of the state in which the property is installed. The home does not have to be your main home.

Qualified fuel cell property costs. Qualified fuel cell property costs are costs for qualified fuel cell property installed on or in connection with your main home located in the United States. Qualified fuel cell property is an integrated system comprised of a fuel cell stack assembly and associated balance of plant components that converts a fuel into electricity using electrochemical means. To qualify for the credit, the fuel cell property must have a nameplate capacity of at least one-half kilowatt of electricity using an electrochemical process and an electricity-only generation efficiency greater than 30%.

Costs allocable to a swimming pool, hot tub, or any other energy storage medium which has a function other than the function of such storage do not qualify for the residential energy efficiency credit.  

Qualified small wind energy property costs.

Qualified small wind energy property costs are costs for property that uses a wind turbine to generate electricity for use in connection with your home located in the United States. The home does not have to be your main home.

Qualified geothermal heat pump property costs.

Qualified geothermal heat pump property costs are costs for qualified geothermal heat pump property installed on or in connection with your home located in the United States. Qualified geothermal heat pump property is any equipment that uses the ground or ground water as a thermal energy source to heat your home or as a thermal energy sink to cool your home. To qualifiy for the credit, the geothermal heat pump property must meet the requirements of the Energy Star program that are in effect at the time of purchase. The home does not have to be your main home.

Married taxpayers with more than one home. If you or your spouse lived in more than one home, the credit limits would apply to each of you separately. For qualified fuel cell property, the homes must be your main homes. If you are filing separate returns, both of you must complete a separate Form 5695. If you are filing a joint return, figure your nonbusiness energy property credit as follows.

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4e3cR2H38Wo&feature=related So what do you want to be when you grow up little Johnny? Tax payer A or Tax payer B?

1.        Complete a separate Form 5695 for each home through line 21.

2.        On one of the forms, complete line 22. Then, figure the amount to be entered on line 23 of both forms and enter the combined amount on line 23 of this form.

3.        On the dotted line to the left of the entry space for line 23, enter “More than one home”. Then, complete the rest of this form.

4.        Attach both forms to your return. Joint occupancy. If you occupied your home jointly, each occupant must complete his or her own Form 5695. To figure the credit, the maximum qualifying costs that can be taken into account by all occupants for figuring the credit is $6,667 for qualified solar electric, solar water heating, or geothermal heat pump property; and $1,667 for each one-half kilowatt of capacity of qualified fuel cell or small wind energy property (not to exceed $13,333 for qualified small

 

wind energy property). The amount allocable to you is the lesser of:

1. The amount you paid, or

2. The maximum qualifying cost of the property multiplied by a fraction. The numerator is the amount you paid and the denominator is the total amount paid by you and all other occupants.

These rules do not apply to married individuals filing a joint return.

Example. Taxpayer A owns a house with Taxpayer B where they both reside. In 2008, they installed qualified solar water heating property at a cost of $8,000. Taxpayer A paid $6,000 towards the cost of the property and Taxpayer B paid the remaining $2,000. The amount of cost allocable to Taxpayer A is $5,000 ($6,667 X $6,000/$8,000). The amount of cost allocable to Taxpayer B is $1,667 ($6,667 X $2,000/$8,000).

Specific Instructions

 Also include on lines 1, 5, 9, 13, or 18, any

labor costs properly allocable to the onsite

preparation, assembly, or original installation

of the property and for piping or wiring to interconnect such property to the home.

Line 1

Enter the amounts you paid for qualified solar electric property. See Qualified solar electric property costs on page 3.

Line 5

Enter the amounts you paid for qualified solar water heating property. See Qualified solar water heating property costs on page 3.

Line 9

Enter the amounts you paid for qualified fuel cell property. See Qualified fuel cell property costs on page 3.

Line 13

Enter the amounts you paid for qualified small wind energy property. See Qualified small wind energy property costs on this page.

Line 18

Enter the amounts you paid for qualified geothermal heat pump property. See Qualified geothermal heat pump property costs on this page.

Line 25

If you are claiming the child tax credit for 2008, include on this line the amount from line 12 of the Line 11 Worksheet in Pub. 972.

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8jDc_vu9is

Right about now you are saying I can’t take anymore. Why did I ever think about doing these energy improvements. Get me out of this tax hell. But there is more.

If you are not claiming the child tax credit for 2008, you do not need Pub. 972.

Line 28

If you cannot use all of the credit because of the tax liability limit (line 26 is less than line 23), you can carry the unused portion of the credit to 2009.

Paperwork Reduction Act Notice. We ask for the information on this form to carry out the Internal Revenue laws of the United States. You are required to give us the information. We need it to ensure that you are complying with these laws and to allow us to figure and collect the right amount of tax.

You are not required to provide the information requested on a form that is subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act unless the form displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a form or its instructions must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any Internal Revenue law. Generally, tax returns and return information are confidential, as required by section 6103.

The average time and expenses required to complete and file this form will vary depending on individual circumstances. For the estimated averages, see the instructions for your income tax return.

If you have suggestions for making this form simpler, we would be happy to hear from you. See the instructions for your income tax return.

:}

Now all you have to do is make copies for your records, double check that everything is signed, put it all in an envelop with the proper postage and address, mail it off and PRAY…have a nice day.

http://www.rooftopcomedy.com/watch/SouthernObamaSupport

:}

Feds Credits To Trade In An Old Inefficient Car – It’s called the Clunker or the Gas Guzzler Bill

It is not law yet, but if it will become law and it looks like it will. Waiting to buy a new car until it passes could be well worth it. I say this because it is unclear whether you will be able to take advantage of both the Clunker Bill and the Tax Credit for buying specific cars. In other words if you trade in an old car (getting a government rebate) and buy a Prius (getting a Tax Credit) would both apply? If they would you could get like nearly 10K off the price of the car making Prius or any other hybred car affordable. Since it is a House of Reps. Bill on first read in the Senate I can not tell you what it will say in the end but as I say, first the Proposed Tax Credit.

Not there silly here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:9:./temp/~bdJxBz::|/bss/|

H.R.2751
Title: To accelerate motor fuel savings nationwide and provide incentives to registered owners of high polluting automobiles to replace such automobiles with new fuel efficient and less polluting automobiles.
Sponsor: Rep Sutton, Betty [OH-13] (introduced 6/8/2009)      Cosponsors (59)
Related Bills: H.R.2640
Latest Major Action: 6/11/2009 Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 74.

:}

Interpreted in a sick way here:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/bailout-watch-554-cash-for-clunkers-passes-house/

Bailout Watch 554: Cash For Clunkers Passes House

By Edward Niedermeyer
June 10, 2009

The House of Representatives has passed Rep Betty Sutton’s $4 billion scrappage scheme [download full text here], reports CNN Money. The bill now goes to the Senate. Under Sutton’s bill, clunkers with a combined 18 miles per gallon rating or worse would be eligible for a scrappage rebate. Purchasing new vehicle which exceeds its replacement’s rating by four miles per gallon would earn a $3,500 rebate. Improve the combined EPA average by 10 mpg and snag $4,500. Offer good for one year. Or until we tear through $4 billion in a wholesome, American display of redemptive consumption. I’m sorry, I mean “shore up millions of jobs and stimulate local economies . . . improve our environment and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The [Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save] act demonstrates that we can free ourselves from the false argument of either you are for the environment or you are for jobs. You can do both, you must do both.” As the bill’s author modestly puts it.

CNN Money »

:}

I hate to be pessimistic but anytime you involve the Feds, the House and the Senate in legislation that directly effects, OIL, Gasoline and the Internal Combustion Engine, I think you have troubles ahead my friend. Here is a site that is very optomistic:

http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=94525

A ‘Cash for Guzzlers’ website was launched to help keep consumers informed and aware about the pending approval of the Cash for Guzzlers bill. The measure, if approved by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama, would offer up to $4,500 in the form of a voucher for consumers who would trade in their old gas guzzler for a more fuel efficient car.

The new bill aims at improving environmental conditions by encouraging consumers driving old cars to trade in their vehicle for a voucher of up to $4,500 that can be used towards the purchase of a more fuel efficient vehicle. If passed, the new bill could lead to the purchase of over 1 million fuel efficient cars, a measure some say could help the US become less dependent on foreign oil. The bill is expected to be passed before Memorial Day weekend.

According to the proposal, consumers would get a $3,500 voucher if they trade in a car that gets less than 18 mpg for a new car with mileage of at least 22 mpg. Vouchers of $4,500 would be awarded if the new car gets at least 10 mpg more than the old.

More information for consumers is available at the recently established website for the Cash for Guzzlers bill, http://www.cashforguzzlers.net/

:}

This one kinda thinks NOT:

http://www.ohio.com/news/nation/44956957.html

Gas-guzzler voucher plan hits roadblock Calif. senator criticizes compromise for failure to boost fuel economy

By Kevin Freking
Associated Press

WASHINGTON: Legislation that would give car buyers a government voucher up to $4,500 when they trade in gas guzzlers hit a speed bump in the Senate amid concerns that a compromise between the White House and House Democrats doesn’t go far enough to protect the environment.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who authored the ”cash for clunkers” bill in the Senate, said Wednesday that she can’t support the compromise announced last week after House Democrats met with President Barack Obama on global warming.

”Essentially what it means is that perfectly good vehicles would be scrapped, so that vehicles with below average fuel economy could be purchased,” Feinstein said.

Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Copley Township, introduced the House version in March, reviving an effort that failed in Congress earlier this year.

The program is supposed to serve two purposes: Help the struggling automobile industry and the environment by replacing gas guzzlers with more fuel efficient autos.

:}

Stay tuned. It is going to be a long global warming summer.

:}

Feds Small Wind Tax Credit – It’s a small wind a gona blow

The advances in “personal wind turbines” in the last 10 years have been amazing. Now you can get 3 kwh, 10 kwh or even 20 kwh on your property pretty much overnight. Most companies are pushing integrated systems with 3 kwh solar and 10 kwh wind. I mean for 30-40k your energy needs for your lifetime are done. But first the Tax Credits.

Small Wind Energy Systems Residential Small Wind Turbines Has nameplate capacity of not more than 100 kilowatts. 30% of cost Use IRS Form 5695 PDF Exit ENERGY STARMust be placed in service before December 31, 2016.

:}

These companies are spreading like wildfire so I will only post a few of the vertical ones and a few horizontal ones. First the vertical ones:

http://www.highplainswindandsolar.com/wind-turbine-power-landing-page.html?gclid=CJbiqpXQjJsCFRPxDAodKQqdqA

 

 

Free On-Site Analysis ($500 Value) – Limited Time Offer

Wind Turbines for Homes, Farms, and Small Businesses

Let an expert from High Plains Construction answer all your questions and figure out if a wind turbine is right for you. High Plains Construction is a licensed contractor that specializes in wind turbines for homes, farms, and small businesses. High Plains will handle all aspects of your project including:

Site Assessment
Feasibility Study
Obtaining a Permit
Engineering
Finding Federal Tax Incentives
Grant Writing
Financing
Assembly
Erection
Electrical Work
Grid Connection

Call us today at 1-888-715-8820 or fill out our online form to schedule a FREE On-Site
Analysis and Savings Study.

:}

OR

http://www.makemyhomeenergy.com/buildwindmill2.php?apid=B100225W

 

Earth4Energy

Earth4Energy claims to have everything you need to make the most of solar power and energy throughout your home.

With countless features and access to an incredibly low priced value pack, this is certainly a program you are going to want to take into consideration.

Click Here For Detailed Product Review!

 

HomeMadeEnergy

There is a lot to know when it comes to solar energy and taking advantage of it from your home. HomeMadeEnergy will provide you with a guide they claim to be the best available and a plethora of highly detailed videos to help you throughout the process.

You will be off to living a safer, cheaper, and more efficient lifestyle in no time.

Click Here For Detailed Product Review!

 

Power 4 Home

There is not a person in the world that enjoys paying incredibly high electricity and energy bills.

Power 4 Home claims to have everything you need to start saving money while helping out the good of the environment.

Click Here For Detailed Product Review!

:}

Then there are the horizontal ones…Which years ago were considered a waste of time but their resistance to turbulence has got them back in the picture.

http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/vertical_axis_wind_turbines.htm

Windspire Logo The Windspire® wind turbine is an affordable, attractive, and silent 1.2 kW vertical axis wind power appliance. Standing only 30 feet tall, the sleek design is well-suited to residential, business, and many other applications. Independently-tested and UL-certified, the Windspire features a fully-integrated design, including a high-efficiency generator, integrated inverter, wireless performance monitor, and tilt-up monopole. The Windspire is made in the USA and is available through dealers.
Urban Green Energy - Worldwide wind energy suppliers Urban Green Energy is an international manufacturer of horizontal and vertical axis wind turbines. We supply on and off-grid systems around the world. Please visit our website to learn more about UGE.

 OR

http://cleantechnica.com/2008/06/20/vertical-axis-turbines-the-future-of-micro-wind-energ/

 

Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines: The Future of Micro Wind? [w/video]

Published on June 20th, 2008

34 Comments

Posted in business, wind energy

 Walking the floor of WINDPOWER 2008, the annual conference and trade show for the wind energy industry, one couldn’t help but be transfixed by all of the different types of turbines – at least I couldn’t. The wind turbine has become the iconic of clean, renewable energy. But the classic three-bladed horizontal axis wind turbine, with its gracefully swooping blades, has become the symbol of not only renewable energy, but also of environmental consciousness and ecological possibility.

Despite the ubiquity of the three-bladed turbine, the oft-overlooked vertical-axes turbines are making quite a splash in the world of wind energy, especially in small and micro-applications. So what’s all the fuss about? Vertical-axis turbines apparently do not suffer from some of the same problems that plague small wind applications in urban settings including, aesthetic concerns, space requirements and sound levels

:}

Fed Credits For Solar Water Heaters – Once it is paid for it is free for life

Or at least for the life of the equipment. (it’s jam band friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhNrqc6yvTU)

I mean this is the ultimate irony in the utility world. Heating water with anything other than the sun which is free is a crime. I mean think about it. Why? First the Tax Credit

Not there silly here:

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=products.pr_tax_credits#s11

Solar Energy Systems Solar Water Heating At least half of the energy generated by the “qualifying property” must come from the sun. Homeowners may only claim spending on the solar water heating system property, not the entire water heating system of the household.The credit is not available for expenses for swimming pools or hot tubs.The water must be used in the dwelling.The system must be certified by the Solar Rating and Certification Corporation (SRCC). 30% of cost All ENERGY STAR solar water heaters qualify for the tax credit.Use IRS Form 5695 PDF Exit ENERGY STARMust be placed in service before December 31, 2016.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LANwIgpha7k )

No pools or hot tubs dam nit…we can’t have everything being free. So these things come in all shapes and sizes:

http://www.energysavers.gov/your_home/water_heating/index.cfm/mytopic=12850

Solar Water Heaters

Solar water heaters—also called solar domestic hot water systems—can be a cost-effective way to generate hot water for your home. They can be used in any climate, and the fuel they use—sunshine—is free.

How They Work

Solar water heating systems include storage tanks and solar collectors. There are two types of solar water heating systems: active, which have circulating pumps and controls, and passive, which don’t.

Most solar water heaters require a well-insulated storage tank. Solar storage tanks have an additional outlet and inlet connected to and from the collector. In two-tank systems, the solar water heater preheats water before it enters the conventional water heater. In one-tank systems, the back-up heater is combined with the solar storage in one tank.

Three types of solar collectors are used for residential applications:

  • Flat-plate collector

    Glazed flat-plate collectors are insulated, weatherproofed boxes that contain a dark absorber plate under one or more glass or plastic (polymer) covers. Unglazed flat-plate collectors—typically used for solar pool heating—have a dark absorber plate, made of metal or polymer, without a cover or enclosure.

  • Integral collector-storage systems

    Also known as ICS or batch systems, they feature one or more black tanks or tubes in an insulated, glazed box. Cold water first passes through the solar collector, which preheats the water. The water then continues on to the conventional backup water heater, providing a reliable source of hot water. They should be installed only in mild-freeze climates because the outdoor pipes could freeze in severe, cold weather.

  • Evacuated-tube solar collectors

    They feature parallel rows of transparent glass tubes. Each tube contains a glass outer tube and metal absorber tube attached to a fin. The fin’s coating absorbs solar energy but inhibits radiative heat loss. These collectors are used more frequently for U.S. commercial applications.

There are two types of active solar water heating systems:

  • Direct circulation systems

    Pumps circulate household water through the collectors and into the home. They work well in climates where it rarely freezes.

  • Indirect circulation systems

    Pumps circulate a non-freezing, heat-transfer fluid through the collectors and a heat exchanger. This heats the water that then flows into the home. They are popular in climates prone to freezing temperatures.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLlOTPBBq9k  )

Still you must decide:

http://www.solardirect.com/swh/swh.htm

Solar Water Heating Systems

 

  All solar water heaters work in every climate, but different types of heaters work best in different areas, see below:
Passive Solar Water Heater Active Solar Water Heater Trendsetter Solar Water Heater
Warm Climate
ProgressivTube
• Solar Hot Water Passive
system
• Easy to install and
maintain; no moving
parts
• Storage tank must be
installed above or close
to collector
• Uses no electricity; will
function during
blackouts
• Price range:
$1,700.00 – $2,600.00
Moderate Climate
Helio-Pak
• Active Solar Hot Water,
flat plate type
• Pumps, valves &
controllers assist in the
prevention of freezing
• Tanks do not need to
be installed above or
close to collectors
• Uses electricity; will not
function during
blackouts
• Price range:
$2,200.00 – $5,200.00
Cold Climate
TrendSetter
• Solar Hot Water Active,
evacuated tube
• Heavy-duty residential
and commercial
• Additional applications:
Water heating, Radiant
floor heating, Space
Heat
• Price range:
$6,000.00 – $17,000.00

Need help or want a Fully Installed System?

We have over 35,000 satisfied customers served since 1986!
Solar Direct has over 25 years of experience in commercial and
residential solar hot water product installation. Services are available
throughout the U.S. with our national installer network.

Contact Us for installation and product information, our team of Product Solution Specialists are standing by to take your calls.

Solar Water Heater installationSolar Water Heating technologies are a simple, reliable, and cost-effective harnessing the sun’s energy to provide for the solar thermal energy needs of homes and businesses. And now the new Energy Policy Act of 2005 allows you receive a federal tax credit worth 30% of the system cost! This is the best time to reap the numerous benefits of solar power!

  • Financial solar rebates available
  • Easy Do-It-Yourself Kits
  • Professional Solar Installations
  • Low Investment – High Return
  • Savings pay for system in 3-5 years

:}

So what are you waiting for?

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeJeL8Ued3s&feature=related  )

:}

Earth Awareness Fest Turns 100 Tomorrow – OK so maybe it’s like 16 or 17

(jam band Friday- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81eSIwsLcWg  )

But it seems like the Environmentalists have been hollering STOP for that long. I know that I promised white roofs today but we will just have to wait for Monday OK.

http://www.ilenviro.org/calendar/

http://www.illinoisclimateactionnetwork.org/calendar/?y=2009&mode=list

http://www.illinoistimes.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=10250

http://illinois.sierraclub.org/sangamon/events.html

 

Presentations at the Earth Awareness Fair

Prairie Capital Convention Center

Sustainable Community Forum

Saturday, May 30 2009

10:00 a.m. 4:00 p.m.

Speakers in PCCC breakout rooms downstairs

Room A

10:30    CFLs, Home Energy Efficiency & Carbon Footprint Explained – CWLP Energy Services Office

11:30                            Solar, Wind and Alternative Energy Sources

                                    Michelle Marley, WindSolar USA

12:30                            Geothermal Heating and Cooling – Richard Hiles,

                                    Henson Robinson Company and Climate Master

1:30                              An Inconvenient Truth/Global Warming & Positive Developments

                                    Sister Sharon Zayac, Jubilee Farm & Jim Johnston, Sustainable Springfield

                       

2:30                              Local Environmental Organizations/Volunteer Opportunities

Room B

10:30                            Rain Gardens Dave Kiliman, Master Gardener,

                                    University of Illinois Extension

11:00                            Food Systems and Urban Planning

                                    Deanna Glosser, Environmental Planning Solutions

                                    -and-

                                    Community Gardening

                                    Kristi Kenney, IL Department of Agriculture         

12:00                            Back Yard Composting & Vermicomposting

                                    Jennifer Fishburn, Horticulture Educator

                                    University of Illinois Extension

1:00                              Rainwater Harvesting: Rain Barrels, Greywater & Water Conservation                                          

                                    Austin Grammer, Prairie Rain Harvester, Inc

:}

There is a lady who thinks that all that glitters is gold ohhhhh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys0hBEEM2Lo&feature=related

:}

Dan Piraro, Jason Love And Matthew Difee Go Live – What do 3 pretty funny guys have to do with energy

Or even the environment or residential energy conservation? Well Actually nothing but Dan lets me post a cartoon of his periodically here when I am completely out of ideas or when he is particularly brilliant which ever comes first. So when he asked his blog readers to reach out to media moguls and poobas to see if they might air a version of it like on Showtime or HBO I could not resist but first the toon:

http://bizarrocomic.blogspot.com/

bz-earthday-04-22-09wb.jpg

:}

Now the Pitch:

COMEDY SHOW!!!

(Click the image for largerer viewage.)

A RARE COMEDY EVENT COMING TO YOUR TOWN!!!
(If your town is New York City.)

I’m doing one of my increasingly rare comedy shows in NYC for an ENTIRE WEEK next month and I can’t bear the thought of going on unless you’re going to be there. Please don’t break my already fragile heart by saying, “I can’t afford to fly all the way to New York From Seattle,” or “I wish I could be there but I’m in prison until 2019.” What is more important to you? Your precious money or my flimsy ego? (Before you answer that, consider that I will give you an autograph when you come to the show, which you can then sell on eBay to offset $3-$4 of your airfare and hotel costs.)

Seriously, this is a big show for me. I do a talk or a short set now and then, most often on the West Coast, but I’m doing fewer of these long-form comedy shows all the time and this is a full week of performances off-Broadway in NYC, so there are a lot of seats to fill. Please come. If you can’t come, send someone you know in NYC to the show and tell them to tell me you said “hi.”

After the show, you’ll be able to meet me, Jason, and Matthew as we hang out in the lobby selling books, signing breasts, and pooping out witty ripostes like a member of the Algonquin Round Table. If you’re lucky, you might even meet CHNW!

Ticket info here. Hope to see you there!

:}

So if you are the Chief Executive Officer of a cable channel like say:

Matt Blank

at Showtime

or

Bill Nelson

at HBO

or

Doug Herzog

at Comedy Central

or even

John Odoner

at JTV

Give these poor guys a break and send someone to their show. Thanks again Dan!
:}

Enbridge Energy And The Rape Of The Canadian Oil Sands – Damge that you can see from space

Why are these people?:

http://www.enbridge.com/

News Releases

Enbridge Inc. Announces Change to Webcast Start Time for 2009 First Quarter Financial Results

Enbridge’s Hybrid Fuel Cell Power Plant Featured on Daily Planet and a Finalist in Green Toronto Awards

News Release (PDF – 69.0KB)

Joint energy industry carbon dioxide storage project achieves key milestone

more…

Enbridge Ontario Wind Power Turns on Green Energy in Kincardine

more…

CCS proposals offer significant emission reductions

04.01.2009

Enbridge Announces plans to hold Open Season for proposed LaCrosse Pipeline

:}

Doing this?

can1.jpg

www.solarnavigator.net

http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/story.html?id=70fd4398-81ff-4f17-8ad4-d81e1abe8a46

 

Oilsands damage is ignored

In a province running out of conventional oil and gas, Alberta’s oilsands are seen as a lifeline that will guarantee the continuation of our comfortable energy-driven society.

In a province running out of conventional oil and gas, Alberta’s oilsands are seen as a lifeline that will guarantee the continuation of our comfortable energy-driven society.

Too much of the time, people in this province don’t think about the cost of this gigantic oilsands development. It’s easy to do: most Albertans don’t live in, and rarely visit, the northern one-fifth of the province where the oilsands lie. What we don’t personally see or smell or taste, we tend to ignore.

The four-day series on the environmental impact of the oilsands boom written by Journal environment reporter Hanneke Brooymans, which started on Friday, is a valuable corrective to our neglect.

can.jpg

www.wellsphere.com

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/12/canadian_oil_at.php

Canadian Oil: At What Price?

by Michael Graham Richard, Gatineau, Canada on 12. 9.05

Most of you are already aware of the damage caused by the burning and the extraction of oil (like the apprehended damage caused by extraction in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge, for example). But what about the famous Canadian tar sands? After only two years of digging for bitumen near Fort McMurray in Alberta, Shell has already dug up a pit that is as much as three miles wide and 200 feet deep. 400-ton trucks, said to be the largest in the world, are used to move around all that dirt, and it takes a lot of it since on average 2 tons of tar sand are required to make 1 barrel of oil.

can2.jpg

www.ienearth.org

http://www.gmanews.tv/story/155046/Oil-sands-company-now-says-1606-ducks-diedhttp://www.responsibleminer.com/234/canadian-oil-sands-declared-more-environment-damage.html

Oil sands company now says 1,606 ducks died

04/01/2009 | 06:49 AMEDMONTON, Alberta — A Canadian oil sands company says more than three times as many ducks died last spring on a northern Alberta toxic waste pond than the 500 birds originally estimated.

Syncrude Canada chief executive Tom Katinas said Tuesday the carcasses of 1,606 ducks were collected from the toxic oily waters. The ponds contain waste from the process of separating oil from sand.

Katinas released the updated figure a week after an Alberta court granted the consortium three more months to enter a plea on federal and provincial wildlife charges. – AP

:}

Don’t Believe go look for yourself:

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=canadian%20oil%20sands&gbv=2&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=il

:}

Why should we in Illinois care?

http://www.sj-r.com/news/x1092988725/Officials-lobby-for-oil-pipeline-project-might-start-in-early-summer

 

Officials lobby for oil pipeline; project might start in early summer

Environmental groups oppose last phase of Canadian-U.S. energy company’s plan

GateHouse News Service

Posted Apr 29, 2009 @ 12:06 AM

Last update Apr 29, 2009 @ 10:39 AM

SPRINGFIELD —

Construction of a major underground oil pipeline along the eastern edge of Sangamon County could begin as early as this summer.

An energy developer and the Canadian consul general from Chicago are in Springfield this week to seek support for the endeavor as a major boost for jobs and energy security, including a meeting scheduled today with Gov. Pat Quinn.

The first section of the nearly 3-year-old, $350 million construction project has been completed to an area about 50 miles northeast of Peoria.

But the final phase has run into opposition from environmental groups and some landowners, who say the pipeline would only encourage continued reliance on polluting petroleum products and would violate property rights.

“Canada has the second-largest reserves in the world. There’s 170 billion barrels of reserves, and 97 percent are in the oil sands,” said Don Thompson, president of The Oil Sands Developers Group.

:}

Nuclear Power Goes South – I don’t want to work, it’s jam band Friday

I just want to bang the drum all day….That is a direct quote from Duke Power’s William Griggs when asked why there are 12 nuclear power plant license applications in the south eastern US.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZclddLcOYYA
Well maybe not but they sure see it as easy money. Once again to cheap to meter:

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40785

ENERGY: Protests Greet Nuclear Power Resurgence in US South
By Matthew Cardinale


A recent protest at the Oak Ridge nuclear plant in Tennessee.

Credit:Nicholas Foster/Atlanta Progressive News


WAYNESBORO, Georgia , Jan 14 (IPS) – Residents and environmental activists are in a bitter dispute with large U.S. energy corporations and the federal government over the safety of nuclear power, as more than a dozen corporations plan to, or have filed, paperwork to open new nuclear power plants, primarily in the U.S. South.

Energy giants like Southern Company, Entergy, and Florida Power and Light are attracted by billions in governmental incentives offered under the George W. Bush Administration.

“There’s a whole suite of incentives being pumped out by the federal government to try and cajole the utilities back into the game,” Glenn Carroll of Nuclear Watch South told IPS.

The U.S. Congress last month passed 38.5 billion dollars in loan guarantees to the nuclear industry. “If they can’t pay back the loan, or don’t want to pay back the loan, the government will guarantee the banks up to 80 percent,” Carroll said.

Five sites have already applied for the first combined licensing applications in 32 years, Roger Hannah, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, told IPS. They are located in south Texas, Bellefonte in Alabama, Calvert Cliffs in Maryland, North Anna in Virginia, and Lee Site in South Carolina.

Four companies have applied for Early Site Permits for sites in Grand Gulf, Mississippi; Clinton, Illinois; North Hanna, Virginia; and Plant Vogtle in Burke County, Georgia.

“We’ve had indications of interest from 12 to 15 other companies,” Hannah said.

The NRC held a public hearing in Waynesboro, Georgia, one of the closest affected cities to Plant Vogtle, on Oct. 4, 2007, to address the NRC’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The NRC must produce the EIS, as per the 1970 National Environmental Policy Act.

The NRC insists the risks posed by nuclear power are small and within federal guidelines. However, activists argue the draft EIS ignores many issues and contend that nuclear power is unsafe.

At a time Georgia is in a historic drought, when residents are being told the state is running out of drinking water, the NRC and other agencies allow over a billion gallons of water per year from the Savannah River to be consumed by the existing Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2.

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzgXpGzVvMU

It could be their enormous water demands that kills them this time but they have never been a very good idea on so many levels.

But here is what the rah rahs had to say about it:

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf41.html

The Energy Policy Act 2005 then provided a much-needed stimulus for investment in electricity infrastructure including nuclear power. New reactor construction is expected to start about 2010, with operation in 2014.

In February 2007 the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) reported that it saw a need for 64 GWe of new nuclear generating capacity in the USA by 2030 – 24 GWe of it by 2020, with nuclear representing some 25.5% of output by 2030.

After 20 years of steady decline, government R&D funding for nuclear energy is being revived with the objective of rebuilding US leadership in nuclear technology. In 1997 nuclear fission R&D was, at US$ 37 million, lower than in France, South Korea, or Canada – only 2% of total energy R&D, which compared pathetically with 68% (US$ 2537 million) of a much larger budget in Japan. From the 1999 budget, this situation has been turned around with various programs including the flagship Nuclear Energy Research Initiative (NERI) and also Plant Optimisation. The first 45 NERI grants were awarded in 1999, signalling a reinvigoration of the federal role in nuclear research, following successful conclusion of the advanced reactor program in 1998.

For FY 2008 (from October 2007) the Department of Energy is seeking $875 million for its nuclear energy programs. . The Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative for closing the fuel cycle and supporting the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership would receive $395 million of this and Generation-IV R&D would get $36 million, chiefly for the very high temperature reactor. The Nuclear Power 2010 program aimed at early deployment of advanced reactors would get $114 million.

For US nuclear plant data, see Nuclear Energy Institute web site, nuclear statistics section.

Contents

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUBvCGBa0B0&NR=1

South Carolina is so confident about building the Nuke that they at least are going to self finance theirs. What happens when an actual State goes bankrupt?

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE51B46920090212

South Carolina regulators OK nuclear

power project

By Jim Brumm

WILMINGTON, North Carolina (Reuters) – South Carolina regulators have unanimously approved a request by the state’s largest utility, South Carolina Electric & Gas (SCE&G), to join with a state-owned utility to build two nuclear reactors.

The South Carolina Public Service Commission vote on Wednesday gave South Carolina Electric & Gas the right to begin raising electricity rates next month to help pay for its portion of the $9.8 billion project.

SCE&G, a subsidiary of SCANA Corp, and Santee Cooper, known formally as the South Carolina Public Service Authority, plan to build the two reactors at the site of the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station near Jenkinsville, about 30 miles north of the state capitol, Columbia.

The commission approval also puts the SCE&G/Santee Cooper project ahead of the other 16 applications filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a combined construction and operating license (COL) for a nuclear power plant.

The NRC’s review of the COL applications is expected to take three to four years. It has been three decades since a nuclear power plant was built in the United States.

The South Carolina utilities have contracted Westinghouse Electric Co. — owned by Japan’s Toshiba and Shaw Group — to build the nuclear plant and expect to have the first reactor in operation by 2016.

SCE&G proposes financing its planned $5.4 billion investment in the new power plant by raising rates 0.49 percent in March and another 2.8 percent in October 2009, followed by increases in each of the next 10 years.

The first increase will be about 53 cents a month for SCE&G customers using 1,000 kilowatt hours of power per month, which now costs $107.60, according to SCE&G spokesman Robert Yanity.

As a state-owned utility, Santee Cooper does not need to seek Public Service Commission approval of its investment in the planned nuclear power plant.

:}

Some people take that bang the drum more seriously than they take Nuclear Power:

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTrwg8bt14k&feature=related

But heh you know how they arrre in the sowth…all gracious, laid back and stupider than well a hog waller:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/environment/2009-03-29-nuclear-power-energy-return_N.htm

Nuclear power inches back into energy spotlight

The nation’s nuclear power industry — stuck in a decades-long deep freeze — is thawing.

Utilities are poised to build a new generation of nuclear plants 30 years after the Three Mile Island accident, whose anniversary was Saturday, halted new reactor applications. The momentum is being driven by growing public acceptance of relatively clean nuclear energy to combat global warming.

Several companies have taken significant steps that will likely lead to completion of four reactors by 2015 to 2018 and up to eight by 2020. All would be built next to existing nuclear plants.

Southern Co. (SO) says it will begin digging an 86-foot-deep crater this June in Vogtle, Ga., to make way for two reactors after recently winning state approval, though it won’t pour concrete until it gets a federal license, likely in 2011. At least five power companies have signed contracts with equipment vendors. And Florida and South Carolina residents this year began paying new utility fees to finance planned reactors.

The steps signal that a nuclear renaissance anticipated for several years is finally taking shape. Seventeen companies have sought U.S. federal approval for 26 reactors since late 2007. All have enhanced safety features.

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjyUrA1sD18&feature=related

Then again if you are a Nuclear Tourist you will have much more to see:

http://www.nucleartourist.com/us/us-plant.htm

That is right IF YOU ARE a Nuclear Tourist:

:}

The following links provide information about each of the nuclear plants in the United States. The first links and maps provide information from the NRC website. The final links are Virtual Nuclear Tourist site and utility pages.

NRC Pages

Map of the United States Showing Locations of Operating Nuclear Power Reactors

Select a triangle showing the location of an operating nuclear power reactor from the map below.

:}

Sorry about the kid and the drum but new Nukes is a lame idea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9EHYaMsJhA&NR=1

:}

Why Is Exelon Going Solar – Could it be that the Nuclear business is about to go South?

I find it interesting that Three Mile Island just refuses to go away. 30 years later all the damage that happened and the deaths (yes deaths) make Nuclear’s future in the North and West bleak. But those hicks (sorry) in the South well that is another matter. But first: The Improbable :-0

http://www.suntimes.com/business/1540009,CST-FIN-solar23.article

Exelon to build largest U.S. urban solar power

plant on Chicago’s South Side

ComEd parent looks to stimulus money for 10-megawatt photovoltaic building near 120th and Peoria in West Pullman

April 23, 2009

ComEd parent Exelon Corp. plans to build the nation’s largest urban solar power plant on the city’s South Side by year’s end.

A view of a 39-acre plot on the South Side that will be covered in solar panels by Exelon.
(Scott Stewart/Sun-Times)

The planned 10-megawatt solar photovoltaic building would be at an industrial site near 120th and Peoria in the West Pullman neighborhood, Chicago-headquartered Exelon said Wednesday.

The plant’s 32,800 solar panels would convert the sun’s rays into enough electricity to meet the annual energy requirements of 1,200 to 1,500 homes. It would eliminate about 31.2 million pounds of greenhouse gas emissions a year, the equivalent of taking more than 2,500 cars off the road or planting more than 3,200 acres of forest, Exelon said.

“This is exactly the type of shovel-ready, community-benefitting project that the Obama administration is touting,” said Thomas O’Neill, senior vice president for new business development at the company’s Exelon Generation.

:}

Did I mention that Mike Madigan might be looking at allowing the major utillities to get back into generation?

 

Madigan: Electric dereg law may need overhaul

Overhaul might protect consumers, House speaker says

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Apr 15, 2009 @ 11:40 PM

Last update Apr 16, 2009 @ 06:36 AM

The 1997 law that restructured Illinois’ electric industry has failed to live up to its promise, and it may be time to consider an overhaul to protect consumers from volatile power prices, says House Speaker Michael Madigan.

Madigan, a Chicago Democrat, has filed a legislative resolution calling on the Illinois Power Agency to study whether to let utility companies regain the authority to run their own power-generating plants.

Such a move would reverse a key part of the 1997 law often referred to as “electric deregulation.” Under that law, utility companies such as Ameren Illinois and Commonwealth Edison stopped generating electricity and became power-delivery companies only. The companies’ power-generating arms were spun off into separate, unregulated entities.

The thinking at the time was that consumers would benefit because they’d be able to shop for power as they shop for other goods and services, looking for the best deal and saving money. But competition never developed in the residential market, and residential customers have seen their bills increase.

:}

That Mike he is always thinking of us. But this is what they are probably more worried about:

http://www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A393821

 

New revelations about Three Mile Island

disaster raise doubts over nuclear plant safety

The truth behind the meltdown

22 APR 2009  •  by Sue Sturgis

Editor’s note: This story originally appeared in Facing South, the online magazine of the Institute for Southern Studies.



Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Harrisburg, Pa.
Photo courtesy of Dept. of Health and Human Services

It was April Fool’s Day, 1979—30 years ago this month—when Randall Thompson first set foot inside the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Middletown, Pa. Just four days earlier, in the early morning hours of March 28, a relatively minor problem in the plant’s Unit 2 reactor sparked a series of mishaps that led to the meltdown of almost half the uranium fuel and uncontrolled releases of radiation into the air and surrounding Susquehanna River.It was the single worst disaster ever to befall the U.S. nuclear power industry, and Thompson was hired as a health physics technician to go inside the plant and find out how dangerous the situation was. He spent 28 days monitoring radiation releases.

Today, his story about what he witnessed at Three Mile Island is being brought to the public in detail for the first time; and his version of what happened during that time, supported by a growing body of other scientific evidence, contradicts the official U.S. government story that the Three Mile Island accident posed no threat to the public.

“What happened at TMI was a whole lot worse than what has been reported,” Thompson told Facing South. “Hundreds of times worse.”

:}

All of these articles gooooooooooo on and on about the radioactive iodine that was released being huge, that the total amount of released material was larger yet (nobody mentions it but a lot of it went into the river) and that approximately 450 people died. So I am just going to stitch some articles together. You can read the whole thing if you want:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/04/03-9

That it happened on April Fools day means that there is a god.

:}

Anomalies abound

That a lot of people died because of what happened at Three Mile Island, as the Thompsons claim, is definitely not part of the official story. In fact, the commercial nuclear power industry and the government insist that despite the meltdown of almost half of the uranium fuel at TMI, there were only minimal releases of radiation to the environment that harmed no one.

For example, the Nuclear Energy Institute, the lobbying group for the U.S. nuclear industry, declares on its website that there have been “no public health or safety consequences from the TMI-2 accident.” The government’s position is the same, reflected in a fact sheet distributed today by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal agency charged with overseeing the U.S. nuclear power industry: TMI, it says, “led to no deaths or injuries to plant workers or members of the nearby community.” [The watchdog group Three Mile Island Alert offers their take on the NRC factsheet here.]

Those upbeat claims are based on the findings of the Kemeny Commission, a panel assembled by President Jimmy Carter in April 1979 to investigate the TMI disaster. Using release figures presented by Metropolitan Edison and the NRC, the commission calculated that in the month following the disaster there were releases of up to 13 million curies of so-called “noble gases” — considered relatively harmless — but only 13 to 17 curies of iodine-131, a radioactive form of the element that at even moderate exposures causes thyroid cancer. (A curie is a measure of radioactivity, with 1 curie equal to the activity of one gram of radium. For help understanding these and other terms, see the glossary at the end of this piece.)

But the official story that there were no health impacts from the disaster doesn’t jibe with the experiences of people living near TMI. On the contrary, their stories suggest that area residents actually suffered exposure to levels of radiation high enough to cause acute effects — far more than the industry and the government has acknowledged.

Some of their disturbing experiences were collected in the book Three Mile Island: The People’s Testament, which is based on interviews with 250 area residents done between 1979 and 1988 by Katagiri Mitsuru and Aileen M. Smith.

It includes the story of Jean Trimmer, a farmer who lived in Lisburn, Pa. about 10 miles west of TMI. On the evening of March 30, 1979, Trimmer stepped outside on her front porch to fetch her cat when she was hit with a blast of heat and rain. Soon after, her skin became red and itchy as if badly sunburned, a condition known as erythema. About three weeks later, her hair turned white and began falling out. Not long after, she reported, her left kidney “just dried up and disappeared” — an occurrence so strange that her case was presented to a symposium of doctors at the nearby Hershey Medical Center. All of those symptoms are consistent with high-dose radiation exposure.

:}

But this has been going on for years…please ignore the nutball survivalist website. It is difficult to get Ken Briggs testimony online. Don’t forget we had Jimmie “the nuke” Carter as President>>>

Nuclear Power Plant Hazard Issues

Are you prepared for a nuclear power plant disaster?

3 March 2001, V3    by Kevin Briggs, Director, USDPI

Observations about the Three Mile Island Nuclear Disaster

“Friday, Saturday, and Sunday were hectic days in the emergency preparedness offices of the counties close to Three Mile Island. Officials labored first to prepare 10-mile evacuation plans and then ones covering areas out to 20 miles from the plant. {USDPI comment:  State and local governments, with support from the Federal government and utilities, currently develop plans that include a “plume emergency planning zone” with a radius of only 10 miles from each nuclear power plant. However, government officials recognize that in a catastrophic incident, a 20 mile evacuation radius akin to what was needed with the Chernobyl disaster may be more appropriate.} The Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency recommended Friday morning that 10-mile plans be readied. The three counties closest to the nuclear plant already had plans to evacuate their residents — a total of about 25,000 living within 5 miles of the Island. A 10-mile evacuation had never been contemplated. For Kevin Molloy in Dauphin County, extending the evacuation zone meant the involvement of several hospitals — something he had not confronted earlier. There were no hospitals within 5 miles. Late Friday night, PEMA told county officials to develop 20-mile plans. Suddenly, six counties were involved in planning for the evacuation of 650,000 people, 13 hospitals, and a prison.”

:}

I quote this to say what should have happened immediately. Not 1 day later when the State was notified and not 3 days later when the Feds had been notified. By that time they knew that a good chunk of New York and Pennsylvania were involved so they DID NOTHING.

The damage was done pretty much in the first several hours of the crisis. There is this from 1979 and it is nasty:

http://econospeak.blogspot.com/2008/11/five-versions-of-truth-for-three-mile.html

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/SecretFallout/SFchp18.html

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/SecretFallout/index.html
Deaths after Three Mile Island accident (end of March 1979):

US Center for Health Statistics for Pennsylvania in May 1979. A SUMMARY

US Center for Health Statistics for Pennsylvania in May 1979 showed the following (per thousand live births): 147 infant deaths in February, 141 in March, 166 in April, 198 in May. At the same time the number of births had declined from 13,589 in March 1979 to 13,201 in May. For the United States as whole the rate of infant deaths per 1000 live births had declined 11 percent between March and May 1979…., “the Pennsylvania figures for March and May representing an increase of 57 deaths, which was more than three times the statistically expected normal fluctuation of about +/- 16, and thus unlikely to occur purely by chance in less than one in a thousand instances.”

The US Vital Statistics for Upstate New York in 1979. A SUMMARY

The US Vital Statistics for Upstate New York in 1979 (north, northwest, and northeast of Harrisburg some 100 to 200 miles away and in the direction the wind was blowing when the heaviest releases of radiation were occurring.) According to these studies of wind direction the expectation was that “The figures for the rest of the state outside of New York City should have gone up, while New York City should either have shown no change or an actual decline….the numbers showed: Between March and May, infant deaths outside New York City climbed an amazing 52 percent, by 63 deaths, from 121 to 184. For New York City during the same period the number declined from 166 to 129. Again, these changes were many times as large as normal fluctuations, and the number of births changed relatively little, or by less than 10 percent.

What about the data for Harrisburg? A SUMMARY.

“only Tokuhata had the data for the 5-mile and 10-mile zones around the plant, and there was no way that I would be able to obtain them…Warren L. Prelesnik, executive vice-president in charge of administration Harrisburg Hospital provided a list of the monthly infant deaths, fetal deaths, stillbirths, and live births in the Harrisburg Hospital for the previous two years. In February, March, and April of 1979, there had only been 1 infant death per month. But for each of the two months of May and June, there were 4. Effectively, since the number of births had not only remained nearly the same but had actually declined slightly, this was more than a fourfold increase in the mortality rate, or of the right magnitude required to fit the observed 50 percent rise in the more distant area of upstate New York. From an average of 5.7 per 1000 live births in the three months of February, March, and April — before the releases could have had an appreciable effect — the newborn mortality rate had risen to 24.1 for May and 26.0 for June, an unprecedented summer peak that did not occur the previous year. In fact, for May and June of 1978, there had been a total of only 3 infant deaths, while for the same period in 1979 after the accident, there had been 8.As some of my colleagues with whom I discussed these findings agreed, by themselves the Harrisburg Hospital numbers were of course small, and only marginally significant, representing only about one-third of all the births and deaths in Harrisburg. But taken together with the vastly more significant and independent numbers for all of Pennsylvania, upstate New York, New York City, New Jersey, Maryland, and Ohio, there was now a much greater degree of certainty: It would have been much too much of a coincidence — perhaps less than one in a million — for all these different numbers to show the pattern they did.

The time and cause of death due to radiation. What can be expected. SUMMARY

One of the remaining important questions that had to be checked, however, was the time and cause of death? if the excess deaths were connected with the radioactive iodine released from the plant, then they should be associated with underweight births or immaturity, since damage to the fetal thyroid would slow down the normal rapid growth and development of the baby in the last few months before birth. The development of the lungs, which have to be ready to begin breathing at the moment of birth, is one of the most critical phases of late fetal development. Any developmental slowdown would be most life-threatening if it led to the inability of the tiny air sacs in the lungs to inflate and start supplying the blood with oxygen. Failure of the lungs to function properly would therefore lead to immediate symptoms of respiratory distress, and if efforts to treat the baby should not succeed, it would die in a matter of minutes, hours, or days of respiratory insufficiency or hyaline membrane disease. Thus, one would not expect to find as large an increase in spontaneous miscarriages well before birth as newborn deaths within a short time after birth, since the lungs did not need to start functioning until the baby was born. Also, there should be no significant increase in gross congenital malformations a few months after the accident, since by the time the baby in the mother’s womb had reached the sixth or seventh month of development, all the major organs had already fully developed. Thus, only some six to seven months after the accident would one expect some increase in serious physical malformations, since these infants would have been exposed to radiation in the first three months of development of critical-organ formation.

data from the Harrisburg Hospital supported these expectations

State of Pennsylvania Health Department had discovered a rise in hypothyroidism among newborn babies in areas where the radioactive gases from Three Mile Island had been carried by the winds.

:}

Now aren’t you glad you know? More tomorrow on Nukes in the South.

:}