Bush economy strikes California

I know a gentlemen that worked for DEP for a bit after spending 35 years at Amos (I think-I know it was a power plant). I'm interested in what he has to say about all of this.

Aaron wrote:I know a gentlemen that worked for DEP for a bit after spending 35 years at Amos (I think-I know it was a power plant). I'm interested in what he has to say about all of this.

If you would, please let me know what he says about it. My suspicion, based on my limited understandings of steam generators, is that the PSC's Mr. Perdue's assessment of it is closer to reality than is LMPA's.

Certainly. But it would be easy for Mountain Laurel to find an expert. That in itself would lead me to be as skeptical as you seem to be.

ziggy wrote:

How so Frank? Because that's not what I've read. I get that it is caused by the equipment installed to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions.

And the cause of nitrogen oxide emmissions is the burning of coal. It is not enough to substitute one problem with still another new problem- nor to blame the new problem on the "cure" for the old problem.

Both nitrogen oxide emmissions and blue haze are caused by the same action- the burning of coal.

YUP, the Great Smokies and the Blueridge got their names from all the "coal burning campsites", ...................... right Zigster.

As long as you are dealing with "one-track minders", devoid of any memories or common sense, ....... one can corral quite a following.

Ozone

Ozone gas, or O3, is an oxygen molecule which contains three oxygen atoms instead of the usual two, making it very unstable. The molecule forms in a blue haze and has a distinctive odor which smells somewhat like hay. Because of the molecule’s unstable nature, it fortunately possesses a half-life of 6 to 8 hours, meaning its concentration halves in that period.

Common Sources

Most people recognize ozone from its presence in the ozonosphere, or ozone layer, where it functions to protect the Earth from harmful ultraviolet rays. Ozone is a naturally occurring gas, and exists only in small quantities outside of the ozonosphere. Ozone is most commonly formed during electrical storms, where an electrical spark will cause the creation of a three-atom molecule. This ozone actually poses no human threat, as the gas’s existence is only dangerous if the concentration gathers at ground level. Ozone on a ground level occurs when sunlight reacts with volatile organic compounds, which exist in sources such as hydrocarbon vehicle emissions. Electrical sparks which create ozone may occur inside the home in any equipment which uses high voltage or ultraviolet light. These items include electric motors, high power office equipment (photocopiers or laser printers), or electronic air filters which have been improperly installed.

Ozone control is complex because, though both indoor and outdoor processes can create the gas, studies have shown that the outdoor level is responsible for the inside level. A low indoor level of ozone reflects a low outdoor level, and a high indoor level reflects a high outdoor level. However, indoor concentrations should still be monitored since they can affect home occupants adversely, and the gas can have more serious effects if a buildup occurs.

Health Effects

Even at relatively low concentrations, ozone can trigger several symptom, including irritation of the eyes, respiratory tract, nose, throat, and trachea. Signs of irritation include heavy coughing and tightness in the chest area. If the gas reaches a higher concentration, it may hamper lung function seriously. If exposure is long-term, an increase in bacterial infections may occur, as well as possible thickening of lung tissue or changes in the central nervous system. Those most at-risk are persons who work or exercise outdoors where a high concentration of ozone is present, such as large cities with a high smog content.

http://www.propex.com/C_f_env_ozon.htm

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:I know a gentlemen that worked for DEP for a bit after spending 35 years at Amos (I think-I know it was a power plant). I'm interested in what he has to say about all of this.

If you would, please let me know what he says about it. My suspicion, based on my limited understandings of steam generators, is that the PSC's Mr. Perdue's assessment of it is closer to reality than is LMPA's.

I spoke with Fred and I was wrong. He spent 35 years in a Nuclear power plant. We discussed this post. His lay opinion (which he emphasized was just an opinion) was that 50% seemed high and he leaned towards Perdue's assessment as well. He said he would look into this and get back with me if he found out anything to support either side.