About: Toxic Waste in the US: Coal Ash (Full Length)
4.6 ppb Cr(VI) is not a threat. It is an ultra-low concentration. Also, the carcinogenic effects of Cr(VI) are exaggerated. What is important here is (1) the dose (which is extremely low), and (2) frequency of exposure. The most important carcinogen related to coal as a whole is arsenic and - sometimes - beryllium. Another elements that are much more problematic than Cr are selenium, mercury (!), lead, and thallium. Coal wastes also often bear elevated amounts of extremely toxic cadmium and much less toxic (but often enriched) zinc, not talking about aluminium. All this is driven by the so-called COAL AFFINITY, measured as COAL AFFINITY INDEX (CAI). Hg, Se, and As have very large CAIs.
Arsenic is not a heavy metal. It is a semi-metal. Chromium is also not a heavy metal. It is a light metal. All metals below iron in the periodic table are light elements. Also, toxic chromium is chromium(VI), which stands for a minute fraction of the coal-ash-contained chromium, which is mainly chromium(III).
So Nuclear Power is like vaping but for coal.
Those in power are making to much money to worry about people.
The root of the problem is the energy people say we provide a service so pay up and shut up.
And long live the Conservative party
This is just more propaganda long live coal long live jobs long live America
I’m sure there chemical processes that decompose the toxic. Engineer special bacteria to decompose the toxic waste.
I'm thankful I live in Australia were we seem to be 100 yrs ahead. If a company fks up which is very very rare they get fisted so hard it's not worth going outside the lines
What about “Clean Coal” lol
everyone seems to be looking at coal ash the wrong way. lithium, sodium, potassium,
rubidium, cesium, francium, iron, magnesium, arsenic, cadmium,
sulfur, Lead, mercury, chromium, uranium, and others parts of the mix are
valuable commodities. with new methods of extraction being developed every year
purification through extraction of these in demand elements leaves very little
to worry about and reduces the need to open new mines. better in equipment than in the water table.
I like her....She excites me!!
Sadly it would probably take a catastrophic spill that kills thousands of people for the government to take action
They say people are at odds with coal ash after knowing what the crumbling infrastructure in nuclear plants are capable of. You can put carbon scrubbers on these smoke stacks, you can't stop the nuclear waste...
Hmm, i just posted on their twitter feed, HEY EVERYONE DUKE ENERGY HAS A TWITTER!
I figured out how to store the stuff... First you have to separate the mercury and anything that could vaporize during heating. Either separate or bond the non stable compounds to a sub-straight, And compress the stuff under high heat and pressure until it is all solidified, Than cast it in to deep underground concrete storage facilities Clear away from any ground water, Perhaps buried under a desert.
When I read these comments I weep for humanity. The vast majority of comments display a total lack of critical and rationale thinking skills. Also evident is an astonishing lack of basic scientific literacy, even among the reporters who produced this piece. For example, coal refuse is not coal ash. The reporter has falsely conflated these two. Coal refuse is just the dirtiest, lowest energy materials that come from a mine. Burning these produces much more pollution per unit energy obtained. Further, adding lime to coal refuse to reduce polluting sulfur compounds produces extra CO2, beyond that produced from the combustion of the coal hydrocarbons.
Ask the Japanese people. Choose between coal or nuclear power. I wonder what they think?
Pollution isn't a problem. We can just buy a new earth. Right?
And you really think that little kid has a clear understanding of what heavy metals are