WastedEnergy

Topics on Energy, Resources, Waste and Culture

Archive for July, 2010

Upper Crust

Posted by wastedenergy on July 21, 2010

Forgot to add Hydrate Zone #5 snapped earlier today.  This gem came in at 3:35 PM on Tuesday.  Wonder what other new leaks have sprung since we last checked in with the spillcam?

Looks like poor Tony might have to sell his boat after all.

5:06 AM EDT:

Oh lordy, what is this?  Discoloration around the rim and edges of the apparatus?  That doesn’t look like it’s anywhere near any of the supposed leak zones…do these mean the entire structure is springing leaks left and right now?  Do they mean so much oil is escaping from seeps in the surrounding seabed and from the leaks and hydrate deposits that the buildup is accumulating from ambient seawater?  Or is this just another odd shadow or lighting effect?

What do you think?

5:30 AM:

Another view of Zone 5, and you can see what Zone 2 looks like now down below that, covering up almost the entire side panel where it sits.  Over to the right of Zone 2 is another area that looks like it could be either a shadow or a new area of hydrate buildup…

5:45 AM

From every angle now, it looks like more and more gunk is just building up on more and more parts of this thing every minute now.  I don’t know how much longer it can last, but it will be interesting to see how long this goes on before someone calls off the “test” and decides to lift this thing off, come hell or deep water.  What they could possibly be testing at this point is beyond me.  It’s obvious the structure is no longer doing what it is supposed to be doing.  I wonder how fast these other leaky areas are coming out?  Would be nice to get some ROV closeups on some of these other areas so we can see if there are visible drips there too, not to mention whether or not these brown discolored areas are in fact the deposits (indicating leaks) that they appear to be.

6:10 AM:

This is what happens when you leave the original leak zone alone for fifteen minutes now (and caught an awesome DC sunrise in the meantime); note the 2nd image is a bit squeezed, my fault trying to make both images fit at this hour, but you can see the new growth as the buildup approaches the bottom in the second image.  And from all appearances, there are now dozens, maybe hundreds of zones like this all around the structure.

6:30 AM:

A new view from Skandi 1 showing brown discoloration accumulating along a horizontal plane of the capping stack.  Compare it to the image below it showing the cap’s original coloration.

6:40 AM:

Zone 1 blows away – yet again!  You can see the last of the trail of dust where the arrow is pointing – wasn’t quite fast enough to catch the bulk of it.  You can see down below it now how the globules of oil are traveling up in series; my entirely unscientific estimate is that they are now coming up about ten times faster than when the cameras first started following the leak area on Sunday.

7:00 AM

The latest I can find from the Coast Guard or anyone in charge is this AP bit from a few hours ago. 

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Retired Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen is dismissing at least five leaks discovered around cap in the blown out Gulf oil well as “very small drips,” like an oil leak in a car. The government’s point man on the oil spill is downplaying worries that the cap might be buckling under the pressure. Allen also says seepage detected along the sea floor is from another well.

Hopefully Thad will have something to say about the leaks again soon, in addition to any other seeps that might have been found around the well.  The man seems prone to sudden reversals; after all, he is now dismissing risks from the same seep of which he warned earlier.  Whose science has determined that the well is coming from a separate, “natural” seep and not from this well?  The same ones BP has been buying off for its legal team from maritime universities across the Gulf Coast? 

The other major wrinkle in the story over the past day has been a statement from BP exec Kent Wells that the chance of attempting another, “static” top kill with the cap kill on is “100%” if the U.S. government approves.  In other words, BP is setting the government up to take the fall for yet another reckless maneuver instead of the company: if Obama and Thad Allen refuse to allow the attempt, BP can claim they are halting progress on the spill and that they were just making their best efforts.  If the government allows it, then it assumes responsibility – and potentially liability – for BP’s risky well handling tactics.

Quite a pickle, isn’t it?  And again, it seems to beg the question of why BP is still in charge of anything here, considering how badly they have time and again flunked every test this well has put before them.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Jeepers Creepers

Posted by wastedenergy on July 20, 2010

Everyone seems so caught up in debating the appearance of clouds of dust near the sea floor (kicked up by ROV thrusters?), so I figured I would throw something new into the fray, with some screen captures of crust buildup around the capping stack (which builds up and periodically washes off) taken between 2:30 and 3:30 AM on 7/20.  So, anyone care to venture a guess as to what is going on here, and what we can expect it to do going forward?







And, in the interest of staying timely, here is another one from just now in the same location:

Update 12:40 PM: Apparently the photo shown above shows a different area of hydrate buildup.

Here is the original area shown below, from a new screencap snapped just now.  If there are multiple areas of hydrate buildup, it means the cap has sprung multiple leaks.

And another image from the ROV HOS Maxx 1 (the same one that has been monitoring both areas of hydrate buildups since Sunday evening), which is now focusing up close on the original area again:

Update #2, 2:30 PM:

OK, the flow rate on the original hydrate zone is DEFINITELY now faster than it was yesterday, and at least one, possibly two new distinct hydrate zones have shown up too.  You can check out the feeds and see for yourself at http://deepwaterbp.com/ Here is Zone 1 as of 2:26 PM:

A new zone, which I’ll call Zone 3, snapped at 1:55 PM:

And finally, a possible, though still uncertain, Zone 4, snapped during a pan at 1:53 PM (though I cannot say for certain this one is not just shadow):

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Sea for Yourself

Posted by wastedenergy on July 19, 2010

‘Cause you know, by the time BP gets through with it, ain’t nobody else gonna want it anymore.  Know what I mean?

Looks like that cap won’t do the trick, and even Uncle Thad agrees with me now.  Wonder what will happen when they take that thing off now?  Will the well blow up like a soda bottle that’s been shaken up, with the pressure that’s been building under the wellhead during the “integrity test”/game of Hide the Salami?  Methinks it’s time to come up with some more creative solutions.  So here’s my contribution (as sung by Sebastian the Sad Oil-Soaked Crab):

Dear reader…listen to me.  The human world, it’s a mess.  Life under the sea is more complicated than anyone on CNN be tellin’ you right now…

The seaweed is always greener
In somebody else’s gulf
You dream about going down there
But BP is the big bad wolf
Just look at the world around you
Right here on the ocean floor
Such nastiful things surround you
What more is you lookin’ for?

Under the sea
Under the sea
Is it really better
Down where it’s wetter?
Don’t take it from me
Up on the rigs they work all day
Out in the sun they slave away
While we be keepin’
Full time for leakin’
Under the sea

Down here all the fish ain’t happy
As off through the slick they roll
The fish on the land are happy
Cause they misery done in full
But Suttles and Wells ain’t lucky
They dug in a deeper hole
One day when the public get angry
Guess who’s head’s gonna roll?

Under the sea
Under the sea
Fish ain’t in season
Unless you want lesions
Watch on TV…
Under pressure we love to cook
Until BP get off the hook
We got some troubles
Big methane bubbles
Under the sea
Under the sea
Since oil is sweet here
Drill in the heat here
Profitably!
Even the sturgeon an’ the ray
They get the urge ‘n’ start to die today
We got to flare it
You can’t compare it
Under the sea

The newt got the boot
The carp play the harp (in heaven)
The plaice oiled in the face
Tony soundin’ sharp
The bass f’ed in the ass
The chub flop in the tub
The fluke make you puke, downhole
(Yeah)
The ray he can’t play
The lings won’t be on your strings
The trout dyin’ out
The blackfish she sinks
The smelt and the sprat
Don’t know where they’re at
An’ oh that blowout blow

Under the sea
Under the sea
When the sardine
Float in that sheen
It’s music to BP
What do they got? A lot of sand (that’s just silt, I swears it!)
We got a hot crustacean band (boiled alive in hot oil!)
Each little clam here
Stuck in a jam here
Under the sea
Each little slug here
Will make a nice rug here
Under the sea
Each little snail here
Know how to fail here
That’s why it’s hotter (200 degrees!)
Under the water
Ya we in be f’ed here
Down in the muck here
Under the sea

Update, 4:00 PM EDT: Please ignore the following images.  I repeat, everything is fine.

Posted in Water and Soil | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Industrial Light and Magic

Posted by wastedenergy on July 16, 2010

Supposedly the blown-out Macondo well is shut down with “no more oil leaking into the Gulf.”  So, since BP always tells the truth, I can only assume this image, taken at 3:16 AM EDT on July 16, 2010, is just some kind of crazy reflection from ROV lighting.  Reflection off what, no one can possibly say…

7/16 2:40 PM Update: added the other screencaps of possible plumes I took below.  All between the hours of 1:30 and 3:30 AM, all brownish material moving upward in a plume-like pattern that looks a lot like what we have been seeing all along.  Is this definitive proof that oil is still leaking from someplace?  Not necessarily, but those with the technical expertise to decide can review the available evidence and decide for themselves.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Uh oh

Posted by wastedenergy on July 14, 2010

So, Matthew Simmons and a few Russians have been saying some crazy things lately, like “BP’s busted oil well is too compromised downhole for relief wells to work, the casing is broken, and the seafloor is leaking oil like crazy from  cracks all around the well.”

And now we supposedly have proof.

Well…what do YOU think?  Is the video real?  Is it showing what it appears to be showing?  Am I hallucinating?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Straw to Straw

Posted by wastedenergy on July 13, 2010

One of the biggest concerns related to energy depletion and scarcity is how to continue to feed the world’s population without access to the vast and cheap reserves of stored energy found in fossil fuels, particularly if population increases to 9 billion by mid-century as forecast by most projections today.  Modern industrial agriculture is highly dependent upon fossil fuels, particularly the oil that provides the energy used in farm tractors, combines, and trucks for transportation to demand centers, and the gas that provides the hydrogen needed for fixation of atmospheric nitrogen into synthetic fertilizer via the Haber-Bosch process.  The energy use and ecological impacts of our agricultural systems are indeed vast, and a quick glance at the Checkerboard America sprawling across the midwestern states is all that is needed to reveal the unsustainability of present methods of food production.

A good place to look for opportunities to curtail waste is in our food system.  But rather than beginning with the more difficult question of what might be more sustainable ways of drawing upon the land for sustenance, I believe it is helpful to first examine the patterns of consumption that drive agriculture in the first place.  Let’s start with one of the most egregious examples of wasted energy, a product which contains many calories but no nutrition, which promotes obesity and diabetes at the cost of ever-rising medical bills and insurance costs for all Americans (yet another hidden subsidy), and which could not exist absent ferociously large energy inputs.  Can you guess what I’m talking about?  Here’s a hint: it starts with straws in the ground and ends with straws in your mouth, and in between lie a whole lot of tankers criss-crossing the heartland.

Keep on chugging…

Corn syrup is a curiosity the likes of which could only be found in a place like the United States of America, where cheap junk food and cheap junk energy are a way of life.  Of course, the same analysis upon which we are about to embark could just as easily be applied to Cheetos and hot dogs, or to our super-sized levels of meat consumption.  But the footprint of corn syrup consumption alone is so vast, its benefits so nonexistent, and the tolls it reaps upon the health of our people, our farmland, and our energy supply so heavy that it deserves to be counted first.

Let’s back up for a moment to the stuff that makes it all possible: the original superstraw, without which so much of what we take for granted would never even exist in the first place.

Well that sucks.

What could better embody our postmodern perversion of the American Dream than the twenty-ounce individual serving of cola packaged in plastic?  Everything about it embodies a culture of waste, from the unnecessarily large portions to the utter emptiness of the corn-sweetener calories, to the disposable container made from finite fossil fuels, to the truck that brought it to you.  And everything in it is made from fossil fuels, from the gas used to make fertilizer used to grow the corn to the coal burned to provide electricity to refine it to the oil used to transport it.  While there might be nothing wrong with slurping soda as an occasional treat (personally I find the stuff rather gross-tasting in the first place), the sheer quantities we consume today, the scale and impacts of its production, and the fact that it is far cheaper than its more nutritious alternatives demonstrate drastically misplaced priorities.  Before we beg those giant corn flakes, Monsanto, ADM, and the other members of the American Corn Growers Association, for “solutions” to the problem of how to feed a world of nine billion, we might start by addressing some of the problems with the way we grow and consume food for a mere seven billion.  It would be one thing to talk about the need for genetically modified organisms if we were concerned about producing enough calories and micronutrients to sustain the people of the world.  It is entirely another matter to argue that we must rely on the plant equivalent of superviruses when so much of that crop is devoted only to making a sick world even sicker.

In a world of abundant fossil fuels, corn syrup is a malnutritious curiosity.  In a world of depleting fossil fuels and ever-rising costs of energy and food, both in monetary and ecological terms, it is no less than a crime against humanity.  So for those looking for ways to make our food systems more sustainable and healthier, and before anyone objects to the “land use footprint” of wind and solar energy, let’s start by cutting back on the largest waste of land, energy, and resources the world has ever seen, shall we?

Not the real thing.

Posted in Agriculture and Food, Energy Consumption | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Nuclear Energy: Will It Blow Up?

Posted by wastedenergy on July 12, 2010

A common claim made by proponents of nuclear energy is that it offers the only means of scaling up “carbon-free” power generation, as the most commonly proposed alternatives, wind and solar energy, generate too little power to be useful as replacements for coal.  How does this claim hold up upon closer inspection?

As it turns out, not so well. It is fallacious to assume that only large power plants are scaleable; many smaller plants accomplish the same purpose and carry less risk and shorter lead times, which gives them a considerable advantage, particularly in a risk-averse investment environment like the one we have now.

Here is an example that demonstrates the point: suppose you invest the same quantity of money in a nuclear plant and a few wind farms for roughly the same amount of average available electricity, accounting for the 25-40% capacity factor for wind. Your nuclear plant will take ten years to complete, while the wind farm will be done in perhaps two or three years depending on the site. Equity investors will not want to risk uncertain returns on their investment that do not even begin until ten years in the future.  In addition, nuclear power, like wind power, has major up-front costs, but unlike wind also major back-end costs associated with dismantling and waste disposal or long-term storage. The waste issue is yet to be resolved for the existing fleet of nuclear plants, let alone if nuclear energy were scaled up, and so represents a (potentially enormous) unaccounted cost as well.

The wind farm, or other renewable or micropower options, will generate a faster return on your investment (and faster energy payback) than the nuclear plant. The money and energy you get back faster can in turn be reinvested in expanding the buildout of said renewables, so ultimately the same amount of money invested in wind or other renewables, even with the same initial buildout, can net you easily double the total energy return compared to the nuclear investment or even far more once you account for reinvesting the profits. By the time the first nuclear plant is done, you would already have several generations of wind farms in place and have generated a great many kilowatt-hours already, compared to zero for the nuclear option.

It’s just one of many reasons building a “diverse energy portfolio” is not the same thing as blindly throwing money at every option that might potentially be available.

Posted in Energy Production | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Dark Heart of the Mountain

Posted by wastedenergy on July 11, 2010

Does anyone really, truly believe that the real price of coal is the $0.03 per kilowatt-hour claimed by utilities as the cost of production (or the $0.08 or so they charge you once they jack it up to retail rates)?

Let’s examine just a few of the costs that are paid for out of your tax dollars, or not paid for at all and just plain causing irreparable damage to our homeworld.

1. Climate change.  It should almost go without saying, but according to the best studies available, coal burning is the primary culprit behind global warming, responsible for some 50% or so of the anthropogenic buildup of greenhouse gases and other pollution (including soot and coalbed methane release) responsible for observed warming of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans that has already resulted in sea level rise, more energetic atmospheric events like hurricanes, extreme heat waves, and greater absorption by warmer air of water vapor, resulting in widespread flooding and droughts.  The current price of this externality is $0.00.

2. Eradication of the marine ecosystem.  Better known in some circles as “ocean acidification,” I figure it would be best to just call this phenomenon what it actually is.  We are on track to hit a mean ocean pH of 7.8 or so by 2050, too acid for coral reefs to form and likely acid enough to destroy extant reefs.  Significant bleaching and destruction has already been observed given our current reduction of ocean pH from a historical average of 8.2 to the 8.0-8.1 we have today.  Lest we forget, these reefs form the basis for virtually the entire oceanic ecosystem as we know it.  Lest we further forget, we humans cannot survive without a functional oceanic ecosystem.

3. Radioactive waste.  Coal mining and combustion results in the creation of more radioactive waste than nuclear power, wherein the problem of disposal still has not been resolved.

4. Massive-scale heavy metal pollution caused by fly ash.  Coal is around 14% ash by volume (more for low-quality anthracite and lignite coals), of which 90% is fly ash, which has a high heavy metal content.  If you like drinking arsenic, lead and mercury, then you should love coal.  Most coal plants still operate retaining ponds rather than landfills, an actual disposal option, and if you want to know what kind of problems that can cause, well, maybe you should visit Kingston, Tennessee sometime.  By the way, if coal ash were counted as part of the municipal solid waste stream, it would be about a third of it.  Yes, it’s true: coal power plants in the United States produce about half as much waste as all of our residential and commercial trash and recyclables combined.

5. Acid rain.  Yes, this is still a problem, especially in developing countries that continue to operate older coal plants.  Which, as it so happens, includes the United States: the average age of coal-fired power plants here is some 40-50 years, with some plants much older, like the lovely Capitol Power Plant we have here in Washington, DC, which was built in 1908.  Yes, that’s right, 1908.  Can you guess whether this particular plant has seen any serious retrofits or upgrades since that time?  Of course, attempts to replace this plant with something, anything, newer and better, have been blocked by the coal lobby here.  Say, you don’t suppose they might be onto something in their attempt to buy politicians, do you?  Is it not pathetic that politicians  are willing to selling their souls for such a pittance as it takes to get them re-elected?  Compared to the total profits that coal pushers can make by selling their product without adequate externality pricing, it really doesn’t take much.

6. Exemption from water quality requirements.  Do you really think we could continue to operate our existing fleet of power plants and extant mining practices in this country if we applied the Clean Water Act universally?

7. Destruction of mountains.

8. Damage to roads and railroads caused by the weight of coal-hauling freight equipment (trucks and trains).

9. Water, water everywhere, and not a drop to drink.  Over half of all fresh water withdrawals are used for power plant cooling, mostly coal.

I’m sure I forgot a few.  Anyway, $0.30 per KWH from solar energy isn’t looking so bad anymore now, is it (let alone $0.10/KWH for wind power)?  Imagine what you can really do with an entire thousand watts for an entire hour.  Thirty cents is a pittance to pay for such a privilege as operating air conditioning, having refrigerated food, or using the Internet.

Oh yeah, and several studies recently showed that coal costs the governments of coal-producing states like West Virginia and Tennessee more than it produces in revenue, which kind of throws a wrench into that whole “coal is essential to the economy” claim, now, doesn’t it?

Posted in Air, Climate Change, Energy Production, Solid Waste, Water and Soil | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Paper Planes and Magic Beans

Posted by wastedenergy on July 9, 2010

Posted in The Ether | Leave a Comment »

A Hot Mess

Posted by wastedenergy on July 8, 2010

Forget about hurricanes pushing oil slicks onshore in Gulf Coast states.  Ignore what you might have read about “Corexit rain” and other atmospheric disturbances.  Have no fear of a little oil in Lake Pontchartrain.  Oil has been moving onshore and slowly but steadily spreading into Gulf Coast states, even accumulating in underground reservoirs where it has the potential to leak out under pressure and cause potentially severe contamination of the surrounding soil and groundwater.  Let me guess: you’ve read all the posts over on TOD about running casing, blowout preventer inclination and seafloor subsidence, skimmers, bad cement jobs, top hats of all kinds, and relief wells, and you think you’ve read the whole story now on this crudest of episodes.  Well, here is a really trashy story about the Texas Orgasm that BP has been having lately all over the Gulf of Mexico and adjacent states.  As it turns out, oil has been making its way onto the coast through the humblest of mechanisms: those big green trash trucks coming through to service your dumpster every week, as well as the occasional cleanup site piled high with used oil boom and bags of tar balls.

Disposal of waste from BP oil cleanup sites is a sticky issue with political, economic, and ecological ramifications for many players in the region.  If you have ever attempted to legally dispose of used motor oil or other oily waste products, you know that managing these wastes is not as simple as tossing them into your trash can and sending them in a big truck to your local landfill.  At these small scales, oil and its liquid products are considered “household hazardous waste,” a class of material halfway in between ordinary household trash and true hazardous waste.  Small quantity generators of these wastes, such as households or small businesses disposing of small quantities of waste such as used oil from a company van, are exempted from the strict federal regulations governing handling and disposal of hazardous waste.  But as a concerned citizen exercising your civic duty to comply with the laws of the land (and because you wouldn’t want to despoil your own backyard), you know that you are still required to bring these items to a household hazardous waste facility or collection event.  And as soon as the material is collected, quite literally the instant you hand it over to the agency or business doing the collecting, the collector is bound by federal hazardous waste management regulations.  Since the household hazardous waste exemption exists in order to avoid overly inconveniencing residential waste generators and make it more convenient for safe and environmentally sound waste management to take place, as opposed to the actual hazardous qualities of the waste itself, one would assume that stricter requirements would apply to those generating large quantities of the waste, no?

Not so when it comes to throwing out thousands of tons of oily waste from the effort to clean up after the hot liquids gushing into the Gulf and the beaches and coastal marshes next door.  Apparently, tossing oil-soaked boom directly into a bin lined with nothing more than an ordinary trash bag (known for their ability to break when collected in packer trucks and rolled over by landfill compactors) is completely fine.  BP is the first example I know of a “conditionally exempt large quantity generator.”

Are you surprised?  If so, here is a tip for those new to studying the fossil fuel game: coal, oil and gas companies are exempt from air and water quality requirements, and the hazardous waste regulations for managing oil spill cleanup waste are no exception to the rule.  After all, the 2005 federal Energy Policy Act specifically exempted gas drilling using polluting and water-intensive hydraulic fracturing methods from the Clean Water Act, and coal-fired power plants and the mines and ash disposal sites that go with them have never been required to comply with most of the provisions of the Clean Water or Clean Air Acts.  Makes sense to me: remember, corporations are people too, and we wouldn’t want to inconvenience the fossil fuel industry or make it harder for these fuels to compete with renewable energy sources.  Considering how much we owe BP and the others willing to get their hands dirty in such a grimy business, our first imperative should be to keep the cost of fossil fuels as artificially low as possible at all costs, even if it means sullying our coastlines, coral reefs, and plankton, and even at the cost of taking us back some fifty years in the soundness of our solid waste management practices.  We need that oil, and there is no alternative!  Plus they give scads of money to politicians.  So it makes sense that we would treat these upstanding corporate citizens the way they want, by giving them lax regulations and loads and loads of tax breaks.

Anyway, there is a big mess going on down in southern Alabama and the surrounding area right now over how much of the oily cleanup waste to put where, with local residents and governments caught between their concerns over the environmental quality impacts of accepting oily waste for disposal versus the potential revenue streams available from making landfill sites available.  A recent investigation by the Associated Press caught a number of state and local environmental officials with their pants down, in many cases completely unaware that hazardous waste was being disposed in these landfills at all.  The investigation also showed evidence of environmentally unsound disposal practices at collection sites, such as heaps of oil-filled bags, collection containers with broken liners or in some cases none at all, and trucks spilling oil along the road and into local lawns as they move along their collection and hauling routes.  Meanwhile, BP and its contractors are allowed to save money and cut yet more corners by disposing of hazardous waste in facilities designed only for ordinary household waste.

,

Whatcha gonna do with all that gunk?  (Photo: Mobile, AL Press Register)

Too Big To Succeed?

What do BP, AIG, and one more little company you might have heard of that goes by the abbreviation WM all have in common?  Here is one characteristic they all share: all three companies grew so large and dispersed in their operations that quality control was bound to suffer on some level.  Over the past several months, many observers have commented on what they see as a culture of negligence, indifference to safety standards, and corner-cutting to save costs at BP.  I would argue that another factor is also at play: the inability of the entity that is the mega-corporation to get control over all its tentacles.  It is easy to appreciate the challenge of changing corporate culture at a company as large as BP, with its hundreds of thousands of employees working in thousands of oilfields around the world as well as in alternative energy and in its gasoline distribution business.  The energy sector and the financial sector have seen players rise to became too big to fail, only to ultimately become too big to succeed.   Solid waste is looking more and more like it is heading in that direction every day too, as consolidation, reliance on (especially privately owned) megalandfills, and a lack of competition among major hauling and disposal operations creates a race to the bottom.  With its landfill, collection, hauling, recycling, composting, and waste-to-energy operations in the United States and Canada and a presence worldwide, is it possible that Waste Management simply has too many hands in too many cookie jars to control what must ultimately be the core of any operation: a meaningful commitment to quality?

As for the mess itself, they could always just burn the nasty but energy-dense waste at one of the fifteen waste-to-energy plants already located throughout Florida and actually make some use of the stuff instead of just burying it or flaring it straight off the side of the Discoverer Enterprise. (Sidebar: do the names of some of these vessels not suggest just a bit of arrogance on the part of these oil companies?)  But that would make just a bit too much sense for a company that seems to have lost the ability to do much of anything right other than making as big and as nasty a mess as possible out of our entire energy supply.

Posted in Solid Waste | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.