# Charleston Chemical Spill



## Don't Tell (Mar 25, 2010)

Read about Charleston chemical spill at WSAZ News.
Be watching fish kill information. 
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...up-to-300000-state-of-emergency-declared?lite


----------



## pppatrick (Apr 21, 2012)

heres a link to a material safety data sheet for 4-methylcyclohexane methanol..

http://www.hometalk.com/browser?lin...ne-methanol?split_test=WzExXQ&force_refresh=1

there is basically no information out there on the effects this could have if introduced to a water supply. one would think that if this chemical is used in processing coal, its not the first time its made its way into our rivers. its an absolutely frightening situation due to how little info is available on the effects of 4-methylcyclohexane methanol. 

if there is going to be a large ecological effect to the Elk, but mainly the Kanawha rivers its truly sad. that area is just now starting to see the effects of what the wvdnr has done to re-establish it as a great fishery.


----------



## CMG_Chelsea (Jul 30, 2010)

That's not good.


----------



## C J Hughes (Jan 24, 2006)

NOT ONE Sunday morning news show had anything to report on the 300,0000 people without water NOT ONE .Nobody gives a $hit about the Elk river or the Ohio River or anyone who lives along the river. The Sunday Morning shows are all to worried about who is going to run in 2016 2 years from now. The owner of the plant that spilled it has left town,too many death threats. Maybe cause his company didn't report the spill at all . BUT his girlfriend says she brushed her teeth with the water and that the water is fine. She also went out of town, spitting out the window I bet .
People here in Ohio will be drinking it this week. Cinn gets all of it's drinking water from the Ohio river ! I know the solution to pollution is dilution. That is what every $hit plant in Ohio that dumps raw sewage into are rivers and streams and lakes every time it rains think.Nobody cares!


----------



## pppatrick (Apr 21, 2012)

the huffpo article really put them on blast. truly sickening.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/12/sunday-shows-ignore-west-virginia-disaster_n_4585922.html

they've been testing samples further down the kanawha and the ohio river and have not turned up an signs of the chemical thus far. what i don't understand is why such a large area is connected to the same water supply? i grew up south of charleston in an effected area of boone county. at that time our water came from a local water treatment plant on a branch of the coal river. whilst i was in high school that changed and the water plant closed and we were converted to the current grid. it seems more logical to have smaller treatment plants in so if something like this occurs it doesn't effect such a large area. though as large of an area as it is, outside of kanawha county, the other effected counties are not not as populated. so from an economical sense its cheaper to provide water from a one central location than operate smaller treatment plants. all about effin money. and not people.


----------



## pete (Oct 30, 2007)

do you know any of the Breedlove,s down there ?


----------



## Don't Tell (Mar 25, 2010)

Many of u may not know it but the Elk supports a trophy walleye fishery, not to mention the smallmouth and other fish that thrive there. I am truly concerned for the residents who rely on a safe water supply. What about the fish, not one word from anyone about a fish kill. If any of u ever get the chance take a drive up the elk , it's a remarkable river.
:B


----------



## pppatrick (Apr 21, 2012)

pete said:


> do you know any of the Breedlove,s down there ?


sounds really familiar. i wanna say my pops got his vehicles serviced at a place owned by some Breedlove's.

i've seen a few reports and articles where concern for fish and wildlife were mentioned. from what i've gathered theres been no signs of a fish kill. 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...rous-is-the-chemical-spilled-in-west-virginia

that article mentions results of a 50% kill of minnows in tests with far far far more concentration. so i would imagine its fine. given the spill happened about a mile from the mouth of the elk, the elk would be pretty much unaffected.


----------



## pppatrick (Apr 21, 2012)

i've never heard mention of the elk river and walleye being in numbers or trophy sizes. i'm sure they are in there though. its most known for its muskie, and happens to be the river that i caught my first muskie, just bellow sutton lake dam. 

here is another article where they spoke with a wvdnr biologist.

http://wvmetronews.com/2014/01/10/dnr-reports-no-sign-of-fish-kill-in-elk-river/

but as of now, they're lifting the ban zone by zone. as the readings are showing its below 1 part per million in samples.


----------



## Don't Tell (Mar 25, 2010)

good report from wvdnr thanks for the link


----------



## hoosiercanadian (Dec 31, 2012)

These tanks should have never been allowed to be constructed near a river, or water source. And any and all pontential hazards like this should be removed . But big money talks, fat cat coal and chemical companys padding politicians pockets allows these things to continue to be located near our waters , and to remain there until the tanks start rotting . I fish the Ohio as often as i can, i'm truly addicted to it and i eat select fish from it, sauger, crappie, and small catfish, none bigger than 2 pounds. So when i hear of extreme ignorance and carelessness like this all for the mighty dollar it drives me crazy. We have got to wise up or all we are going to leave for our children is going to be one big unfixable mess. We cannot drink money !!!


----------



## chadwimc (Jun 27, 2007)

Isn't that one of the chemicals used to make coal "cleaner"?
A move mandated by the tree huggers?
Maybe we can get our electricty from rainbows...Or unicorns...


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

hoosiercanadian said:


> These tanks should have never been allowed to be constructed near a river, or water source. And any and all pontential hazards like this should be removed . But big money talks, fat cat coal and chemical companys padding politicians pockets allows these things to continue to be located near our waters , and to remain there until the tanks start rotting . I fish the Ohio as often as i can, i'm truly addicted to it and i eat select fish from it, sauger, crappie, and small catfish, none bigger than 2 pounds. So when i hear of extreme ignorance and carelessness like this all for the mighty dollar it drives me crazy. We have got to wise up or all we are going to leave for our children is going to be one big unfixable mess. We cannot drink money !!!


Everything has been built around that river since Lewis and Clark started walking west. It the most cost effective means of shipping for many industries, and if it wasn't for those companies being there, the rivers wouldn't get the day to day attention they deserve. This isn't the first spill along those rivers. And to be honest, it's nowhere near the biggest. The main problem with this one is location.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

Besides, where would you build these tanks that a spill wouldn't affect a water source? The moon i guess....

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Doboy (Oct 13, 2008)

Bad Bub said:


> Besides, where would you build these tanks that a spill wouldn't affect a water source? The moon i guess....
> 
> Simple.
> MANDATORY brick, block or concrete 360* retension WALLS!
> ...


----------



## Doboy (Oct 13, 2008)

hoosiercanadian said:


> *But big money talks, fat cat (OIL)coal and chemical companys padding politicians pockets allows these things to continue to be located near our waters , and to remain there until the tanks start rotting . So when i hear of extreme ignorance and carelessness like this all for the mighty dollar it drives me crazy. We have got to wise up or all we are going to leave for our children is going to be one big unfixable mess. We cannot drink money !!!*





POLITICAL SLANDER!!!
CAUTION!!! YOU'LL GET PULLED!  

'WE' are what, 40-50 THOUSAND STRONG HERE?
WE NEED TO POLICE 'OUR' LAND & WATERS,,,, STAY VOCAL & UNITE!

BTW, hoosier,,, I believe your RIGHT-ON!


----------



## Doboy (Oct 13, 2008)

chadwimc said:


> Isn't that one of the chemicals used to make coal "cleaner"?
> A move mandated by the tree huggers?
> Maybe we can get our electricty from rainbows...Or unicorns...




*OR WIND, WATER & SUN!*

Ok,,, I'm done! ;>)


----------



## hoosiercanadian (Dec 31, 2012)

Yes i AM a treehugger and damn proud of it, somebody better hug them or there won't be any left. I am also an electrical contractor, and i am very aware of what turnes most of the turbines in this country. But it is the year 2014 not 1920 and it is time to phase out the use of coal , quit blowing off the tops of mountains, polluting our air and our water. Anyone with any foresight surely can see this. We need to be active and stand up to polluters and protect our natural resources. Instead of just saying oh it wasn't that much, it will just wash downstream , not the first chemical spill, and wont be the last, no it won't be the last especially if we do nothing. People who do nothing and think a little pollution is just the price we have to pay for keeping the wheels turning are part of the problem . Time to wise up . Like Doboy says there are alternatives !


----------



## Don't Tell (Mar 25, 2010)

Couldn't have said it better myself. But I am not a T H


----------



## Fisherman 3234 (Sep 8, 2008)

Doboy said:


> *OR WIND, WATER & SUN!*
> 
> Ok,,, I'm done! ;>)


Wind power, if there is no wind, your generating no power, solar, no sun no power, and hydro-electic power requires a dam or structure that would hinder the normal cyclic migrations of fish up and down river, coal power, is cleaner then it was, but still causes pollution, nuclear power has it own risks as well. There are pros and cons to every method of harnessing energy. I do agree that these facilities near a primary water source should have more safeguards against a spill to prevent this type of contamination from happening again.


----------



## Doboy (Oct 13, 2008)

*Like 40 years ago*, way up in the Pa mountains, there was a hunting camp that I went too.
Up-stream, there was a cabin with a floating paddle-wheel generating system. (I saw another example somewhere, floating on the Allegheny River. It was floating offshore,,, attached to a tree!) They ran everything in the cabin, that they could, on 12v. 
lol, It looked like the system was energized by a 12v Corvair generator!

ANYWAY,,,
How many cabins, households, CITIES could be (partially) energized the SAME WAY? HOW MUCH COAL & OIL COULD WE SAVE?

EVERY time that I fish below the NC Dam, I stare and wonder,,,, why aren't there any generating devices ON or IN every one of those outflows?
( I'm sure that there is a 'brain' on OGF that could estimate/calculate the amount of energy LOSS with just the posted KCFS figures!?
and Ya,,, NONE of this stuff will work when it's - 20*! )

MANY great ideas on Youtube;





http://www.youtube.com/watch?annota...&feature=iv&src_vid=p4scG3cuL7I&v=Vb5XVg96c2A







http://water.weather.gov/ahps2/hydrograph.php?wfo=pbz&gage=ncuw2


----------



## Doboy (Oct 13, 2008)

hoosiercanadian said:


> Yes i AM a treehugger and damn proud of it, somebody better hug them or there won't be any left. I am also an electrical contractor, and i am very aware of what turnes most of the turbines in this country. But it is the year 2014 not 1920 and it is time to phase out the use of coal , quit blowing off the tops of mountains, polluting our air and our water. Anyone with any foresight surely can see this. We need to be active and stand up to polluters and *protect our natural resources.* !



YES! I almost totally agree with the 'tree huggers',,,,
But one of the "protect our natural resources" things that REALLY P-O's me,,, is the 'SAVE OUR FORESTS' argument!
Here, you have a 'RENEWABLE RESOURCE', and the BIG ENERGY corporations use the argument to MAKE PLASTIC!!!


----------



## pppatrick (Apr 21, 2012)

seems this chemical spill has caused the coal industry to lose a few "friends", and rightfully so. 

just because its cloudy doesn't mean solar energy is not able to be harnessed. wind silos require very little wind to turn. and once turning they use centrifugal force to remain spinning. as doboy and i have discussed, every dam on every large river should have a hydro. its a complete waste not having it. 

i prefer the term conservationist. haha.


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

In order to have "usable" hydroelectric power on the Ohio river, you would have to completely submerge every town and city along its banks. It takes a massive amount of water velocity to turn those turbines, and the only way to create it is to back up enough water that it creates a high enough drop to gain enough velocity to turn into electricity. Why do you think the dams and lakes along the Tennessee and Colorado rivers are so huge??? Could you imagine turning the pike island pool into Kentucky lake??? You would displace millions of people and businesses. Every town and city would need to be leveled and excavated prior to flooding. How much would it cost to remove Pittsburgh or Cincinnati from the map? The Ohio river barely carries enough water for barges to travel in the summer. It would take decades to fill all the lakes to generation levels.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

Everyone thinks these "green" sources are the answer. But nobody thinks about the consequences that they entail as well. Wind energy kills birds, solar energy creates shade, hydroelectric power completely redraws the map, and completely transforms the ecology of a river system. Not to mention, the operating costs and cost to maintain these "technologies" is mind boggling...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Fisherman 3234 (Sep 8, 2008)

Bad Bub said:


> Everyone thinks these "green" sources are the answer. But nobody thinks about the consequences that they entail as well. Wind energy kills birds, solar energy creates shade, hydroelectric power completely redraws the map, and completely transforms the ecology of a river system. Not to mention, the operating costs and cost to maintain these "technologies" is mind boggling...
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


BINGO!!!!!, there is no easy fix, as far as with the dams go, look what damming of the Snake, and Columbia rivers have done to the sturgeon population, same goes with the salmon population in other western states. Dams effect fish populations in a big way.......


----------



## Daveo76 (Apr 14, 2004)

As for hindrance of fish migration, I've caught Hybrid Stripers at Greenup Dam that were tagged at Racine , up river and Sauger tagged from below Markland. It certainly isn't hindering the Asian Carp . There aren't that many dams left on the Ohio that don't have Hydro Facilities and I don't see any towns underwater. It's going to happen so people better get used to the idea and learn to fish a Hydro. If someone is a tree hugger, why are they fishing in the first place?


----------



## Doboy (Oct 13, 2008)

*AND OVER SEAS OIL COSTS U.S. TAX PAYERS TRILLIONS!!!
& WHAT,,, some 45,000 LIVES,,, and COUNTING! *
("Anyone with any foresight surely can see this")

OM Bub,,, I don't want to submerge cities, I just want to use the water/ RENEWABLE energy that's being WASTED.
WITHOUT the TAX-PAYER FUNDING IT!!!


A year or so ago, I wrote about how BFI was NOT ALLOWED TO 'FIRE-UP' ALL OF IT'S METHANE GENERATORS. (You should SEE the beautiful yellow 10 to 15' of 'burn-off' fire coming out of the stack.)
I was told that they were not allowed to generate TOO much electricity.
"It would make the PRICE OF KWH DROP TOO MUCH!"

Every sewage treatment plant SHOULD HAVE a generating system!
They all have burn-off stacks. If you can smell it, it can make money.
The plant in Struthers BLEW UP LAST YEAR! 

A Youtube vid showed a huge dairy farm. It was making more profit from the methane than from the MILK! The farmer was not allowed to sell the surplus electricity and place it back into the grid.

Bio-degradable matter, wood, leaves, branches, grass, cardboard, etc SHOULD NOT GO INTO LAND-FILLS!
If it's NOT used to make compost, it should be used to make ELECTRICITY.
A CLEAN, RENEWABLE 'GREEN' RESOURCE.

NOW,,, THAT'S WHAT FRIES MY DONKEY!
Hand over fist WASTE.

I'm done,,, I gotta throw another log on the fire!


----------



## hoosiercanadian (Dec 31, 2012)

I think that anyone who hunts and fishes should be a conservationist, tree hugger , whatever, i do'nt think all " tree huggers " are members of peta or vegetarians , I love to fish, and put fish on the table ! I simply don't want anybody to ruin, pollute, or mess with my favorite fishing waters, I really don't think that anyone who cares about what is happening to our enviroment should be labeled . But back to the topic, we all need to give polluters hell , from corporations to the guy who tosses his beer cans into the river. Lets take care of what we have so we can with a reasonably clear conscious eat those sauger and walleye fillets.


----------



## Fisherman 3234 (Sep 8, 2008)

Daveo76 said:


> As for hindrance of fish migration, I've caught Hybrid Stripers at Greenup Dam that were tagged at Racine , up river and Sauger tagged from below Markland. It certainly isn't hindering the Asian Carp . There aren't that many dams left on the Ohio that don't have Hydro Facilities and I don't see any towns underwater. It's going to happen so people better get used to the idea and learn to fish a Hydro. If someone is a tree hugger, why are they fishing in the first place?


There are a very small amount of fish that are able to move through the lock systems on the Ohio river, although I wasn't just talking about the Ohio river now was I? The Asian Carp (Silver and Bighead) are a big problem. The only natural predators really big enough to put a little dent in the population are Flatheads and Blues, we will not know the true effects of the Asian Carp in the Ohio River for years to come. God help us if they get in the Great Lakes, especially Erie.....


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

Daveo76 said:


> As for hindrance of fish migration, I've caught Hybrid Stripers at Greenup Dam that were tagged at Racine , up river and Sauger tagged from below Markland. It certainly isn't hindering the Asian Carp . There aren't that many dams left on the Ohio that don't have Hydro Facilities and I don't see any towns underwater. It's going to happen so people better get used to the idea and learn to fish a Hydro. If someone is a tree hugger, why are they fishing in the first place?


But my point is those hydroelectric facilities are not capable of producing the wattage for even a small village to run off of. Most of those turbines are in place to supply backup power to the dams gates and locks in the event of a major blackout. You would need a generating facility over half the size of the Hoover Dam just to power Pittsburgh or Cincinnati. The one or two little water wheels that are installed at our current dams could barely keep Walmart lit up... (no chance if they actually had more than 2 registers open...)

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

And it's not just about migrating fish. It would turn a mostly flowing system into a reservoir type system. All those fish that depend on constant water flow would be killed off. The smallmouth population would most likely be replaced by largemouth with exception of the immediate tailraces. Sedimentation would be elevated, and habitat changes would completely shift the types of fish able to survive in the river.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Mosey (Oct 31, 2010)

Bad Bub said:


> But my point is those hydroelectric facilities are not capable of producing the wattage for even a small village to run off of. Most of those turbines are in place to supply backup power to the dams gates and locks in the event of a major blackout. You would need a generating facility over half the size of the Hoover Dam just to power Pittsburgh or Cincinnati. The one or two little water wheels that are installed at our current dams could barely keep Walmart lit up... (no chance if they actually had more than 2 registers open...)
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


The meldahl hydro plant will generate 105 megawatts. This is 1/5 the output of a single coal power plant and is enough to power 105,000 homes daily. More than enough to power a 100 walmarts. It uses the same water that comes through green up and and all the other hydros above it. The water is flowing all the time, why not take advantage. 


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Don't Tell (Mar 25, 2010)

To Bad Bub, With all due respect, where does your Hydro Expertise come from. do u work at a hydro facility. Our city of 9000 runs entirely off of hydro at about 3 megs, at least that's what we purchase so it may be more or less than 3.
we used to have all kinds of power problems in our city but since the hydro was put on line our power problems have gone away. according to our utility dept. we are only using a small amount of what is being generated by the hydro, the rest of it is going to other cities in West Virginia and I assume other Ohio cities. I seriously doubt u know what you're talking about when it comes to power distribution.


----------



## Gottagofishn (Nov 18, 2009)

Looks like someone is thinking about Hydro power on the ohio...... or was.... this is dated 2/8/09. I just skimmed through it and am not familiar with existing or planned Hydro facilities but none the less, there is some great reading here and a significant study in it as well. 

http://ecogeek.org/component/content/article/2920-dam-retrofits-on-ohio-river-to-produce-350-mw-of-h

Here is an exert from the intro;
"The construction of new hydropower plants isn't particularly environmentally-friendly, but what about the already existing dams in the country that could be making electricity? According to MWH, a water engineering firm, out of the 80,000 dams in the U.S., only three percent are currently used for power generation. Isn't that just a bunch of untapped, clean energy?

Ohio utility American Municipal Power thinks so. It has partnered with MWH to conduct five retrofit projects on the Ohio River, turning dams that were built for navigation and watershed purposes into hydropower facilities. When completed sometime between 2013 and 2015, the dams will produce a total of 350 MW, enough power for 350,000 homes. The total cost of the projects will come to about $1.9 billion."


One thing for sure though...... whoever has the most $$ wins! Coal, Hydro, wind or solar.....

It really was never about our quality of life or anything we want now was it?


----------



## chadwimc (Jun 27, 2007)

Mosey said:


> The meldahl hydro plant will generate 105 megawatts. This is 1/5 the output of a single coal power plant and is enough to power 105,000 homes daily. More than enough to power a 100 walmarts. It uses the same water that comes through green up and and all the other hydros above it. The water is flowing all the time, why not take advantage.
> 
> 
> Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


And yet, there are people on here who are upset that hydro electric project eliminated a fishing spot for, at the most, several dozen people. On a river that is more than 900 miles long...


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

First off, my apologies for not "re" researching this issue before engaging in the discussion. I've learned a lot about the current hydro power projects along the river over the last 8 hours. I was going off of past arguments and info based from when "run of the river" turbines were considered non impactual. Lots have changed by what I've read, but lots hasn't as well. This link is a pretty good read if you have time. (Mainly the last paragraph or two) 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059963923


Oops...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Don't Tell (Mar 25, 2010)

tks for the link. I think its time for us to talk fishing , made a trip to Byrd a few days ago, one sheephead nothing else.


----------



## Doboy (Oct 13, 2008)

To the LAST 5 POSTERS,,, & my friend Bub,
The responces & links are VERY helpfull.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

THESE ITEMS NEED TO BE AIRED OUT, PEOPLE NEED TO BE INFORMED.
'It' started out about a Chemical spill, and evolved into 'Free GREEN ENERGY & Waste'.
ALL GOOD


(Through my career, WE were commanded/ threatened into 'dumping' THOUSANDS of gallons of transformer oils, machine oil & grease, antifreeze, battery acid AND bury truck-loads of barrels of creosote,,, all along the shores of the Ohio River & it's feeder rivers & creeks.
When the EPA was called,,, THEY gave the 'Companies' a WEEKs 'heads-up' before the inspection. Quote; "THEY (the EPA) had to have permission to inspect the property". So you know how THAT turned out.
I still get choked-up at the THOUGHT-OF-IT!
SO,,, Please forgive me when I get CRANKED-UP when talking about Government 'Watch-dog' entities & Huge Trillion Dollar ENERGY COMPANIES.) 


*O-BTW Don't Tell,,, I hit the O River with 2 dozen fatheads yesterday eve,,,,
ONLY CAUGHT LEAVES & STICKS. *


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

Doboy said:


> To the LAST 5 POSTERS,,, & my friend Bub,
> The responces & links are VERY helpfull.
> 
> THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
> ...


Oh, I know what you're talking about with the EPA inspections. I used to work at a place in W.Va. that had to have inspections regularly. They actually had them on a 4 month schedule. It was a real $h!t show for the week leading up to them. They did the same thing when OSHA was coming. It was a real joke. Rubber making uses a ton of hazardous chemicals by the way.... most of which was just exhausted out through a filter system... that didn't have any filters...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Daveo76 (Apr 14, 2004)

Fisherman 3234 said:


> There are a very small amount of fish that are able to move through the lock systems on the Ohio river, although I wasn't just talking about the Ohio river now was I? The Asian Carp (Silver and Bighead) are a big problem. The only natural predators really big enough to put a little dent in the population are Flatheads and Blues, we will not know the true effects of the Asian Carp in the Ohio River for years to come. God help us if they get in the Great Lakes, especially Erie.....


 Think of it as a huge lake between dams. Do inland fish go from lake to lake?? These fish in the Ohio have plenty of tribs to travel too. You have some inland lakes that only have bass , bluegills , crappie and catfish. In the Ohio in every pool, you have more than enough species to keep everyone happy. Plenty of folks come all the way to the Ohio river just for catfish bait. I'm finished,,,,,


----------



## Rivergetter (Jun 28, 2011)

Mosey said:


> The meldahl hydro plant will generate 105 megawatts. This is 1/5 the output of a single coal power plant and is enough to power 105,000 homes daily. More than enough to power a 100 walmarts. It uses the same water that comes through green up and and all the other hydros above it. The water is flowing all the time, why not take advantage.
> 
> 
> Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


I'm not sure where those numbers come from but the plant I work at makes 3200 megawatts and can barley keep up with summer demand. So with your math there is going to be a lot of hydros needed to keep those wal marts going. 


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Rivergetter (Jun 28, 2011)

Don't misunderstand me I'm am not really pro coal. I am pro U.S. And I think we should use all of our resources including hydro on the ohio. But to replace coal fired plants is going to take a lot of green power and we are not there yet. But we are trying to shut down all coal usage. 


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Fisherman 3234 (Sep 8, 2008)

Daveo76 said:


> Think of it as a huge lake between dams. Do inland fish go from lake to lake?? These fish in the Ohio have plenty of tribs to travel too. You have some inland lakes that only have bass , bluegills , crappie and catfish. In the Ohio in every pool, you have more than enough species to keep everyone happy. Plenty of folks come all the way to the Ohio river just for catfish bait. I'm finished,,,,,


Daveo76, you have contributed a lot to the forum and especially on the Greenup dam reports for that of which I thank you, but the examples that I cited were correct. On the Ohio River since the building of the dams there has a been a decline or extirpation of shovelnose/Lake sturgeon, Paddlefish, Alligator Gar, Ohio river (strain) walleye Larger sizes of Catfish,(70's,80's,90 lbers), as well as other species. If you don't believe me, this information comes directly off of the ODNR's website. Anytime you alter the flow of a natural body of water, it is going to affect the ecosystem.


----------



## Daveo76 (Apr 14, 2004)

Fisherman 3234 said:


> Daveo76, you have contributed a lot to the forum and especially on the Greenup dam reports for that of which I thank you, but the examples that I cited were correct. On the Ohio River since the building of the dams there has a been a decline or extirpation of shovelnose/Lake sturgeon, Paddlefish, Alligator Gar, Ohio river (strain) walleye Larger sizes of Catfish,(70's,80's,90 lbers), as well as other species. If you don't believe me, this information comes directly off of the ODNR's website. Anytime you alter the flow of a natural body of water, it is going to affect the ecosystem.


 Oh, don't get me wrong, I don't doubt you one bit. But with progress comes the headaches and consequences. The river is cleaner than it has been since I've been fishing it but it will never be completely clean. Thanks for your perspective and input and come down in the spring when the Wipers start,,,,,,


----------



## Mosey (Oct 31, 2010)

Rivergetter said:


> I'm not sure where those numbers come from but the plant I work at makes 3200 megawatts and can barley keep up with summer demand. So with your math there is going to be a lot of hydros needed to keep those wal marts going.
> 
> 
> Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


I was just using 500 Megs as an average for a coal power plant. The beckjord coal plant near me averages 800 some megawatts. I'm sure there are plants that make much more. The average home uses 1kw/hr. I dunno how much a walmart uses. It seemed reasonable to assume that on a sq ft basis 100 homes with a 1000 sq ft footprint would equal the average 100,000 sq ft footprint that a walmart has and energy consumption would be somewhere close to what the average home uses. 100 homes @1kw/hr= 100kw/hr x 100 walmarts= 10,000 kw/hrs, far less than the 105 megawatts that the meldahl dam hydro is projected to generate. Please correct me if im wrong. 


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Rivergetter (Jun 28, 2011)

Your numbers are an average and not that far off. The problem arises in the summer months when the rivers start to flow slow. If the state of ohio relyed on hydro we would see lakes like Berlin and mosquito dry by august. That's not to say that we should not have hydros. When the river is flowing fast in the spring that water is be wasted by not useing it to generate. I would like to add that the chemical that was spilled is used my to wash coal for steel mills and coke plants than it is for coal fired plants. The plant I work at is a clean coal plant and our coal is not washed. But the media has an enemy so we get blamed for it. And Walmart is a smart company they are very energy efficient. Pay attention to the lights the next time. 


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Mosey (Oct 31, 2010)

Rivergetter said:


> Your numbers are an average and not that far off. The problem arises in the summer months when the rivers start to flow slow. If the state of ohio relyed on hydro we would see lakes like Berlin and mosquito dry by august. That's not to say that we should not have hydros. When the river is flowing fast in the spring that water is be wasted by not useing it to generate. I would like to add that the chemical that was spilled is used my to wash coal for steel mills and coke plants than it is for coal fired plants. The plant I work at is a clean coal plant and our coal is not washed. But the media has an enemy so we get blamed for it. And Walmart is a smart company they are very energy efficient. Pay attention to the lights the next time.
> 
> 
> Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


Yeah I'm sure the numbers drop off as the river approaches pool. Also I'm not pro coal, pro hydro or pro environment, I was simply bringing to light that the hydros up and down the ohio generate far more power than previously stated by bad bub.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Rivergetter (Jun 28, 2011)

Mosey said:


> Yeah I'm sure the numbers drop off as the river approaches pool. Also I'm not pro coal, pro hydro or pro environment, I was simply bringing to light that the hydros up and down the ohio generate far more power than previously stated by bad bub.
> 
> 
> Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


I agree. There is times in the spring when the hydros here in the U.S. And Canada actually make so much power that we buy there power for our customers. Funny thing how the power grid works.


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

Mosey said:


> Yeah I'm sure the numbers drop off as the river approaches pool. Also I'm not pro coal, pro hydro or pro environment, I was simply bringing to light that the hydros up and down the ohio generate far more power than previously stated by bad bub.
> 
> 
> Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


I was being somewhat sarcastic with the Walmart comment.... but point taken.
And as rivergetter mentioned, Walmart is probably the most energy minded corporation I've ever stepped foot in. Skylights throughout the day being the most obvious...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## muskyhunter76 (Mar 16, 2013)

Pro coal.... It's more clean than you think.. Don't let the media. And liberals Feed you lies about coal... Do some digging before you go against coal...it keeps your lights on .. And for a reasonable price!


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

Doboy said:


> ANYWAY,,,
> How many cabins, households, CITIES could be (partially) energized the SAME WAY? HOW MUCH COAL & OIL COULD WE SAVE?
> 
> EVERY time that I fish below the NC Dam, I stare and wonder,,,,why aren't there any generating devices ON or IN every one of those outflows?
> ...


I swear, I wondered about that at least 40 years ago! I couldn't understand it either. True, it won't supply ALL of our electricity, but it would add MW's to the grid, hopefully reducing the cost of KWH's for us. Who could possibly have a problem with that? Well, maybe the folks who make all their money selling us those KWH's! When in doubt about motivation, follow the money!




muskyhunter76 said:


> Pro coal.... It's more clean than you think.. Don't let the media. And liberals Feed you lies about coal... Do some digging before you go against coal...it keeps your lights on .. And for a reasonable price!


I am also not anti-coal. Let's face it, we went with the best technology we had at the time, and the industry, sometimes with the government clubbing it over the head, has become more environmentally responsible. I'm still baffled by the coal industry knocking the tops off of mountains in West Virginia, dumping the spoil into the hollows, smothering spring fed streams, and then claiming that the streams still flowed "underground" to eventually emerge wherever the spoil pile ends. That kind of makes them hard to fish! 

No doubt if we went a different way, especially under government fiat, electricity would cost us more. I'll offer my water bill as an example. My Mom lives outside of town in a rather well to do area. I live in town in a rather modest abode. Yet, my water bill is about twice hers even though we use about the same amount of water. The reason is I pay "city" sewer rates which are higher than county rates. Why is that? Because the sewer system in the city is old and not always segregated between storm and sanitary. Believe me, we've had plenty of news reports on TV showing human feces floating down the Mahoning river to prove it. Now, I wasn't around when the sewer systems were planned and installed, but I have to pay more for them because the EPA says I have to.

Again, when in doubt about motivation, follow the money!


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

The thing is, it's so costly to install the turbines compared to the gain in wattage, that it would likely cause our electric bills to skyrocket in order to pay for them. If a power company like AEP or first energy felt like they could make/save money with hydro power, I believe they would have already done it extensively. Even if they just mainly used it to supplement their energy needs during high water flows to cut back on fuel usage. Imagine if they could pump enough hydro power throughout the spring, that they cut their coal usage in half during that time... that to me would be the biggest selling point to hydroelectric power along the Ohio and Mississippi. But is it enough of a savings to justify a 1.8 billion dollar investment? Obviously someone doesn't think so...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

Bad Bub said:


> The thing is, it's so costly to install the turbines compared to the gain in wattage, that it would likely cause our electric bills to skyrocket in order to pay for them. If a power company like AEP or first energy felt like they could make/save money with hydro power, I believe they would have already done it extensively. Even if they just mainly used it to supplement their energy needs during high water flows to cut back on fuel usage. Imagine if they could pump enough hydro power throughout the spring, that they cut their coal usage in half during that time... that to me would be the biggest selling point to hydroelectric power along the Ohio and Mississippi. But is it enough of a savings to justify a 1.8 billion dollar investment? Obviously someone doesn't think so...
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


This is a good point. My original befuddlement came from the fact that turbines weren't part of the original design. Yes, retrofitting is much more costly compared to original design. My thinking was that they went to all the trouble to design and build a lock and dam complex, why leave that out? Even if they put a small one in that did nothing more than power the lock and dam, that's a load off the grid. I guess the thinking was different back then.


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

buckeyebowman said:


> This is a good point. My original befuddlement came from the fact that turbines weren't part of the original design. Yes, retrofitting is much more costly compared to original design. My thinking was that they went to all the trouble to design and build a lock and dam complex, why leave that out? Even if they put a small one in that did nothing more than power the lock and dam, that's a load off the grid. I guess the thinking was different back then.


A few (very small few) were built with a concrete enclosure with the intension of adding turbines at a later time. I don't know how far they have gone with any installs at those particular locations though.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------

