News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Corridor H

Started by CanesFan27, September 20, 2009, 03:01:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

seicer

I suspect so. Corridor H from Davis eastward to the crest of the Allegheny Front also uses WV 93's existing alignment, with some modifications, so the impact is going to be lower than something totally new. I am surprised at how much WV 93 west of the lake is being discarded - it was only built in 1964.

As for the US 33 alternative - I'm not sure. I've read some reports that mentioned a WV 93 relocation going through Greenland Gap, and then Corridor H. I wonder if their information was skewed or if it was an editor confusing WV 93 for US 33.


1995hoo

Quote from: oscar on August 01, 2013, 02:04:33 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2013, 01:30:29 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 01, 2013, 12:58:56 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2013, 10:46:08 AM
Heh. One reason I like the Corridor H route is that it avoids Maryland (and, if I'm heading to Ohio, it also avoids Pennsylvania's substandard Interstates).

Yeah, but my V-1 is not illegal in Maryland. It is in Virginia.  :bigass:

True enough–well, it's illegal to use, not to possess, anyway. I have a V-1 as well from my law school days in North Carolina, though I haven't upgraded it to the newest model. I used to use it in Virginia all the time on trips to and from Durham by driving at night and using the concealed display module. Never got caught. What I always hated about using the V-1 in Maryland is that it seemed like on the I-95 corridor I got an inordinate number of false positives whenever I'd pass under an overpass. But that's when the bogey counter is nice because if it always says "1" and then suddenly one day it says "2," you know something's up.

I haven't used it in several years because lately I just don't usually go fast enough to bother. I wasn't at all concerned about getting nailed for speeding at 75 mph on Corridor H earlier this week, for example, even though the V-1 was in a drawer at home. I still enjoy the idea of going nice and fast, but the low Wife Acceptance Factor for extremely high speeds coupled with my appreciation for our rather low insurance premiums make me not bother very often.

I understand that the newest breed of radar detector detectors can sniff out V-1s in use.  I would assume that the Virginia and maybe D.C. cops have made the upgrade.  So I suggest you continue leaving your V-1 at home for short trips into WV (less hazardous environment than, say, Montgomery County MD).   

Frankly, it's been several years since I used it; last time was on a trip to Mont-Tremblant and I pulled over at the last rest area before the border to hide it in our luggage since mere possession of a detector is illegal in Quebec. We've made several drives to Florida since then (ranging as far down as Miami) and I haven't brought it on any of those, though maybe last December I might have wanted it when I got fed up with traffic jams and was doing in excess of 90 mph on I-95 between St. Augustine and Daytona. Didn't encounter any cops, though.

Nowadays I suppose I'd have a bit of a problem running a radar detector and a dashcam at the same time, actually, unless I were to buy a dual-plug adapter for the lighter plug (assuming that wouldn't interfere with the six-speed manual). While I have two separate lighter plugs, one of those is inside the center armrest and I therefore use that one for an iPhone charger.

Looking back at this past weekend's trip (home to Bedford Springs, PA, via the Oldtown Low Water Toll Bridge on Friday, then on Monday out the Pennsylvania Turnpike to Fallingwater and back home via US-40, US-219, US-50, WV-42, Corridor H, and I-66) the only time I really went particularly fast was the brief push up to 80 at the western end of Corridor H before deciding it felt too fast. I suppose I was doing 65 in a 55 on most of the two-lane roads, but I was never particularly concerned about getting pulled over, and the only time we saw a cop who would have nailed us (at the Mason-Dixon Line on US-40), Ms1995hoo spotted him in advance before we crossed into Maryland.

Corridor H is the type of road that, if it were in Virginia, would be posted at 60 mph (due to the at-grade intersections) and would receive a fair amount of utterly unnecessary speed enforcement. I'm glad West Virginia seems a bit more enlightened on both fronts. I think we might have passed maybe five other vehicles (at most) in the entire eastern segment from the WV-93 access road to Wardensville.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

cpzilliacus

Some readers of this thread may have already seen it, but Gribblenation has a superb overview of the history and controversies associated with Corridor H that makes for interesting reading.

Conflict in the Mountains: The Story of Corridor H in West Virginia
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2013, 04:46:18 PM
Frankly, it's been several years since I used it; last time was on a trip to Mont-Tremblant and I pulled over at the last rest area before the border to hide it in our luggage since mere possession of a detector is illegal in Quebec. We've made several drives to Florida since then (ranging as far down as Miami) and I haven't brought it on any of those, though maybe last December I might have wanted it when I got fed up with traffic jams and was doing in excess of 90 mph on I-95 between St. Augustine and Daytona. Didn't encounter any cops, though.

I don't usually drive fast enough to need a detector [virtual knock on wood], have never owned one, and it's not really worth speeding in the District of Columbia anyway, where I do a fair amount of driving.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2013, 04:46:18 PM
Nowadays I suppose I'd have a bit of a problem running a radar detector and a dashcam at the same time, actually, unless I were to buy a dual-plug adapter for the lighter plug (assuming that wouldn't interfere with the six-speed manual). While I have two separate lighter plugs, one of those is inside the center armrest and I therefore use that one for an iPhone charger.

I have two as well.  One is usually for my Galaxy Tab (Android) tablet, on which I keep Inrix running most of the time.  The other one is for my cell phones (one for work, one for personal).

I have a "splitter" as well, but it is easy  to overload (and blow a fuse) in my experience.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2013, 04:46:18 PM
Looking back at this past weekend's trip (home to Bedford Springs, PA, via the Oldtown Low Water Toll Bridge on Friday, then on Monday out the Pennsylvania Turnpike to Fallingwater and back home via US-40, US-219, US-50, WV-42, Corridor H, and I-66) the only time I really went particularly fast was the brief push up to 80 at the western end of Corridor H before deciding it felt too fast. I suppose I was doing 65 in a 55 on most of the two-lane roads, but I was never particularly concerned about getting pulled over, and the only time we saw a cop who would have nailed us (at the Mason-Dixon Line on US-40), Ms1995hoo spotted him in advance before we crossed into Maryland.

Speed limit enforcement on I-68 is usually light-to-none, but every once in a while (on warm season weekends) I have observed that the MSP, and the Sheriff's Offices of Garrett and Allegany Counties (with help from the Cumberland municipal police) will do "saturation" speed limit enforcement on I-68.  The Cumberland cops can use up the ink in their pens writing tickets on I-68 through Cumberland (where the posted limit is appropriately 40 MPH).

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2013, 04:46:18 PM
Corridor H is the type of road that, if it were in Virginia, would be posted at 60 mph (due to the at-grade intersections) and would receive a fair amount of utterly unnecessary speed enforcement. I'm glad West Virginia seems a bit more enlightened on both fronts. I think we might have passed maybe five other vehicles (at most) in the entire eastern segment from the WV-93 access road to Wardensville.

I did see one West Virginia trooper car driving east on 48 between W.Va. 93 and Knobley Road.

Though  Virginia, to its immense credit, has posted 70 MPH speed limit signs on I-66 between I-81 and U.S. 15 at Haymarket.  Just wish that VDOT would get a decent barrier on the median of the old part of I-66 around Marshall (it was an "orphaned" section of Interstate for many years).  As it is now, there is little to deter "crossover" head-on wrecks there.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

1995hoo

Quote from: J N Winkler on July 31, 2013, 08:15:11 PM
....

Quote from: 1995hoo on July 31, 2013, 03:53:20 PMIn Canada and the parts of Mexico I've visited, it's a given that people do that, especially truck and RV drivers.

You haven't visited Mexico outside Cancún and the surrounding resort areas, have you?  In the parts I have travelled in (mainly Chihuahua and Sonora), there are generally no shoulders, so drivers turn out to allow following vehicles to pass.  In Canada it helps that traffic densities are generally very low outside the 100-mile-wide belt just north of the US border, but there are plenty of places where two-lane roads operate at bad LOS and drivers don't generally pull onto the shoulder to let others pass--when traffic increases beyond a certain point, that just becomes an exercise in exchanging front position in one queue for tail position in another.  When I visited western Canada in 2003, I found long lengths of BC 99 between Vancouver and Whistler and TCH 1 northeast of Kamloops (now being four-laned) that operated that way.

Never been to Cancun, actually, but the rest of my travel in Mexico has all been on the Yucatan or Cozumel, so yes, I know that's not necessarily representative of the entire country. Still, driving south on Route 307 down past Tulum it's quite nice when you're going 130 in a 110 zone and the guy in the car in front of you moves partly or entirely onto the shoulder to help you get past (and I did the same when someone would come up on me going 140 or 150).

I haven't driven in western Canada (did not rent a car when we visited Vancouver), but I've travelled quite a bit around eastern Canada ranging from Sault Ste. Marie and Cochrane east to the western part of the Island of Newfoundland. Outside of Quebec, I found the idea of moving to the shoulder to be very common when road design permitted it, especially in Nova Scotia. No doubt part of it is that because Canadians probably spend more time, on average, on two-lane roads than the average American driver, they better understand how frustrating it is to be stuck for long periods unable to pass.

The point someone–I think cpzilliacus–made about the increasing use of rumble strips on shoulders being a deterrent to moving to the right is certainly very valid. I'm somewhat ambivalent towards those on the whole, but I must say the ones on the center stripe can be damn annoying when you're looking to pass a large vehicle and you need to pull left more or less onto the center line to see whether it's clear enough to begin to pass.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

SP Cook

Quote from: hbelkins on August 01, 2013, 10:25:49 AM
But the larger question is, why does Corridor H come under so much more criticism than the other ARC corridors?

IMHO, a combination of factors.

- The area covered by H is historically "vote the way granddaddy shot" Republican.  That caused two things to happen.  First, it went right to the bottom of the priority list in a heavily democrat state, with all the corridors elsewhere in the state finished first.  That allowed time for the BANANA crowd to get organized.  As I stated elsewhere, none of the great public works that make modern life possible would be built today.  Second, the state's interest in fighting it was limited, since the political gain was limited.

- The area really is thinly populated.  Among the lowest population densities east of the Mississippi.  So that leaves not that many people to agitate and organize against the enemies of progress.

- Its not a coal producing area, really, other than Tucker County, which is already served by an H ending at Elkins and other roads.  A lot of the corridors (G, L, B, Q, E) really help in the modern production of coal via the land improvement method (so called mountaintop removal or strip mining).  The coal companies really don't care if H gets built or not.

- The area has a heavy newcomer population that is similar to rural Vermont, Maine, upstate NY, etc.  Old hippies that want to play farmer, generally supported by parents that are glad to see them finally out of the house.  Since environmentalism is just another word for selfishness, the last thing these people want to see is a good road, so they would have to SHARE their little slice of heaven with others. 

- The "economic development" aspect, to be fair, is overblown.  The only economic potential of that virtually vertical part of the country is tourism.  Nobody is going to build an auto plant in Moorefield.

agentsteel53

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 01, 2013, 05:38:27 PM

Never been to Cancun, actually, but the rest of my travel in Mexico has all been on the Yucatan or Cozumel, so yes, I know that's not necessarily representative of the entire country. Still, driving south on Route 307 down past Tulum it's quite nice when you're going 130 in a 110 zone and the guy in the car in front of you moves partly or entirely onto the shoulder to help you get past (and I did the same when someone would come up on me going 140 or 150).

gotta love Mexican drivers.  very courteous in general.  the opposite end of the speed spectrum is true as well: a few months ago I was driving MX-2 from Imuris to Cananea across a large mountain pass, and there were lines upon lines of trucks doing 10-15mph.  everyone was doing all they could to allow for cars to get around, including waving out the window that it is safe to pass around a blind curve.

the only drivers I've seen in Mexico that are obstructionist hogs are, you guessed it... Americans.
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

NE2

Quote from: SP Cook on August 01, 2013, 06:11:46 PM
Since environmentalism is just another word for selfishness
Fuck you.
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

cpzilliacus

Quote from: SP Cook on August 01, 2013, 06:11:46 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 01, 2013, 10:25:49 AM
But the larger question is, why does Corridor H come under so much more criticism than the other ARC corridors?

IMHO, a combination of factors.

- The area covered by H is historically "vote the way granddaddy shot" Republican.  That caused two things to happen.  First, it went right to the bottom of the priority list in a heavily democrat state, with all the corridors elsewhere in the state finished first.  That allowed time for the BANANA crowd to get organized.  As I stated elsewhere, none of the great public works that make modern life possible would be built today.  Second, the state's interest in fighting it was limited, since the political gain was limited.

In a perfect (probably fantasy) world, party affiliations would simply not matter when it comes to highway projects.  It took a GOP Governor of Maryland, Bob Ehrlich (only served one term in the one of the most-Democratic states in the Union), to undo some of the worst policies of his predecessor, Parris Glendening, and get an EIS done for Md. 200. 

Quote from: SP Cook on August 01, 2013, 06:11:46 PM
- The area really is thinly populated.  Among the lowest population densities east of the Mississippi.  So that leaves not that many people to agitate and organize against the enemies of progress.

That's true - though have any county or state elected officials (e.g. legislators) from the  Corridor H area really been opposed to the project?

Quote from: SP Cook on August 01, 2013, 06:11:46 PM
- Its not a coal producing area, really, other than Tucker County, which is already served by an H ending at Elkins and other roads.  A lot of the corridors (G, L, B, Q, E) really help in the modern production of coal via the land improvement method (so called mountaintop removal or strip mining).  The coal companies really don't care if H gets built or not.

The generating station at Mount Storm consumes coal - and lots of coal, and apparently it all arrives on rubber tires or by a conveyor system for seams closer to the plant (there is a railroad spur that comes up to the plant property from the Potomac River, but I don't think it is used by any coal trains).  On the flipside, the coal has obviously been getting to Mount Storm without Corridor H.

And the other significant natural resource along much of Corridor H are trees - and lots and lots of trees.  Logs that are not going to be transported to the sawmill or pulpmill by light rail.  And the finished lumber from the sawmills needs to be transported to market, probably by truck.

Quote from: SP Cook on August 01, 2013, 06:11:46 PM
- The area has a heavy newcomer population that is similar to rural Vermont, Maine, upstate NY, etc.  Old hippies that want to play farmer, generally supported by parents that are glad to see them finally out of the house.  Since environmentalism is just another word for selfishness, the last thing these people want to see is a good road, so they would have to SHARE their little slice of heaven with others.

Absolutely correct.  And I believe lot of those newcomers are from areas closer to Washington, D.C., where some people are taught  that highway engineers and planners are the spawn of Satan.

Quote from: SP Cook on August 01, 2013, 06:11:46 PM
- The "economic development" aspect, to be fair, is overblown.  The only economic potential of that virtually vertical part of the country is tourism.  Nobody is going to build an auto plant in Moorefield.

I agree that there's not likely to be much heavy industry, but in addition to forestry, there is a fair amount of farming along Corridor H (including chicken farms that the environmentalists have tried to limit and shut down, usually claiming they want to save the Chesapeake Bay (the Eastern Continental Divide crosses Corridor H someplace between the power plant and Davis, and everything to the east along Corridor H is in the Chesapeake's watershed)), and I assert that the farmers will benefit by being able to get their chickens and other products to market a little easier and at lower cost.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

seicer

Quote from: SP Cook on August 01, 2013, 06:11:46 PM

- The area has a heavy newcomer population that is similar to rural Vermont, Maine, upstate NY, etc.  Old hippies that want to play farmer, generally supported by parents that are glad to see them finally out of the house.  Since environmentalism is just another word for selfishness, the last thing these people want to see is a good road, so they would have to SHARE their little slice of heaven with others. 

So glad you can be of such use to this forum.

bugo


Alps


dave19

   I drove up to the Mt. Storm area two days ago. There has been a significant amount of earth moving and grading along WV 93 in Tucker County since the last time I was up there about two months ago. That area is divided into five sections, and all but one has had a lot of work done in them.
   Almost all of the beams are in place for the bridge over the Stony River (below the dam breast). The overpass of the railroad spur leading into the power plant is taking shape (and yes, there is rail traffic in and out of there - I didn't see any on this trip, but the rail head was shiny; I have had to stop for a train there on another occasion).
   It looks like they are ready to start paving east of WV 42. The bridges over where 42 will be relocated are in place (42 will be straightened out and pass underneath US 48). From there to the interchange west of Bismarck, it looks like they are about done with grading, but not as ready for paving as the area east of WV 42 is.

ARMOURERERIC

OK, so what is the next segment to open and when?

cpzilliacus

Quote from: dave19 on August 01, 2013, 11:52:46 PM
The overpass of the railroad spur leading into the power plant is taking shape (and yes, there is rail traffic in and out of there - I didn't see any on this trip, but the rail head was shiny; I have had to stop for a train there on another occasion).

This is interesting. 

I have never seen a train in or out of Mount Storm when I have driven by  there (admittedly much less frequently than you). 

I  know the tracks go down the mountain to the old Western Maryland line that runs roughly parallel to the Potomac River - and between Bayard (where the spur to the power plant diverges) and Davis, the line has been out of service for many years - I believe it once continued to Parsons and presumably beyond.

Maybe Dominion Virginia Power is now having coal shipped in on those train tracks?  At one time, all of the coal burned at Mount Storm was coming by truck from a mine in southern Garrett County, Md., but that mine may be mined-out at this point.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on August 02, 2013, 12:08:17 AM
OK, so what is the next segment to open and when?

WVDOT has a pretty detailed Corridor H Web site. .

According to the Davis to Bismark page on that site:

QuoteA contract was awarded in December 2010 to Trumbull Corporation for the construction of 6.2 miles of Corridor H, from the existing corridor at Bismarck in Grant County to the WV 93 connector at Mount Storm in Tucker County; construction of that project is anticipated to be completed in the summer of 2014. Construction of the remaining portion of the Davis to Bismarck section is anticipated to begin in the fall of 2012, and the WVDOH intends to complete construction of the 16-mile section in the fall of 2014.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

SP Cook

Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 01, 2013, 07:19:48 PM

The generating station at Mount Storm consumes coal

The Mt. Storm plant has always consumed coal mined within 20 miles of its location.  They pretty much built the plant on top of the coal.

froggie

Quote- The area has a heavy newcomer population that is similar to rural Vermont,

You really don't understand rural Vermont.  Contrary to popular belief, there has been little "newcomer population" in Vermont outside of far southwestern Vermont, the Rutland area, and the area immediately around Burlington.

QuoteA contract was awarded in December 2010 to Trumbull Corporation for the construction of 6.2 miles of Corridor H, from the existing corridor at Bismarck in Grant County to the WV 93 connector at Mount Storm in Tucker County; construction of that project is anticipated to be completed in the summer of 2014. Construction of the remaining portion of the Davis to Bismarck section is anticipated to begin in the fall of 2012, and the WVDOH intends to complete construction of the 16-mile section in the fall of 2014.

Delays in both cases.  As I recall, when that 2010 contract was signed, the goal at the time was to have both segments completed by the end of this year.

seicer

Quote from: SP Cook on August 02, 2013, 06:10:07 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 01, 2013, 07:19:48 PM

The generating station at Mount Storm consumes coal

The Mt. Storm plant has always consumed coal mined within 20 miles of its location.  They pretty much built the plant on top of the coal.

80%: http://www.power-eng.com/articles/print/volume-109/issue-4/features/managing-the-plant-dominion-mt-storm.html

Mount Storm coal fired power plant produces 1,600 MW and contribute 12.5 million tons of CO2, 3,139 tons of sulfur dioxides, 22,464 tons of nitrous oxides and 340 lbs. of mercury each year. Nearby, the NedPower Mountain Storm wind turbines produce 264 MW of power on 132 turbines.

CanesFan27

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on August 02, 2013, 08:14:55 AM
Quote from: SP Cook on August 02, 2013, 06:10:07 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 01, 2013, 07:19:48 PM

The generating station at Mount Storm consumes coal

The Mt. Storm plant has always consumed coal mined within 20 miles of its location.  They pretty much built the plant on top of the coal.

80%: http://www.power-eng.com/articles/print/volume-109/issue-4/features/managing-the-plant-dominion-mt-storm.html

Mount Storm coal fired power plant produces 1,600 MW and contribute 12.5 million tons of CO2, 3,139 tons of sulfur dioxides, 22,464 tons of nitrous oxides and 340 lbs. of mercury each year. Nearby, the NedPower Mountain Storm wind turbines produce 264 MW of power on 132 turbines.

Jumping in, Sherman where are you going to put the additional 800 windmills to produce the same amount of electricity? 

seicer

Veering off-topic, but there are thousands upon thousands of acres identified as prime locations for wind farms on mountaintop removal sites. If the land has already been devastated and scarred, why not at least put it to some productive use?

Without going into specifics, coal production is declining sharply, partially because coal seams are becoming too thin, the quality is becoming too poor (e.g. too much sulphur), fracking in unveiling plentiful, cheaper and cleaner burning sources of energy. If we think that the Mount Storm power station will be around burning coal for another 30 to 40 years - then I'd suggest checking out all of the abandoned and disused mining sites within 30 miles of the plant. There are only a handful of mining operations in existence with only a few high volume underground mines left.

Plus, there are now limits on how much fish you can catch in Summersville Lake thanks to mercury contamination (just for one instance). You can consume bass and catfish just once a month, and walleye six times a year.

Grzrd

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on August 02, 2013, 10:55:17 AM
Veering off-topic, but there are thousands upon thousands of acres identified as prime locations for wind farms on mountaintop removal sites. If the land has already been devastated and scarred, why not at least put it to some productive use?

A May 15 Seattle Times article reports on an Associated Press investigation which concludes that even wind farms can have severe environmental consequences:

Quote
The Obama administration has never fined or prosecuted a wind farm for killing eagles and other protected bird species, shielding the industry from liability and helping keep the scope of the deaths secret, an Associated Press investigation found.
More than 573,000 birds are killed by the country's wind farms each year, including 83,000 hunting birds such as hawks, falcons and eagles, according to an estimate published in March in the peer-reviewed Wildlife Society Bulletin.
Each killing of a protected bird is a federal crime, a charge that the Obama administration has used to prosecute oil companies when birds drown in their waste pits, and power companies when birds are electrocuted by their power lines. No wind-energy company has been prosecuted ....
"It is the rationale that we have to get off of carbon, we have to get off of fossil fuels, that allows them to justify this,"  said Tom Dougherty, a longtime environmentalist who worked for nearly 20 years for the National Wildlife Federation in the West. "But at what cost? In this case, the cost is too high."

When companies voluntarily report deaths, the Obama administration in many cases refuses to make the information public, saying it belongs to the energy companies or would expose trade secrets or implicate enforcement investigations.
"What it boils down to is this: If you electrocute an eagle, that is bad, but if you chop it to pieces, that is OK," said Tim Eicher, a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service enforcement agent.

I guess environmentalists are not a monolithic block .......

cpzilliacus

#422
Quote from: SP Cook on August 02, 2013, 06:10:07 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 01, 2013, 07:19:48 PM

The generating station at Mount Storm consumes coal

The Mt. Storm plant has always consumed coal mined within 20 miles of its location.  They pretty much built the plant on top of the coal.

That's what I thought.  But I also read (some years ago) in one of the Maryland papers (maybe the Baltimore Sun - see 2006 article below) that the easily extractable coal in that mine in southern Garrett County was pretty well exhausted.

After the discussion above, I looked at the Google images of the former Western Maryland Railway tracks between Bayard, W.Va. and Piedmont, W.Va. (across the Potomac River from Luke, Md.) and I did see what appear to be long (but empty) strings of coal hopper cars, which makes me think that maybe some of the coal burned at Mount Storm is coming in on those rails.

After 29 years, coal runs out at Western Maryland mine - Last ton to be pulled next week - operations to end soon
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on August 02, 2013, 10:55:17 AM
Veering off-topic, but there are thousands upon thousands of acres identified as prime locations for wind farms on mountaintop removal sites. If the land has already been devastated and scarred, why not at least put it to some productive use?

That is a relatively low-impact way to put  some of the land to good use.

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on August 02, 2013, 10:55:17 AM
Without going into specifics, coal production is declining sharply, partially because coal seams are becoming too thin, the quality is becoming too poor (e.g. too much sulphur), fracking in unveiling plentiful, cheaper and cleaner burning sources of energy. If we think that the Mount Storm power station will be around burning coal for another 30 to 40 years - then I'd suggest checking out all of the abandoned and disused mining sites within 30 miles of the plant. There are only a handful of mining operations in existence with only a few high volume underground mines left.

And I understand that coal in the West (in particular Wyoming) is much  easier and cheaper to mine (as compared to coal mines east of the Mississippi River), and even with  the added cost of transport by railroad, is cost-effective for some coal-fired generation in the East.

Quote from: Sherman Cahal on August 02, 2013, 10:55:17 AM
Plus, there are now limits on how much fish you can catch in Summersville Lake thanks to mercury contamination (just for one instance). You can consume bass and catfish just once a month, and walleye six times a year.

If I had my way, the nation would be looking to displace coal-fired electric generation with nuclear.  Unlike wind and solar power, nuke power works very well (as does coal) to supply baseload power to the grid.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

agentsteel53

Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 02, 2013, 12:13:48 PM
If I had my way, the nation would be looking to displace coal-fired electric generation with nuclear.  Unlike wind and solar power, nuke power works very well (as does coal) to supply baseload power to the grid.

but think of the children who will be born with two heads!
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.