Pollution maps of the US

[lawrocket 3]

http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/carbon-sources-47040802?kw=ist

Check out the you tube video that maps out the emissions of CO2 for the US.

It appears that the biggest doses of grenhouse gases come from the northeast and the upper midwest, as well as the Southest throughTexas gulf border.

I find this pretty interesting on a couple of fronts. First, it provides a good visual idea of the CO2 emissions that blew me away when I saw it.

Second - I was shocked but not surprised at the emissions from the blue states - despite the compacts in these states to reduce the emissions. Obviously, there is plenty of manufacturing done in these blue states.

Interestingly - the image on the top right somewhat parallels the political "red state/blue state" - but with the blue areas showing less than predicted emissions and the red states showing more than predicted emissions.

Red State/Blue state - we just can't escape it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

I would think that the NE and the Midwest produce high amounts..due to the industry but also due to the primary source of electricity.. the burning of coal in power generation. That can also be why the desert SW....although fairly sparsely populated had a huge input on the purple 3D model. There are quite a few power plants in the area of the vast coal reserves we have there....it does not take a rocket scientist to notice the smog .. when you go to many of the national parks in the area.

I would also posit.. that the environmental laws in many of the southern states are fairly lax....I know that when I fly into Houston for example.. the layers of different colored air is vis1ble as you descend... and the air actually burns my eyes.. even inside the airport while waiting for my next flight.

[lawrocket 3]

Yes, Houston is a doozy. I remember going there to visit my lady and was not surprised at the pollution.

And you are right baout the coal. Coal is readily available and cheap - we've got over 300 years of coal reserves in untapped seams. And where there is coal you'l find a lot of coal-fired plants.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Nightingale 0]

It looks like the hot spots along the California coast are the ports in Long Beach, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I would also posit.. that the environmental laws in many of the southern states are fairly lax....I know that when I fly into Houston for example.. the layers of different colored air is vis1ble as you descend... and the air actually burns my eyes.. even inside the airport while waiting for my next flight.

I've seen that in Newark and Chicago, too...among other places, I'm sure.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[nerdgirl 0]

Very cool! Thanks for posting that!

In addition to Jeanne’s observations, especially w/r/t concentration of manufacturing facilities, I’d be very curious to see two additional pieces:

-- Normalization per capita
-- Similar maps for China, especially SE and NE; India; Bangladesh (Dhaka); Nigeria (Lagos); and Mexico (Mexico City). What does it look like in places where there really are no environmental regulations to a lot less than even in the reddest of American States?

VR/Marg


[Attachment: graph showing geographical distribution, or concentrayion, of 75% of US population based on 2000 Census.]

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Normalization per capita

I think that this is crucial. Part of the reason this is such an important thing would be to shwo much of the effect of NIMBYism. How many coal-fired plants would be seen in metro Boston? I'd suspect none. There'd probably be plenty out by Hampden, etc.

You'd typically want to have power generation away from the population centers - in part BECAUSE of the pollution issue.

I'd think that such a figure as a normalization per capita would be skewed because of this.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,132]

>You'd typically want to have power generation away from the population
>centers - in part BECAUSE of the pollution issue.

Yep. Unfortunately cities expand. When the Salem and Brayton plants were built near Boston/Providence, the areas they were built in weren't very populous. Now they are very large towns.

[idrankwhat 0]

This reminds me of this pic:
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories/images/usa-nightlights1994-1995b.jpg

I'd love to see an updated version.

[Amazon 7]

A lot of those lights east of the Rockies are powered from coal fired plants... not all mind you.. there are also quite a few oil fired and nuclear...but we are talking about CO2 emitters.

A very high percentage of that west of the Rockies is Hydro power.

Up here in the PNW it is almost ALL Hydro power with some nuclear thrown in.

That is why most of the time we have to take it on faith that air exists.. since we usually cant see it or smell it.

[lawrocket 3]

California has maybe one or two coal fired plants. 63% of our power comes from natural gas fired plants - and another 15% from nuclear and 10% from hydro.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

I know a hell of a lot of BPA Hydro is sent south...are you sure about that number of only 10% or is that just what is getnerated in CA.. I would also add that a bunch of those coal fired plants over in the 4 corners region.. and Hydro from Hoover and Glen Canyon find their was to CA as well.

[lawrocket 3]

I posted what Cali generates. I believe we import 10% of our power.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

Actually you import more than three times that

http://www.energy.ca.gov/html/energysources.html

Electricity (2006)
Source
In-State 78.1%
Natural Gas 41.5%
Nuclear 12.9%
Large Hydro 19.0%
Coal* 15.7%
Renewable 10.9%

Imports 21.9%
PNW 6.7%
USSW 15.2%


Add the Imports 21.9% and the Coal fired plants located in the Intermountain Region of 15.7% and that basically makes the point I was trying to make. 37.6% is generated outside of the state...and that 15.7% is making a lot of smog in what used to be the pristine areas where several of our more scenic national parks are located. It is a rare day when it is clear now for viewing those once vast vistas. They are still just as vast.. you just cant see them.

I am surprised at how much Natural Gas is used though.... and the renewable... well Byrons windmills come to mind

[rhys 0]

Quote

And you are right baout the coal. Coal is readily available and cheap - we've got over 300 years of coal reserves in untapped seams. And where there is coal you'l find a lot of coal-fired plants.

sadly enough, it will probably take another 300 years for the energy companies to use more efficient ways to use the resource in that area.

$$$ value is sadly determined by the supply of the resource rather then the consequence of using the product.

Why was Kyoto not signed again?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Why was Kyoto not signed again?

Ask Clinton or Gore. They were in the Oval Office and had the chance. Clinton never submitted it to the senate.

Oh, yes, Gore said that the US would NEVER sign it until it had developing nations jumping on board.

Bush hasn't submitted it, either - for some reason he thinks that China should get less than a 100% exemption.

My wife is hotter than your wife.