User talk:Tednace

Hi Ted, welcome to SourceWatch. A query on Sempra Power Proposal - I note that while it is referred to as a cancelled proposal it has two category tags - Category:Idaho proposed coal plants and category:Cancelled coal plants. Do you want that page to have both categories or is Category:Idaho proposed coal plants redundant? cheers --Bob Burton 22:59, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Some notes on SW Style and Referencing

Hi Ted, me again. Thanks for starting the various power projects - I notice that some of them have already floated to the top of the Google rankings already.

I have been working my way through the various pages that you and Kaethin have created. My apologies for taking a while to catch up with them but the last week or two have been a bit crazy. A few notes on SourceWatch style and referencing that are aimed to help readers follow links on key points back to primary sources and for easy readbility.

• Acronyms: it is best to spell out the full term for the first use on a page with the acronym in brackets and then the use of the acronym for subsequent uses;

• we aim to have all key points on a page referenced. Here's one of your pages I have edited so you can see what I'm aiming at - Plum Point Energy Station and Mustang Energy Project.

• In terms of referencing style, please see Help:References. If you need any help in mastering the formatting, feel free to drop me a line. My job is to help tidy things up and help editors with any problems they are having. In particular, it is worth noting that we aim to have full references with author, url, title, the publication, the date it was published and page (if relevant. If a document is an Acrobat file we also include (Pdf) at the end of the reference so that readers are forewarned (which is especially relevant to those on slow dialup connections).

• the format of the "Resources" section is ("references" are for those sources cited in the narrative text, "related SourceWatch Resources" are links to internal SourceWatch articles and "external Links" are to links off the SourceWatch site that may be of interest to readers. (If you open this edit window, you can use the following code as your template).

Resources

Related SourceWatch Articles

• Title goes here

External Links

Let me know if you have any queries. I'll try and nibble away on some of the other articles that I haven't got back to yet. But if you or Kaethin beat me to it, I won't be upset. :) --Bob Burton 01:39, 18 December 2007 (EST)

Re Geosequestration

Hi Ted, I noticed that one of the proposed links you had on the portal page was "coal capture and sequestration". FYI there is a stub on geosequestration. I'm pretty easy on what the best term to use is. --Bob Burton 05:43, 1 January 2008 (EST)

CCS

Hi Ted, I though you might be interested in this map of demonstration CCS projects around the world that I came across. See http://www.co2crc.com.au/demo/worldprojects.html Is it worth starting a page with a list of the projects and a set of stubs?

cheers, --Bob Burton 05:16, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

Hello and tell us a little about yourself

Hey Ted, just dropping by to say "hello" and to ask you to perhaps let the other editors on SourceWatch know a little bit about yourself by adding some information to your user page. You can get there by clicking the "user page" tab when on this discussion page or by clicking your name at the top of any SourceWatch window (when you're logged-in). By way of example, see what Sheldon, Bob or I have done.

By the way, I love what you guys are doing with coal swarm - keep up the good work!--Conor Kenny 03:23, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

Red links

Hi Ted, generally red links only really are something to worry about if they stay there for a long time. Given the ACCCE members are reasonably central to the industry, it wouldn't take too much to create stubs on them. Where there are good Wikipedia articles, we should feel free to copy them across with acknowledgment (this can be done by adding wikipedia inside {{ }} tags. I've gone through the membership list and tweaked the names to correspond to the most common version of the names used. Some of them I have linked to existing SW and a few I've removed the w: link. --Bob Burton 06:17, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

Trailblazer

Hi Ted, I can't see any mention of Trailblazer in the existing collection lists - is it known as something else? Or, is it a new listing? (They do mention that permit applications have been/will be applied for in 2008). --Bob Burton 06:57, 14 May 2008 (EDT)

Pic size reduced

Ted, does this solve the pic size problem? Reduced it tpo 200 pixels and tweaked contrast and brightness. --Bob Burton 06:10, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Arch Coal "borrow"

borrowed article text from Wikipedia is what you commented when copying the content of the Wikipedia article about Arch Coal. Are you aware that the GFDL requires (as far as I know) that you give attribution to the five authors who contributed most to the content? I am the creator of the Wikipedia article about Arch Coal, and I didn't see myself attributed anywhere. Please e-mail me at ResearchBiz at gmail.com. Thanks. -- Thekohser 15:32, 2 December 2008 (EST)

Mountaintop removal ref link

Hi Ted, I was just tidying up a few refs on the page and came across this dead link http://www.epa.gov/region3/mtntop/eis.htm

This is what was on that page from the Internet Archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080328151433/http://www.epa.gov/region3/mtntop/eis.htm but I'm not sure what specific page it was intended to point to (if any).

It would be better to point to the current EPA website if possible but I wasn't sure which link it should be to as I wasn't sure what search parameters to use given there is no direct quote. Perhaps it is something off this one? cheers --Bob Burton 19:17, 4 December 2008 (EST)

http://www.epa.gov/region3/mtntop/eis2005.htm

Mitchell Kammer plants

Hi Ted-

I was thinking about referencing them to each other, but I'm still new enough to formatting wiki pages that I didn't know how to go about it.

From the research I've done, it seems that American Electric Power merely named two compounds within the same site different names. The Kammer plant is the oldest, with all three of its units being built before 1960. The Mitchell site's units were built in the 1970s. The only reason I even discovered that they were, in fact, the same facility was because their TRI reports are filed together.

That's the dilemma that first spurred this thought, because it is going to be extremely difficult for me to add the toxic metal waste data to each of these pages individually because the data is filed as a combination of both facilities.

When I modified them, I put a link in one to the other, but did not specify that they were the same plant, nor did I know how to completely reference them to each other.

By the way, I thought I would introduce myself as Kate Rooth's Greenpeace intern, Kathryn Schwartz, the one who wrote the power plant case files that she sent to you. I'm glad I can be of some use to you!

Tks=

Ted - thanks for the catch --Bob Burton 21:12, 22 February 2009 (EST)

Link of interest

Hi Ted, worth a look - http://www.easterncoalcouncil.com/2009_Documents/2009_Program_of_Work_for_Council.pdf

cheers --Bob Burton 06:25, 24 February 2009 (EST)

Gates Foundation and Coal

Hi Ted-

I am now completely finished adding all the data I had found to their matching wiki article, and I started on adding information to the Bill Gates article and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation article.

I just kind of jumped in and added info to the Bill Gates article because it was a short enough stub that I could do that, but the Foundation article is quite a bit longer, with much more information, and so I didn't know where to throw my information on their equity holdings (since some of them are coal-related).

I also gave the "books on coal" page a running start, but I was unsure as to what format or 'look' the page should have. Other pages just seemed to have titles and relevant information like publication date, etc, but I wanted to add blurbs to the page so the content of the book is clear. Again, it's just a start, but before I got too far into it, I wanted to make sure it looked ok.

I'm planning on going back to the coal plant pages, too, as soon as I get a little breathing room from them. My goal (as ambitious as it may be): start at A and try and add that same emissions and toxics data for every plant. I most likely will not have the time in the near future to add accidents or litigation, but at the very least I can start transcribing some hard data.

Hope all is well out in sunny warm CA. It's business here as usual - bright and sunny, but freezing cold.

Display shortcut

Hi Ted I just came across a way of adding a shortcut for the alphabetical listing of articles in a large category and have added it to the coal issues catg but no others - see here. There's probably other large categories it should be added to as well within CS but you'll know the best candidates -- let me know if you need a hand Cheers bob

right angle brackets

Thanks, Ted. I think those were from someone early on who added their books. If you'd like, I'll go back and fix them. I'm still adding books and changing/adding subsections as needed. I've already exhausted Google Books and now I'm using Amazon as a book reference guide.

There were a lot of old manuscripts on coal in complete PDF files dating back to the mid-1800s on coal and coal policy, which I think would be kind of neat to snap up and hold on to... maybe in a separate wiki page? I haven't done anything with PDF files yet ( at least not intentionally), so I'm not even sure where to begin on that.

Thanks again for the heads-up on the references.

Also, I have been uncovering information about coal-related incidents in the past: coal miners strikes and accidents that have lead to considerable numbers of deaths. In one book, they made mention to the "second mine wars", and in others they discussed extremely large sludge spills, cave-ins, and other industrial coal accidents from the 1800s through the present day, though most seemed to happen before the 1970s.

Are there any articles started on these coal miner strikes/union strikes or these larger coal-related accidents?

The links I mentioned

Hi Ted, here's those links that I mentioned to you earlier re "Climate Industrial Complex" and Lomborg http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124286145192740987.html and http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124337884903556091.html cheers --Bob Burton 23:54, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

May be of interest

Hi Ted - here's the "Energy Supply and Use" chapter of the Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States that was recently released. This may be of some interest - I haven't had a chance to read it yet but it looks like there are some significant points in it vis a vis coal power plants. For example, it states that "There is a high likelihood that water shortages will limit power plant electricity production in many regions. Future water constraints on electricity production in thermal power plants are projected for Arizona, Utah, Texas, Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, California, Oregon, and Washington state by 2025.191 Additional parts of the United States could face similar constraints as a result of drought, growing populations, and increasing demand for water for various uses, at least seasonally. 209 Situations where the development of new power plants is being slowed down or halted due to inadequate cooling water are becoming more frequent throughout the nation.191" --Bob Burton 01:35, 22 June 2009 (EDT)

Number of coal plants

Hi Ted, I have noticed a discrepancy on the Sierra Pacific Resources page in the "Existing coal-fired power plants" section. It states that SPR "owned 6 coal-fired generating stations in 2005" then lists two coal-fired power stations (Reid Gardner and North Valmy) in a table. Then after the table is the statement "In 2006, Sierra Pacific's 2 coal-fired power plants emitted 9.6 million tons of CO2 and 9,000 tons of SO2." (with no reference for the latter but with the co2 data being for 2007 and the so2 data being for 2006).

The way this written raises a few questions:

• does SPR still have 6 coal fired power stations in 2009? If so, we should list them?
• does the unreferenced 2006 data on the co2 and so2 relate solely to the Reid Gardner and North Valmy stations that are currently in the table?

I suspect the reason it is written the way it is because there are bits of data from different sources, none of which are directly comparable for the same time period.

I have noticed this on a few other pages as well.

I suspect we should:

• list all the coal-fired power stations as of 2008 or 2008 in the table;
• provide references for the 2007 co2 data and the 2006 so2 data;
• in the statement tallying the total emissions - is there a more up to date figure? if not then we should specify that it relates to only two of the six plants.

How does that sound?--Bob Burton 18:20, 29 August 2009 (EDT)