Print Page | Close Window

SunCoke Company of Middletown

Printed From: MiddletownUSA.com
Category: Middletown Area Business
Forum Name: Middletown Area Businesses
Forum Description: News, Information from and about area businesses
URL: http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=893
Printed Date: Jan 27 2022 at 1:10am


Topic: SunCoke Company of Middletown
Posted By: Middletown News
Subject: SunCoke Company of Middletown
Date Posted: Jan 23 2009 at 2:58pm
Suncoke gets the go-ahead from the Ohio EPA to build a coke/power generating plant.
 
About Suncoke:
For more than 45 years,  http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/aboutsuncoke.html - SunCoke Energy  has furnished high quality metallurgical coke to integrated steel makers that utilize blast furnace technology. In the U.S., SunCoke Energy produces over 3 million tons of metallurgical coke per year, 20% of total U.S. production. Its U.S. plants are located in Vansant, Virginia; East Chicago, Indiana; and Haverhill, Ohio. Internationally, a new 320-oven cokemaking facility and power plant located in Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil became operational in March 2007. The plant produces 1.7 million tons coke per year and converts waste heat into 139 MW power.
 
 
 
SunCoke Energy is completing a second plant in Haverhill, Ohio. At full production, this facility ("Haverhill II") will produce 550,000 tons coke per year from 100 new heat recovery ovens. It will also produce 366,000 per hour of superheated steam that will be delivered to an onsite power facility, generating 46 MW electrical power for sale into a major power grid. Initial coke production started in July of 2008.
 


-------------
Please like our http://www.facebook.com/middletownusa" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page




Replies:
Posted By: Middletown News
Date Posted: Jan 23 2009 at 2:59pm
SunCoke Energy possesses the only proven, clean, heat recovery technology in the world that conforms to EPA MACT emission standards and offers steam or electric power as an emission free by-product.  We bring  http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/superiortechnology.html - superior heat-recovery technology  , capital, and people to make the best coke in the market. We will  http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/buildownoperate.html - build, own, and operate  a coke plant with you, delivering substantial benefits:
  • Blast furnace efficiency improvement from consistent,   http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/highestqualitycoke.html - higher quality coke .

  • The most   http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/environmentallysound.html - environmentally friendly  cokemaking operation available.

  • Availability of low cost energy (steam or electric power) as an emission free coke plant by-product.

  • Significant cost savings from lower capital and operating costs.

  • Guaranteed performance.


-------------
Please like our http://www.facebook.com/middletownusa" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page



Posted By: Middletown News
Date Posted: Jan 23 2009 at 3:01pm
Produces Virtually No Hazardous Emissions
Air
  The 1990 Amendment to the U.S. Clean Air Act named the SunCoke Energy non-recovery technology as the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) for U.S. cokemaking. All new coke plants built in the United States must comply with those MACT standards; all older positive-pressure cokemaking technology fails to comply. SunCoke Energy's coke oven emissions are extremely low since negative draft prevents leaks and long retention time at high temperatures incinerates virtually all typical coke plant emissions. Most ambient air emissions are also reduced.

Water
  There are no waste water discharges from a SunCoke Energy heat recovery plant. The plant is a net water consumer with machine cooling water reused to provide quench water.

Solid Waste
  There are no hazardous solid wastes or sludges from a SunCoke Energy heat recovery plant. The only solid wastes are non-hazardous calcium sulfate and calcium sulfite from the spray dryer flue gas desulfurization system which can be recycled to other industries, used as fertilizer for certain crops, or land filled.


-------------
Please like our http://www.facebook.com/middletownusa" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page



Posted By: Middletown News
Date Posted: Jan 24 2009 at 11:51am
An important previous discussion:
http://middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=348 - SunCoke Plant - Planning Commission Vote - Event Date: 26 Mar 2008
 

"Should SunCoke be permitted to build a coke plant in Middletown?"

The question should be " Are we willing to accept the consequences of not permitting SunCoke to build the coke plane in Middletown" ?



-------------
Please like our http://www.facebook.com/middletownusa" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page



Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jan 24 2009 at 12:11pm
In this economy building a New Coke Plant is no gurantee that AK is going to either remain open in Middletown or not be bought out and the Middletown Operation Closed down altogether.  I expect that more layoffs are coming for Middlertown.


Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Jan 24 2009 at 10:46pm
As I stand  some nights on my back deck on S.Marshall viewing the orange haze in the skies coming from AK,I ask myself if we are willing to accept the consequences of having more pollution for the sake of a few more shiny coins which will be wasted anyway


Posted By: Middletown News
Date Posted: Jan 25 2009 at 1:49pm
As I look out my office window into the empty Towne Mall parking lot, I wonder what will save our city?
 
Then I remember, its a few extra shiney coins from new and expanded businesses coming to Middletown. SunCoke will create more jobs. Its a fact.


-------------
Please like our http://www.facebook.com/middletownusa" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page



Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jan 25 2009 at 2:44pm
How many more Jobs Jonathan after it is built?  Supposedly 75 jobs.  Now the question is how many jobs will be lost by closing the Current Coke ovens down?  Currently AK produces about 75% of it's Coke and buys 25% elsewhere.  When the Old Facility is shut down will those be lost jobs?????????????????????
 
If we don't loose any jobs the new Coke Plant will generate enough Payroll Taxes to pay for 1 employee at City Hall, lets say the Economic Director.


Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Jan 25 2009 at 9:28pm
So would hookers, It comes down to what type of town and enviroment you would want to past on to the younger members of one's family. I assure you pollution isn't the one I would choose. I recall history where some american indians traded for some shiny trinkets.


Posted By: Middletown News
Date Posted: Jan 26 2009 at 4:19pm
Pacman, think about losing all the AK jobs in Middletown as a consequence. I would hate to think that is so. Especially since the new plant will reduce the total pollution in our air once the old coke plant shuts down.

-------------
Please like our http://www.facebook.com/middletownusa" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page



Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jan 26 2009 at 7:18pm
Hahahaha I knew you would come back with that one Jonathan.  Now Ak makes 75% of its Coke on site, the question is, is the material to make that coke going to become unavailable in 12-09, since coal is the main ingredient I doubt that will happen or are they going to lose the other 25% of the coke they buy on the open market.  Hmmmmmmmm.........
 
My main point being I am not buying AK's we're going out of business if we don't have the new Coke Plant.  Personally I think Middletown got snookered once again.


Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Jan 26 2009 at 10:37pm
Pac, I see where certain people have all their eggs in one basket(AK) and when that basket is finally dropped it will cause chaos in the minds of local people which is exactly what this town presents to the locals. I am from Charleston S.C. where I witnessed the 2nd largest Naval base on the east coast closed down. Charleston has survived this devastation by being creative and has rebounded from what at the time was seen as the end of the world. I believe if the right people were in charge of this town it also could rebound if AK was to close. One door closes,five opens.


Posted By: MadisonMom
Date Posted: Jan 27 2009 at 12:19am
""""One door closes.....five opens""""" quote from tomahawk35....................

I CERTAINLY HOPE THIS IS TRUE FOR WILMINGTON, OHIO,,,,,,WITH THE CLOSING OF THE DHL PLANT.
HOW HORRIFIC FOR THIS COMMUNITY. DID ANYONE WATCH 60 MINUTES LAST NIGHT? THE WILMINGTON DHL PLANT WAS THE FIRST TOPIC.

To think, any production plant/business/etc. could close at anytime,,,,,,,,,,,,,,


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jan 27 2009 at 7:02am
Hawk- You mentioned the "all the eggs in one basket" theme. Reminds me of the Letter To The Editor I wrote in the mid 1980's.The article focused on the reliance of this town on AK Steel for money flow, employment and being the only place in town to land a decent paying job. The article further encouraged the city to develop and attract more diversified jobs other than paper mill and steel work. I took a copy of the article to then Commissioner Bill Donham and handed it to him before the commission meeting started.As an example of non-active behavior on the city's part, at this same time, the old Montgomery Ward building on University Blvd. was considered as a location for the post office which is still downtown and still lacks parking. Old Bill read the letter and we discussed the post office thing. That was in the mid 80's. It is now January 27th, 2009 and we still have no diversified jobs, the city is still relying on AK Steel as the "big brother" and the post office still lacks parking space. You also mentioned that if the right people were in charge of this town it could also rebound if AK closed. The work to land jobs that would need to be created to cushion the loss of AK should have been started in the 70's when the city saw AK downsizing.The urgency has been ignored by city leaders for over 35 years. IF started today, it would take at least 10 years to stock enough diversified jobs to resupply the pipeline with decent jobs to hit the ground running after an AK demise and, sadly, that would be a very optimistic timeline. The city is not now set up to attract any of the jobs we are talking about. That's another failed city leader subject that has been grown by incompetence in this/past city leadership.The players on Council has changed over the years, but the theme has always been the same- ignore the important stuff and do subtle fru fru crap that has set this city back 30 years behind our neighbors in thinking and developing. As long as the voters are happy placing stubborn, mindless, non-progressive, retreads in office, we will continue to experience this cluster we call a city government.


Posted By: John Beagle
Date Posted: Feb 11 2009 at 11:05am
I understand from that SunCoke has not begun constructing their facility yet. This in part may be due to the city of Monroe filing a lawsuit.

From Christopher A Walker, Attorney for Monroe: "The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Cincinnati on Wednesday, 1/28."

-------------
http://www.johnbeagle.com/" rel="nofollow - John Beagle

Middletown USA

News of, for and by the people of Middletown, Ohio.


Posted By: Middletown News
Date Posted: Feb 24 2009 at 10:53am
In their Feb. 5 conference call, Sunoco states that construction will take 15-18 months after the permit process is complete and that completion may extend past the end of 2010. Source: Les Lofton

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=99437&p=irol-calendarPast - http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=99437&p=irol-calendarPast


-------------
Please like our http://www.facebook.com/middletownusa" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page



Posted By: MadisonMom
Date Posted: Feb 24 2009 at 4:24pm
Jonathan, I don't have time to check this site. Tell me where to go once I log onto it.


Posted By: randy
Date Posted: Mar 11 2009 at 12:14pm
The City of Monroe says it will spend however much it takes to stop the SunCoke Plant from being built in Middletown. As of now, they have spent $150,000 of tax payers' money with no end in sight.


../view_news.asp?a=4141 - To see a full story on the Monroe/SunCoke law suit.


Posted By: Middletown News
Date Posted: Mar 11 2009 at 2:42pm

I don't understand why Monroe is doing this to us. Have they not noticed our high unemployment? Do they not realize that many in Monroe who are out of work, would be working if this plant got the green light.

Green Light = Economic Stimulus



-------------
Please like our http://www.facebook.com/middletownusa" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page



Posted By: arwendt
Date Posted: Mar 11 2009 at 3:41pm
Perhaps no one in Monroe got the memo from Obama that said "Stimulus is Spending!"

Or perhaps they only got the memo from him that said "We are going to rebuild the economy by creating jobs with clean, renewable energy".

Earth to Monroe. That last one was just a lie to get elected.


-------------
“Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power.” Benjamin Franklin - More at my http://wordsoffreedom.wordpress.com/ - Words of Freedom website.


Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Mar 11 2009 at 10:41pm

Why do people think that Monroe is doing this as a way of getting Middletown's goat? It may be that they are really concern about  more pollution and the health of our youth. I can understand this type of concern because being a pipefitter for 36 yrs,I have worked in 39 States and help build power plants,nuclear power plants,chemical,gas,paper mills,and steel mills and these plants were always built far away from communities. I laughed my head off when Mr. Tacker(whatever his name is) claimed his famous white glove test at the coke plant he visited, I assure you there is no such plant that exist in this world.



Posted By: randy
Date Posted: Mar 11 2009 at 11:11pm
The fact is still the same we need jobs in middletown badly,and Monroe does too. What they are doing is not helping the situation that our city has found it self in


Posted By: arwendt
Date Posted: Mar 12 2009 at 11:50am
So am I the only one that just does not get a city that would build right next to the busiest highway in all of Ohio, incorporate itself as close as it could to a steel mill that has been here for over 100 years, and then pitch a total hissy fit about pollution from a new plant that meets all EPA regulations?

-------------
“Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power.” Benjamin Franklin - More at my http://wordsoffreedom.wordpress.com/ - Words of Freedom website.


Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Mar 12 2009 at 11:52pm
I used the term "more pollution" there is a time when certain things must be ceased. The idea that AK has been here for a hundred yrs. tends to make me believe that there shouldn't be anything in this town. I can see people from out of town loading up the family to drive to middletown to see the mill. That would be a hoot.


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 7:40am
While not a big fan of corporate America because of the internal games they play with their employees, I will do what I rarely do in defending a company like AK. (this is killing me!). They have really cleaned up their act since the 50's (with stack scrubbers and pressure from the EPA over the years). For you folks who weren't here in the 50's, old Armco Steel's blast furnace belched out the orange iron oxide that covered the cars. You could literally hose off the iron oxide dust on a daily basis back then. This new facility that is being proposed, seems to be advanced in light years from those days as to pollution. Personally, I welcome the job opportunities- any job opportunities, when I look at what the selection of jobs has been lowered to in this city. If it helps just a few folks attain a decent standard of living here, I'm for it. I like to see people prosper and be able to provide for their families. It's healthy for the town too. Conversely, this situation is EXACTLY what is wrong with the vision of this town. Once again, one company- AK, is this city's only focus. Getting that coke plant up and operational is our only focus. Why can't we be multi-focused on more than one thing at a time? Where are our other company developing/building scenarios? Other cities talk about multiple job opportunities. We wait forever, stagnated, with nothing to talk about, then, ONE lousy thing pops up and we talk it to death about how wonderful it is. Why?   


Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 10:05am
Vet:
I certainly remember those days.  (We lived on Grand Avenue, only a few blocks from the main gate.)  I distinctly remember a local politician in the late '50s standing in front of our grocery store and telling some neighbors that: "You can measure the economy of Middletown by the height of the smoke coming out of those stacks!"  At that time, he was probably correct.


-------------
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012


Posted By: arwendt
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 10:08am
Good points VieVet and well said as always.

-------------
“Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power.” Benjamin Franklin - More at my http://wordsoffreedom.wordpress.com/ - Words of Freedom website.


Posted By: sportsnut
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 11:06am
Below you will find the reason we in Monroe are fighting this.  This article is written about the famous "white glove test" plant that has the exact same permit as the one they are attempting to build here has.  Yes, we realize that all jobs are at a premium.  Yes, we realize how important AK is to the surrounding area.  Yes, we even realize that many think we are just trying to put one over on Middletown.  The reality is that SunCoke has a history of not keeping up with their pollution standards and this plant will be horrible for our small city if it is built as planned.  The location is bad enough, but the pollution it will emit - while better than what Armco emitted in the 50's - is still well above what other coke plants in the state emit.  Why should we settle for a subpar plant?  Oh wait, maybe the leaders(?) of Middletown should be asking that question.
 
Oh and I believe this article is pretty pertinent to our situation here in SW Ohio.  Why do you think it hasn't been in any of the local papers but the amount of money Monroe is spending to try and get a cleaner permit has?  Just saying ......
 
 
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 5
77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD
CHICAGO, IL 60604-3590
DEC 062008
REPLY TO THE ATTENTION OFAE-
17J
CERTIFIED NIALL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Wayne Pruitt
General Manager
Haverhill North Coke Company
2446 Gallia Pike
Franklin Furnace, Ohio 45629
Re: Notice and Finding of Violation at Haverhill North Coke Company, Franklin Furnace


Dear Mr. Pruitt:
This is to advise you that the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency has determined that Haverhill North Coke Company's (Haverhill North Coke's) facility at 2446 Gallia Pike, Franklin Furnace, Ohio, is in violation of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and associated state or local pollutioncontrol requirements. A list of the requirements violated is provided below. We are today issuing to you a Notice of Violation and Finding of Violation (NOV/FOV) for these violations. Haverhill North Coke's PSD Permit to Install (PTI) limits emissions of particulate matter PM), particulate matter 10 (PM 10), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2) and volatile organic matter (VOM). The purpose of these emissions limits is to
help protect the public from unhealthy exposures to criteria pollutants, emissions of which contribute to respiratory problems, lung damage and premature deaths.Based on Excess Emissions Report (EER) data submitted for emissions unit P901, Haverhill North Coke has violated its 3-hour rolling SO2 emission limit for six fiscal quarters
since 2006. Also, for twelve quarters since the CEM was certified in 2005, Haverhill North Cokehas violated its PTI requirement to continuously operate its SO2 continuous emission monitor
(CEM). Additionally, Haverhill North Coke failed to immediately report a baghouse malfunction observed by Portsmouth Local Air Agency on July 6, 2008. Violation of these requirements is also a violation of the Ohio State Implementation Plan (SIP), as
ell as Title I, Part C of the CAA and its associated regulations which require compliance withthe terms and conditions of PSD permits. Accordingly, Haverhill North Coke has violated Title I of the CAA and its implementing regulations. RecycledlRecyclable Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (50% Postconsumer)
Section 113 of the CAA gives us several enforcement options to resolve these violations, including: issuing an administrative compliance order, issuing an administrative penalty order,
bringing a judicial civil action, and bringing a judicial criminal action. Section 113 of the CAA provides you with the opportunity to request a conference with us about the violations alleged in
the NOV/FOV. A conference should be requested within 10 days following receipt of this notice and any conference should be held within 30 days following receipt of this notice. This
conference will provide you a chance to present information on the identified violations, any efforts you have taken to comply, and the steps you will take to prevent future violations. Please
plan for your facility's technical and management personnel to take part in these discussions. You may have an attorney represent you at this conference. The EPA contact in this matter is Gina Harrison. You may call her at xxx-xxx-xxxx if you wish to request a conference. EPA hopes that this NOV/FOV will encourage Haverhill North Coke's compliance with the requirements of the CAA.
Enclosure
Sincerely,
cc: John Paulian, Division of Air Pollution Control
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
Cindy Charles, Director, Air Pollution Unit
Portsmouth City Health Department
Air and Radiation Division
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5



Posted By: here&now
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 11:40am
I cant see how a city that has the Larry Flint "Hustler" store and a truck stop that spews pollution all day long and has for years and years, can spend all this money on something that in the end they cant win.

I am glad i don't live in Monroe and have to watch my tax dollars go to waste.


Posted By: sportsnut
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 11:53am
Originally posted by here&now here&now wrote:

I cant see how a city that has the Larry Flint "Hustler" store and a truck stop that spews pollution all day long and has for years and years, can spend all this money on something that in the end they cant win.

I am glad i don't live in Monroe and have to watch my tax dollars go to waste.
 
Fair enough(even though Monroe is attempting to be progressive/aggressive in moving beyond being a truck stop dot on the map). 
 
Does the fact that SunCoke did this ....
 
 
SunCoke seeking new permit, says new EPA filing will have tougher pledges to minimize emissions. By Jessica Heffner

Staff Writer
Friday, March 13, 2009

MIDDLETOWN SunCoke Energy officials have revealed a plan to obtain a more stringent air permit, which would allow the company to circumvent the time requirements for "netting" emissions credits.

Ryan Osterholm, project manager for the $340 million Middletown coke oven facility, said the company will submit a new major-source NSR permit to the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, which will include tougher air quality, disbursement and monitoring requirements than its current permit.

In essence, the permit will "eliminate any doubt" SunCoke is meeting its permit requirements, Osterholm said.

"Even though there are additional requirements, we believe we will meet those," he said.

SunCoke will submit the new permit application to the Ohio EPA within the next few weeks, he said.

There have been questions about SunCoke's current permit, issued by the Ohio EPA in November, due to the agency's interpretation of air emission credits from the closing of AK Steel's sister plant in June 2003.

The permit defines a window of five years for use of emission credits. The new permit would not include the time constraint, Osterholm said.

Though the U.S. EPA sent a memo saying it would have no further comment on the permit or Ohio EPA's interpretation, new information submitted to the federal agency's Region 5 office caused it to reopen its review, said Bill Omohundro, spokesman for U.S. EPA.

Chris Walker, an attorney retained by the city of Monroe, has submitted documents alleging that increased sulfur dioxide emissions from AK Steel's blast furnace were omitted from the netting analysis.

These additional emissions would exceed the threshold allowed for the gas in the permit, according to Walker.

The review has no impact on SunCoke's ability to continue construction, though Omohundro said he could not say whether there would be repercussions if U.S. EPA decided to overturn the netting ruling.
 
 
... not tell you that they are concerned with the case Monroe is making?
 
 
 
The most amazing thing about this entire argument - in my eyes - is that peole really don't seem to care if pollution completely fills the air as long as AK Steel is still in business. 
 
Let's try and bring some business diversification to the area instead of being a one trick pony .....


Posted By: here&now
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 12:55pm
Sportsnut: i do agree that we need more diversification in our town, but at this monment in time that is not an option for Middletown or  Monroe for that matter. People are out of work and something  has to change.....soon . The Coke plant is  whats on the table NOW we can not just walk away from that.


Posted By: sportsnut
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 1:08pm
Yes it is NOW - and I think the problem most are having with this situations is that people really believe Monroe is against the coke plant.  Monroe is not.  We are against the way the zoning was changed and mostly because of the way the EPA rubberstamped the approval of the emissions when there are cleaner plants elsewhere in OH.  It's not a matter of stopping progress, it's a matter of progressing in a way that is good for all. 


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 1:34pm
Sportsnut- Interesting article about Haverhill- Now, what the article doesn't report is whether the violations were caused by the faulty design/malfunction of the system, the incompetence/ lack of training of the employees manning the facility, whether the employees were instructed to bypass procedures that would have prevented release of pollutants to the environment or the technology just doesn't deliver against what was promised. How does this plant's performance compare to the other SunCoke plants with this technology? May just be the Haverhill operation that is the problem child, not the technology as a whole.(Baghouse violation/failed to operate it's SO2 monitor) Those sound like operational- easy to fix items to me. If their other locations don't "over- pollute", what conclusion could you reach? We really don't know what we're going to get in Midd. and Monroe because the place hasn't been built yet and the bugs haven't been ironed out which is a common occurance in any new process startup. Wouldn't you agree that comparing Middletown to Haverhill is a bit premature since this site hasn't been built as yet, nor operational? To support the plant or to be against it's existance is premature on both sides of the fence. We simply don't know to what degree it will pollute or how competently it will operate. Another issue- does Franklin Furnace Ohio have different pollution violation criteria than Middletown Ohio? Is it more strict, magnifying the violations numbers and seriousness?


Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 10:24pm
You don't have to live in Monroe to have your tax dollars wasted, it's been happening in your own back yard without even coming close to what Monroe has been achiving.


Posted By: tomahawk35
Date Posted: Mar 13 2009 at 10:44pm
Viet, You bring up some very good points concerning this plant which makes me wonder why the leaders of our fair city didn't take more time and do some real investigating concerning such topics instead of pulling the trigger so fast. It's this kind of quick action that would cause great concern because there were never any consideration taken on behalf of anyone who questioned this plant. It was all emergency pasting of any thing that would get this plant up and running. This is a red flag.


Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Mar 14 2009 at 3:03am
Originally posted by tomahawk35 tomahawk35 wrote:

Viet, You bring up some very good points concerning this plant which makes me wonder why the leaders of our fair city didn't take more time and do some real investigating concerning such topics instead of pulling the trigger so fast. It's this kind of quick action that would cause great concern because there were never any consideration taken on behalf of anyone who questioned this plant. It was all emergency pasting of any thing that would get this plant up and running. This is a red flag.
'Hawk: It wounds me to say this, since I always have been in support of the coke plant (and remain so), but just read the threads under "City Council" and "Middletown News, Info, and Happenings" regarding a 501(C)3 known as Middletown Moving Forward.
 
It's obvious that current and former Middletown City officials are in league with area business to surreptitiously load Middletown City Council (and eventually the Butler County Commission) with stooges that will be nothing more than marionettes with the businesses pulling the strings.  The more that you dig, the more corruption you see, and the less you will "wonder" why strange things happen in Middletown City Hall.


-------------
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012


Posted By: instigator
Date Posted: Mar 15 2009 at 12:47am
VietVet you remind me of someone I just can't put my finger on it.Ermm

-------------


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Mar 15 2009 at 10:30am
Well instigator, I hope it's not someone running this city or in the school hierarchy. Also hope it ain't some lousy politician or uppity country clubber either. That wouldn't be a good thing. You might be looking for an anti-establishment, authority that is incompetent hatin', blunt, critical, sometimes angry, take no prisoners, sarcastic, crap stirring, honery, humor injecting, stubborn, wishing for the past, anti rose-colored glasses people, type of individual. Don't know, but right or wrong, that's how I see myself.


Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Mar 15 2009 at 11:59am
Originally posted by VietVet VietVet wrote:

You might be looking for an anti-establishment, authority that is incompetent hatin', blunt, critical, sometimes angry, take no prisoners, sarcastic, crap stirring, honery, humor injecting, stubborn, wishing for the past, anti rose-colored glasses people, type of individual. Don't know, but right or wrong, that's how I see myself.
 
And those are his GOOD points!!! LOLLOL
Just kidding, Vet.  You're OK in my book!!!  Thumbs%20Up


-------------
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Mar 15 2009 at 7:09pm
Good comeback Mike!!!! I like it!!!    At 60, there's probably no chance of me improving on those either. And, like everyone else, have the battle scars that created all of it too.   


Posted By: sportsnut
Date Posted: Mar 16 2009 at 10:41am
Interesting point Vet.  These violations could very well be caused by the folks of Haverhill being incompetent and not running the facility in the proper fashion.  Who is ultimately responsible for that?  The parent company that is wanting to build right here in Middletown.
 
The main point though is why won't the State EPA require the proposed plant coming to Middletown to fall under the same strict restrictions as the new FDS Project plant in Toledo, OH?  If the leadership of Middletown had done any research, they would have found this cleaner method of making Coke and pushed SunCoke to do the same.  Unfortunately it was pushed through without anyone questioning if there is a better way.  And there is a better way.
 
I still don't understand why Monroe is the bad guy in pushing for this plant to be the cleanest it can possibly be.  I would think most of you that see your City Government's mode of operation would appreciate seeing a City Government actually taking the time to speak to the people, do some research, and not just bow down to certain folks with a private agenda.
 
Good to see the Journal finally report on the Haverhill issues. 


Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Mar 16 2009 at 1:12pm
Originally posted by sportsnut sportsnut wrote:

I would think most of you that see your City Government's mode of operation would appreciate seeing a City Government actually taking the time to speak to the people, do some research, and not just bow down to certain folks with a private agenda.
 
Good to see the Journal finally report on the Haverhill issues. 
The problem with anyone being willing to "appreciate seeing a City Government actually taking the time to speak to the people, do some research, and not just bow down to certain folks with a private agenda." is this:
 
Those on council know next to nothing about the subject, but most have egos too large to admit that.  They are also too proud to think that anyone else may know more than they do on the subject so they will not ask anyone who is competent.  (Just like with any other subject.)  They could read an article or two (I'd recommend the chapters on coke-making and coke ovens  in 'The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel". by U. S. Steel Corp.) but all that would do is give a very basic overview and teach them a few "buzz words".  They then would be in a situation where "a little knowledge was a dangerous thing", since, as usual, they would try to act like experts, but would be easily fooled.


-------------
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012


Posted By: sportsnut
Date Posted: Mar 16 2009 at 5:20pm
Originally posted by Mike_Presta Mike_Presta wrote:

 
Those on council know next to nothing about the subject, but most have egos too large to admit that.  They are also too proud to think that anyone else may know more than they do on the subject so they will not ask anyone who is competent.  (Just like with any other subject.)  They could read an article or two (I'd recommend the chapters on coke-making and coke ovens  in 'The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel". by U. S. Steel Corp.) but all that would do is give a very basic overview and teach them a few "buzz words".  They then would be in a situation where "a little knowledge was a dangerous thing", since, as usual, they would try to act like experts, but would be easily fooled.
 
So, are you saying this is what Monroe's council did, or what Middletown's would do?
 
I don't always agree with what Monroe's council has done in the past, and fortunately they have allowed me to voice that to them while still respecting each other's view point.  I don't see them as these arrogant aristocrats like some elected officials. 
 
The Monroe City Council did pay 2 (or maybe 3 - not sure) consultants with years and years of experience in the steel making process and on the environmental damage that may be caused by this plant.  This time(which isn't always the case), homework was done and the proper action(IMO) has been taken.
 
After moving out of Middletown to Monroe 3 years ago, it is refreshing to be able to say I am proud of how my elected officials have acted.
 
Why don't we all take a stance on having the cleanest coke plant available built as opposed to allowing a plant with the minimum EPA specifications?  I think that would be a great compromise for our two cities.
 
Or better yet, have the cleanest coke plant available built inside the AK fence.  I know - that is asking too much.  LOL


Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Mar 17 2009 at 5:52am
Originally posted by sportsnut sportsnut wrote:

So, are you saying this is what Monroe's council did, or what Middletown's would do?
I was referring to what Middletown's Council would/does do.  I thought I made that quite clear since I was replying to your post.  I apologize for not being sufficiently specific. 
Originally posted by sportsnut sportsnut wrote:

Why don't we all take a stance on having the cleanest coke plant available built as opposed to allowing a plant with the minimum EPA specifications?  I think that would be a great compromise for our two cities.
Sorry, but I doubt that anyone wants anything besides the cleanest technology available.  That is certainly NOT my desire, and I doubt that it is anyone's desire.  To promote the idea that anyone wants to unecessarily pollute the air is not only insulting on your part, but also demeans your arguement.  That is a ludicrous position, and I will not reply further to such tripe. 
 
(By the way, just to be perfectly clear, I also am NOT in favor of dirty water, wife-beating, child abuse, nuclear war, cruelty to animals, global warming, or any of the other tripe that people who try to imply that there are perfectly normal Amercans advocating dirty air are in favor of.  That being said, if you would like to have a reasonable discussion, that's fine.  I would be pleased to do so.  If you insist on maniacal accusations,  find an equal with whom to argue.)
 
Originally posted by sportsnut sportsnut wrote:

Or better yet, have the cleanest coke plant available built inside the AK fence.  I know - that is asking too much.  LOL
HA, HA!!  The "cleanest coke plant available"???  Everyone in Monroe  was perfectly happy with THIS one if it was just moved a few thousand feet northeast, weren't they???  Most of the homes and businesses which Mr. Schiavone, in his impassioned plea at the Public Hearing, said would be shuttered and abandoned would have been just as close, or even closer to the new plant if it were to be built "inside the fence", wouldn't they???  So, exactly how much concern does the kind-hearted counselor and the people of Monroe actually have for the folks of Amanda, Oneida, Engles Corner, Mayfield, or Blueball since they have NO PROBLEM at all with cokemaking even CLOSER to their homes than it will be to Monroe (and DOWNSTREAM to the prevailing winds to boot)???
 
I have no idea of your background, sir.  But perhaps you should read the ENTIRE book that I recommended (The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel), and then analyze the global steel situation as it was when SunCoke and AK first conceived this project, and then review the tapes of Mr. Snook's presentation at the Public Hearing.  Please recall that Mr. Snook made a good case that this "did not make sense"!  Well, given the world economy, and steel supply and demand at the time of conception of this project, I believe that Mr. Snook was correct!!!  UNLESS...unless AK felt, as most analysts did at that time, that the global market for certain grades of steel would continue to exceed forseeable supply, thus creating an excellent opportunity for a domestic supplier such as AK to strategically add capacity, such as EA furnaces and thin slab casters, which coupled with an economical, captive electrical power source (as this co-gen cokemaking facility is) would have perfectly situated them to take full advantage of the situation. 
 
The entire situation is much too esoteric and too complicated for Middletown's Council to fully grasp.  I have not, and will not try to speak fpr Monroe's Council, nor for their citizens. 
 
I was quite impressed with Mr. Snook's presentation.  I actually thought that he was going to reach the same conclusion that I did, but he stopped short.  His facts and logic were better arguements for Monroe's side than all of the other hystrionics, emotions, and blatherings about Middletonians wanting dirty air put together.


-------------
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012



Print Page | Close Window