Green entrepreneur eyes shut-down Dav...

Green entrepreneur eyes shut-down Davenport cement plant

There are 31 comments on the Santa Cruz Sentinel story from Feb 13, 2010, titled Green entrepreneur eyes shut-down Davenport cement plant. In it, Santa Cruz Sentinel reports that:

The life of the century-old Davenport cement plant may not be over just yet. The entrepreneur behind Moss Landing's green cement business Calera Inc.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Santa Cruz Sentinel.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
most important one

San Jose, CA

#2 Feb 13, 2010
man that glenda hill - she's a sharp one!
Public Option Supporter

San Jose, CA

#3 Feb 13, 2010
Hey, how about bringing back those guys who proposed (but the County rejected) a plasma-arc garbage burning system and combine it with the Calera process, producing cement, less CO2, zero garbage in the landfill, and power to desalize the ocean water for domestic use. I've heard about such synergistic industrial sites in The Netherlands, where government has brought together industries so the output waste of one factory is the input raw material for the next factory, and so on down the line.
Westsider

Brisbane, CA

#4 Feb 13, 2010
Turning an exisitng use into a "green" use without a tear down and re-build, on an existing site, and combining old and new technologies to create carbon neutral industry, while helping California to stake a claim to being a "Green industry leader" and provide domestic jobs is PERFECT.

If I were the governing bodies involved, I'd put out the red carpet, and get these guys streamlined permitting, waive fees on construction of the new plant, and get them in as soon as possible to also create a tax flow to the City from sales.

This is GREAT thinking in a time we need GREAT thinking.
localresident

Santa Cruz, CA

#5 Feb 13, 2010
well, that sounds like a great plan!
dON hEICHEL - sOQUEL

San Francisco, CA

#6 Feb 13, 2010
http://www.calera.com/

Watch their video...

They're fudging on the cost issue already...

If you don't think that's important, ask yourself if you'd wish to be at a greater economic disadvantage to China than you currently are...

Or, when the Chinese are playing the same game and the field is leveled I'll jump on it...until then you're just helping export more jobs to coal fired China & increasing the carbon footprint importing the product back to here.

#1 producer of solar panels in the world?

#1 producer of wind turbines in the world?

China...& they didn't need a stinkin' carbon reduction law to do it.

THEY USED OUR CAPITAL...
diogenes

United States

#7 Feb 13, 2010
Kudos to anyone who can restore full-time jobs by manufacturing a product that people want, need and can afford.

But spare us the comment about "using carbon dioxide pollution". C'mon, Kurtis. You're a good writer and you know better than to slip an agenda into a news story. That sort of thing only belongs on the editorial page.

Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring trace gas. Plants absorb it and life could not exist without it. It has existed for millions of years in concentrations higher and lower than current levels, the vast majority of that time occurred prior to human existence.

Carbon dioxide not "pollution". Please don't pollute news stories with political opinion.

Thanks in advance.
diogenes

United States

#8 Feb 13, 2010
Public Option Supporter wrote:
Hey, how about bringing back those guys who proposed (but the County rejected) a plasma-arc garbage burning system and combine it with the Calera process, producing cement, less CO2, zero garbage in the landfill, and power to desalize the ocean water for domestic use. I've heard about such synergistic industrial sites in The Netherlands, where government has brought together industries so the output waste of one factory is the input raw material for the next factory, and so on down the line.
The county will never allow any kind of business to resume at the Davenport cement plant. Back in the 80's, Lonestar Cement had a brilliant proposal to burn old vehicle tires. The emissions would have been significantly less toxic than coal burning and would have helped eliminate an incredible environmental problem by reducing the amount of used tires.

But eco-fascists like the Sierra Club and hypocritical NIMBY's in Davenport and Bonny Doon used their local political connections to destroy that project.

These fools still control the process. The cement plant and its thousands of acres will be sold to some socialist non-profit who will let the land go to hell.

Just watch.
Matthew Kaufman

Santa Cruz, CA

#9 Feb 13, 2010
How about we put a couple of modern gas turbines there (like Calpine has been putting in) to back-feed the 60kv transmission (and possibly augment that in the future with a better intertie either down the coast or up in Ben Lomond to the 115kv coming up from Moss Landing), run them as a cogen heat source for preheating the cement plant process, and capture the CO2 from the new generation for the Calera cement process? There's certainly a need for additional generation support at this end of both those transmission lines, so the only problem will be figuring out who takes on the liability for the toxic landfill that is blocking the Coast Dairies transfer.(I doubt Calera will want that)

Of course RBDA will object to the power plant idea, while simultaneously complaining about the frequent power outages, and an EIR to add generation will be much easier to block than one to reactivate the existing plant.
dON hEICHEL - sOQUEL

San Francisco, CA

#10 Feb 13, 2010
diogenes wrote:
Kudos to anyone who can restore full-time jobs by manufacturing a product that people want, need and can afford.
But spare us the comment about "using carbon dioxide pollution". C'mon, Kurtis. You're a good writer and you know better than to slip an agenda into a news story. That sort of thing only belongs on the editorial page.
Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring trace gas. Plants absorb it and life could not exist without it. It has existed for millions of years in concentrations higher and lower than current levels, the vast majority of that time occurred prior to human existence.
Carbon dioxide not "pollution". Please don't pollute news stories with political opinion.
Thanks in advance.
California Energy Commission's Climate Change Activities

California's Climate Change Research Center states that during the last 50 years, winter and spring temperatures have been warmer, spring snow levels in lower and mid-elevations have dropped, the snowpack has been melting one to four weeks earlier, and sea levels are projected to rise. Not only will there be a change in average temperatures but there is a projected increase in extreme conditions such as a rising incidence of "heat storms." While these trends will impact all of us, they will have an especially large consequence for California's agricultural industry.

The impact on the energy infrastructure in the state is likely to be significant as well. Lower levels of snowpack...

http://www.energy.ca.gov/climatechange/

"heat storms'??? Lower levels of snowpack????

Seen D.C. lately??

+

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists...

establishment's alarm at the growing influence of this ''counter consensus''. In March, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has a key role in President Obama's plans to curb CO2 emissions, asked one of its senior policy analysts, Alan Carlin, to report on the science used to justify its policy. His 90-page paper recommended that the EPA carry out an independent review of the science, because the CO2 theory was looking indefensible, while the "counter consensus'' view – solar radiation and ocean currents – seemed to fit the data much better. Provoking a considerable stir, Carlin's report was stopped dead, on the grounds that it was too late to raise objections to what was now the EPA's official policy.

OBAMA'S OFFICIAL POLICY!
Mister Mean

AOL

#11 Feb 13, 2010
Calera's model for making cement rests on carbon trade-offs and other voodoo economics from the discredited anthropogenic global warming scams? When Constantz describes this as a "two-fer" he must be talking about it creating another sham industry supported by taxpayer subsidies while also earning himself huge bucks.
dON hEICHEL - sOQUEL

San Francisco, CA

#12 Feb 13, 2010
diogenes wrote:
Kudos to anyone who can restore full-time jobs by manufacturing a product that people want, need and can afford.
But spare us the comment about "using carbon dioxide pollution". C'mon, Kurtis. You're a good writer and you know better than to slip an agenda into a news story. That sort of thing only belongs on the editorial page.
Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring trace gas. Plants absorb it and life could not exist without it. It has existed for millions of years in concentrations higher and lower than current levels, the vast majority of that time occurred prior to human existence.
Carbon dioxide not "pollution". Please don't pollute news stories with political opinion.
Thanks in advance.
Meanwhile a remarkable drama has been unfolding in Australia, where the new Labor government has belatedly joined the "consensus'' bandwagon by introducing a bill for an emissions-curbing "cap and trade'' scheme, which would devastate Australia's economy, it being 80 per cent dependent on coal. The bill still has to pass the Senate, which is so precisely divided that the decisive vote next month may be cast by an independent Senator, Stephen Fielding. So crucial is his vote that the climate change minister, Penny Wong, agreed to see him with his four advisers, all leading Australian scientists.

Fielding put to the minister three questions.

How, since temperatures have been dropping, can CO2 be blamed for them rising?

What, if CO2 was the cause of recent warming, was the cause of temperatures rising higher in the past?

Why, since the official computer models have been proved wrong, should we rely on them for future projections?

The written answers produced by the minister's own scientific advisers proved so woolly and full of elementary errors that Fielding's team have now published a 50-page, fully-referenced "Due Diligence'' paper tearing them apart. In light of the inadequacy of the Government's reply, the Senator has announced that he will be voting against the bill.
The wider significance of this episode is that it is the first time a Western government has allowed itself to be drawn into debating the science behind the global warming scare with expert scientists representing the "counter consensus" – and the "consensus" lost hands down.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists...

3 simple questions from an Australian Senator on AGW...UNANSWERED!

11 factual errors in AlGore's 'Truth' by British Court...UNANSWERED BY AlGore...for over 2 years now!!
Jess Wundrin

Millbrae, CA

#13 Feb 13, 2010
Thanks to whoever laid out today's edition of the Sentinel. I laughed so hard I spewed coffee when I saw the carbon footprint/global warming agenda in the page A2 overflow portion of the Cemex going green article, and directly across from it on page A3 was news story headlined: "Snow on ground in 49 of 50 states: Hawaii the lone holdout"

Any chance the demonization of carbon dioxide (the exhalation of humans and inhalation of plant life) might end after it snows in both Hawaii AND Hell?
Rocket J Squirrel

Soquel, CA

#14 Feb 13, 2010
Mister Mean wrote:
Calera's model for making cement rests on carbon trade-offs and other voodoo economics from the discredited anthropogenic global warming scams? When Constantz describes this as a "two-fer" he must be talking about it creating another sham industry supported by taxpayer subsidies while also earning himself huge bucks.
yep and a little extra homework before anyone gets more smoke blown up their inseam...
http://cleantech.com/news/4327/you-say-calder...
http://www.greentechmedia.com/green-light/pos...
Carbon neutral? 130 employees driving to work and back, a fully powered building, construction equipment 5 days a week and Calera yet has to actually use flue gas emissions from a power plant. This isn't about making cement this is about carbon credits acquiring venture capitol and grants.
Curious about how long removing calcium from seawater at 60,000,000 GPD before someone questions taking one of the oceans basic building block and realizing this is not such a good idea.
dON hEICHEL - sOQUEL

San Francisco, CA

#15 Feb 13, 2010
Copenhagen done and dusted
Posted by Senator Steve Fielding on December 22 2009 | 94 Comments

The Copenhagen Climate Change Conference has come and gone and we can all breath a sigh of relief now that the circus is finally over.

As I predicted would happen all along, the conference ended in shambles without any real agreement reached between the parties and without any real commitment by any country to significantly reduce their carbon dioxide emissions. The only thing to come out of it was a non-binding agreement between the various nations which was more tokenistic than anything of any real substance and this just adds further justification for the Senate’s decision to reject the Rudd Government’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS).

Just imagine if the CPRS had passed and the Copenhagen conference had ended up like it did with no agreement. The Australian economy would be on the road to self-destruction. Thousands of our jobs would be booted offshore, not to mention the increase in the cost of living because of the tax imposed by the CPRS. Estimates have it that the CPRS would be like having a GST at 12.5%. That’s a pretty cruel joke to play on the Australian people especially when the rest of the world isn’t ready to act in the same way.

http://www.stevefielding.com.au/blog/comments...

AUSTRALIA'S CARBON TRADING SCHEME DEFEATED; CALLED A CRUEL JOKE BY THIS SENATOR!!

CALIFORNIA HAS A CARBON REDUCTION SCHEME, AB 32 & IT'S WAAAAY BEYOND A CRUEL JOKE ON OUR ECONOMY!

Please elect some leaders that will take us back to tokenistic gestures; perhaps then we'll be able to compete globally again!
Hats off

Santa Cruz, CA

#16 Feb 13, 2010
to Don Heichel, the cut and paste king.
solar fusion

Vallejo, CA

#17 Feb 13, 2010
A far better idea would be to set up an algal biofuel project up in Davenport. Using the plant to make cement would just result in more local pollution - recall this from the Merc?

"In 2008, cancer-causing chromium 6 was discovered at the facility, which promoted a temporary shutdown of the plant and a big cleanup bill that Cemex never reimbursed the county for."

"The facility also faced pending federal regulations that would have been costly to meet. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the plant was one of the nation's largest mercury-polluting cement plants and was a major emitter of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas."

You would think this story would have mentioned these rather major factors. Similarly, the Moss Landing fossil fuel power plant is the #5 point polluter in the state, coming in after the oil refineries.

The Big Dirty on the Central Coast - no, let's not talk about that!
solar fusion

Vallejo, CA

#18 Feb 13, 2010
Note to Jess Wundrin:

Yes, the fossil fuel lobby a seized on the snow talking point - but the facts are that climate models predict that as the planet warms, more water will evaporate into the atmosphere, especially in tropical areas.

That water gets transported around the globe, and when it runs into winter cold fronts, it comes out as snow and rain.

That's why Britain had record-breaking "once in 1000 year" flooding this past winter, and it's also probably why so much snow is falling across the eastern half of the United States.

Now, Jess, look at Vancouver, site of the 2010 Rain Olympics, or the 2010 Spring Olympics - the only place snow is sticking is indoors, and temperatures are way above average.

In fact, Jess, on a global basis, this has been the warmest January ever recorded.

Yes, that won't stop the fossil fuel PR lobby from psuhing simple-minded associations, like "snow is cold so the planet isn't warming", etc...

You guys must think your marks are just really stupid.
Coulrophobia

Alviso, CA

#19 Feb 13, 2010
There is NOTHING "green" about making concrete. You strip mine land to irreplaceable remove rock formations that took millions of years to form, millions of years ago. You leave behind a ravaged landscape that is of no use to anyone. You burn coal, tires, slag, or any other combustible that is cheap and plentiful, and then you transport the very heavy product in trains, truck or ships powered by oil-derived fuels (and in the case of ships, that is sometimes extremely dirty waste oil). This technique to harness the carbon dioxide that results from burning does address one small negative effect of cement manufacturing, but it ignores (conveniently) the larger picture. Calling this process "green" is absurd and is an insult to any of us who try to live our ENTIRE LIVES in an environmentally sensitive way. The "combo" system Calera proposes for Davenport no more than a fancy system of trading in carbon credits.
Coulrophobia

Alviso, CA

#20 Feb 13, 2010
...remove irreplaceable rock formations...
Coulrophobia

Alviso, CA

#21 Feb 13, 2010
diogenes wrote:
<quoted text>
The county will never allow any kind of business to resume at the Davenport cement plant. Back in the 80's, Lonestar Cement had a brilliant proposal to burn old vehicle tires. The emissions would have been significantly less toxic than coal burning and would have helped eliminate an incredible environmental problem by reducing the amount of used tires.
But eco-fascists like the Sierra Club and hypocritical NIMBY's in Davenport and Bonny Doon used their local political connections to destroy that project.
These fools still control the process. The cement plant and its thousands of acres will be sold to some socialist non-profit who will let the land go to hell.
Just watch.
What a hate-filled thing you are, D! Pitiful that you revel in such bitterness, from so many years ago.

You are wrong about tires being cleaner than coal. Tires contain, and create in burning, a larger number of toxins that are far more harmful than does coal. From an info site on the topic:

"It is common knowledge that burning tires in the open is extremely harmful to human health and the natural environment. The fumes emitted are packed with the many toxic chemicals that tires contain (including volatile organic compounds such as benzene, metals such as lead, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzo(a)pyrene, and synthetic rubber components such as butadiene and styrene). Additionally, the chlorine content in tires leads to the creation of dioxins and furans (which are extremely toxic chemicals) when tires are burned."

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Davenport Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Human head, remains found in hills; dead man ma... (Oct '08) 2 hr Anonymous 408 25
TBSC-"Stashing the dope bag" with Santa Cruz Po... 5 hr Lost marbles 13
Did FAT Pat get evicted yet? 6 hr Woof 4
FAT Pat deserves a driveby fruiting (May '13) 17 hr Woof 36
Art now-Rises-Double symbolism-architecture Mon ART IS NOW 2
Kahnjob loses in Court AGAIN Mon WooF 21
Why does Robert Kahnjob exploit FAT deranged PIGS (Jun '15) Sun Woof 63
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Davenport Mortgages