Download Article Annotation of End of the Miracle Machines: Inside the power

1
Article Annotation of End of the Miracle Machines: Inside the power plant fueling America’s drought By
Pranav Subramanian
Word Count: 1,737 words
1. Title, director/author and release/publication year?
“End of the Miracle Machines: Inside the power plant fueling America’s drought” by Abrahm Lustgarten,
was published by June 16, 2015
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The Navajo Power Generating Station near Page, Arizona is the largest power-generating center in the
West. It uses coal to generate electricity. The station contains furnaces that are heated to more than a
thousand degrees Fahrenheit, and this helps create enough pressure to spin a rod of steel weighing 80
tons faster than the speed of sound. The rod helps generate electricity and sends water out of the
Colorado River some 325 miles away, to the cities of Phoenix and Tucson. However, this plant produces
more carbon emissions than almost any other facility (for instance, it uses 15 tons of coal every
minute!).
This pollution is obviously not good for the environment and dry weather often strikes the region. A
drought has been affecting the region for some time and it appears this power station’s days are over. It
is an incredible feat of engineering to be able to harness the river’s water and doing so has helped
people settle 20% of the United States. But doing so has damaged the environment beyond repair.
Additionally, many pieces are outdated and this means the plant station (along with the Hoover Dam)
loses a lot of water every year, through water seepage, or evaporation.
The article also dives into the history of the station. In 1901, President Roosevelt ordered that the Wild
West be reclaimed so that people could settle there. Arizona wanted a canal that would divert water
from the Colorado River to help the region “prosper”. Soon large coal reserves were discovered near the
Navajo reservation and an idea was soon hatched. A plant would be constructed so that the coal could
be turned into electricity, the local Native Americans could get jobs and the region would get power and
additionally they would pump the water up. It was not a financially sound idea, but the canal has been
credited for much of Arizona’s economic production. However, the surrounding area (including eleven
national parks) was polluted with smog and some sources attribute this pollution to twelve premature
deaths in the Navajo tribe reservation in 2012.
The EPA wanted the plant to install catalytic converters to reduce emissions greatly, but critics argue the
plant had become so intertwined with the local life and economy that it can’t be shut down.
Environmentalists argue that the plant is dirtying the local environment and damaging human health. A
deal was struck in 2014 that would ensure emissions are cut after 16 years and that one of the three
generators will be shut down by 2019.
3. How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is
provided, for example? Does the article have emotional appeal?
2
Although not a lot of scientific evidence is provided, the article certainly uses emotional appeal. It uses
statements from various stakeholders to show the plant’s contribution to climate change. The author
believes in hyperbole by pointing how many trains dump coal that is instantly burned up, etc. The article
certainly provides a lot of scientific information. Many facts and figures are cited, and it is clear that the
author has done his research.
4. What stakeholders are described or portrayed in the film, what were their experiences, what
expertise did they have, and what were their stakes?
Stakeholders include Jared Blumenfeld, Jim Pratt, Jon Kyl, Nicole Horseherder, and Terry Edwards. Jared
Blumenfeld is the administrator of the EPA’s region for the Pacific Southwest, including Arizona, Nevada
and California. He points out that “the mechanics of moving water is just lost on people”, and that he
understands how important this engineering feat is. He believes the plant needs to reduce its emissions
and has been key in striking a deal with the plant’s owners to help make the Navajo Power Generating
Station more environmentally friendly. He believes that the deal was done correctly and will ensure that
the main goal of reducing nitrogen oxide emissions by 80% has been met.
Jim Pratt is the senior director of base load generation for Salt River Project and one of the station’s six
co-owners. He believes that the canal has helped Arizona’s economy immensely despite what others
may think.
Jon Kyl is the former three-term senator and four-term congressman from Arizona. He was involved
heavily in the negotiations over the plant’s fate. He understands the closing down the plant will affect
the state negatively so it has to be done in a delicate manner. Yet, he believes that “the link between
the plant’s emissions and climate change “is absolutely not proven, it is simply assumed”. Yet he
believes the state has run out of options and will eventually have to bring in water from outside.
Nicole Horseherder is a Navajo environmental activist who is pushing the state of Arizona to invest more
in renewable energy. She has twice testified before Congress about the power plant’s negative impacts.
Horseherder is concerned that few are speaking up about how damaging the plant is to the
environment, and how dangerous it is for people to raise a family here.
Terry Edwards has worked at the generating station since 1979. He is the plant’s operations and
maintenance supervisor. He believes that for another two hundred years of coal can still be mined. He
believes that climate change “is cyclical and man can’t change on his own”.
5. What parts of the article did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I liked how the article detailed the EPA’s push to get the plant to reduce its emissions. It showed both
sides of the argument: those who want the plant to cut its output, and those who believe the EPA wants
the plant to be gone for good. The article also tried to highlight both perspectives of the argument and
show that this is a complex problem with no easy solution.
6. What parts of the article were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
The article spent a bit too much time on the history of the plant. While some background was necessary,
not all was needed. Furthermore, at times the author repeated things that had already been mentioned.
3
7. What audiences does the article best address? Why?
The article best addresses college students and above. The writing style indicates a more mature
audience who needs a basic grasp of finances, environmental studies, engineering etc. Additionally, such
an audience can analyze all the information presented in the article. This same audience is well-suited to
contact those in power (such as politicians) or become involved in ways that can help reduce climate
change.
8. What could have been added to this article to enhance its educational value?
The article should have included ways the state could transition to a renewable energy based economy.
It is clear that at least some people want to do so, but that the state is heavily dependent on the plant,
and without it the state’s economy is quite negatively impacted.
9. What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the article? If the article itself
does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The article suggests that the state invest more in renewable energy and should come up with ways to
conserve water. If Arizona continues along the same path, it will exhaust the water it has, and pollute
the environment so badly humans will not be able to live there. It must shift towards renewables and
devise a solution to conserve the water it uses from the Colorado River. All of the options in this article
need to be examined seriously.
10. What three points, details or references from the film did you follow up on to learn more? Write
short descriptions of what you learned in your search, providing citations.
I looked into the EPA deal, health hazards due to the Navajo plant, ways that Arizona can lessen its
dependence on the power station and shift to renewable alternatives like solar and wind energy.
The EPA deal ensures that one generator will shut down and install new controls to ensure that there is
less pollution (which is creating a regional haze). The EPA is enforcing a rule regarding regional haze
which is impacting the visibility in eleven national parks. The EPA regulations will cut emissions by 80
percent and visibility impairments by 73 percent by 2044.
Those who live on the Navajo Reservation know the health effects of power. The soot that blankets the
air prevents fruits and vegetables from growing, and fewer animals live near the reservation as well. The
Navajo Nation consists of parts of Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico. The coal mines and coal power plants
on Navajo land are responsible for about 1,500 jobs and represent a third of the tribe’s annual budget.
Respiratory problems like asthma, lung cancer etc. afflict the tribe in higher rates than in places with less
pollution.
Within the Navajo tribe a grassroots movement is pushing for solar and wind alternatives to the coal
plants which cause so much damage. Diné Citizens Against Ruining Our Environment, is a Navajo group
founded 22 years ago and since 2010 has been leading an effort to move the Navajo Nation away from
coal. Recent changes are bringing solar and wind power to almost 20,000 homes that lack electricity.
4
The move to renewable energy will create jobs, lessen pollution, and help improve the health of local
citizens.
Ultimately, the problem is a tough one in which one basic necessity, water, is being procured by
compromising another basic necessity, air. It is time for the politicians and the residents to come to
consensus that is a Win-Win for all concerned, especially the generation that is yet to arrive.
Citations:
"Arizona and Coal." SourceWatch. Accessed October 31, 2015.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Arizona_and_coal.
Lustgarten, Abraham. "End of the Miracle Machines." ProPublica. June 16, 2015. Accessed October 31,
2015.
Randazzo, Ryan. "EPA Approves Plan to Curtail Operations at Navajo Generating Station." Azcentral. July
28, 2014. Accessed October 31, 2015.
http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2014/07/28/epa-approves-plan-curtail-operationsnavajo-generating-station/13277331/.
Vlahakis, John. "Navajo Nation Moving Away From Coal." Earthy Report. October 27, 2010. Accessed
October 31, 2015. http://www.earthyreport.com/site/navajo-nation-moving-away-from-coal/.