According to environmentalists in United States, burning coal in power plants contributes to develop a harmful chemical called coal ash in the ecosystem.
Those people concerned about it, and they want a new stricter regulation for that activity by the government. However, owners from companies of coal disagree about a new rule, as long as, it would be unnecessary and from their perspective; it might have a negative impact. The listening passage support the idea about new regulation. They strongly believe that the current regulation is insufficient at some point. For example, they require companies to use liner to protect the environment that doesn’t work at all, because they only use liner in case of a new landfill or a new pond. Companies are not require to use in old ponds or landfills. The harmful chemicals from coal ask can be able to leak into ground water and contaminate drinking water.
Analysts concern about recycling coal ash and they believe new rules might discourage this procedure. Those analysts pointed out, the fact that recycling coal ash represents a large portion of materials such as concrete and bricks, which reduces disposal in other ways, and it doesn’t represent environmental danger, also infer to increase cost of products made by coal ash. Companies can have no option and increase price of electricity. In the other hand, the listening passage refuse to agree with it. They believe the new regulation no longer will discourage people to use recycle coal ash products. Other danger material for example, mercury can be handle and stored despite the current regulation for a long period, it has been unsafe recycled for over 50 years, and consumers won’t be afraid to buy recycle coal ash products if strict regulations are working out. In addiction the listening explains, even though the price will naturally increase, it wouldn’t be so bad if you look at the math behind it, which is going to represent only 1% average of cost.
According to environmentalists
in United States
, burning coal in power plants contributes to develop a harmful chemical called coal ash in the ecosystem.
Those
people
concerned about it, and they want a
new
stricter
regulation
for that activity by the
government
.
However
, owners from
companies
of coal disagree about a
new
rule
, as long as, it would be unnecessary and from their perspective; it might have a
negative
impact. The listening passage support the
idea
about
new
regulation
. They
strongly
believe that the
current
regulation
is insufficient at
some
point.
For example
, they require
companies
to
use
liner to protect the environment that doesn’t work at all,
because
they
only
use
liner in case of a
new
landfill or a
new
pond.
Companies
are not
require
to
use
in
old
ponds or landfills. The harmful chemicals from coal ask can be able to leak into ground water and contaminate drinking water.
Analysts concern about recycling coal
ash and
they believe
new
rules
might discourage this procedure. Those analysts pointed out, the fact that recycling coal ash represents a large portion of materials such as concrete and bricks, which
reduces
disposal in other ways, and it doesn’t represent environmental
danger
,
also
infer to increase cost of products made by coal ash.
Companies
can have no option and increase price of electricity. In the other hand, the listening passage refuse to
agree
with it. They believe the
new
regulation
no longer will discourage
people
to
use
recycle coal ash products. Other
danger
material
for example
, mercury can be
handle
and stored despite the
current
regulation
for a long period, it has been unsafe recycled for over 50 years, and consumers won’t be afraid to
buy
recycle coal ash products if strict
regulations
are working out. In addiction the listening
explains
,
even though
the price will
naturally
increase, it wouldn’t be
so
bad
if you look at the math behind it, which is going to represent
only
1% average of cost.