Plan for Big Mercury Cuts Advances
by Sandy Bauers
The Philadelphia Inquirer
November 17, 2006
Mercury from coal-fired power plants - currently responsible for the bulk of all mercury emitted in Pennsylvania - is expected to fall by 90 percent over the next nine years under a plan approved yesterday by a state regulatory board.
The plan, vigorously debated for two years and heavily opposed by power plants and mining companies, trumps a weaker federal rule. Pennsylvania would join Illinois as the first major coal-producing states to move beyond the federal limits and make them tougher - if measures to do so in both states become final.
"This is a landmark victory for environmental protection and public health in Pennsylvania," Gov. Rendell said in a statement. "We cannot accept that our state is laden with more toxic mercury pollution than nearly anywhere else in the nation and do nothing about it."
While the Republican-controlled state legislature has 14 days to stop the rule approved by the Independent Regulatory Review Commission, observers say that's unlikely.
John Hanger, president of the environmental group Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, which initiated the drive for the rule, praised yesterday's decision but also called for "vigilance."
"The Republican Party - particularly from the southeast - has a lot to gain or lose on this matter," he said. "I don't think the Republican Party wants to be identified as the party of mercury pollution."
Hanger said the rule proved "the birth of a new Pennsylvania that understands a clean environment is essential for not only public health but also a vibrant economy."
However, Douglas L. Biden, president of the Electric Power Generation Association, reiterated that the rule was "not in the best interests of Pennsylvania."
Power-plant owners have warned that complying with a tougher rule would drive up electric bills, force some coal-fired power plants out of business, and send power plant jobs out of the state.
The state has 36 plants and is second only to Texas in mercury emissions. Pennsylvania emits 5 tons of mercury each year, 80 percent of it from power plants.
"If they start shutting power plants down, there's going to be a political price to pay," Biden said.
He said the issue "was never about whether to reduce mercury emissions but how to do it."
A key part of the rule prohibits plants that emit more mercury than permitted from purchasing "credits" from cleaner plants, as the federal rules allow.
Biden said the combination of annual federal caps and the state's refusal to allow credits will actually require emission reductions of up to 98 percent.
"There's no technology that enables us to get to those levels," he said.
Mercury, which becomes airborne in the coal-burning process, is a neurotoxin that can remain in the environment for centuries. Once it falls into waterways, it becomes the more toxic methylmercury, which accumulates in fish and other wildlife.
It poses the greatest danger to the developing fetus and young children, causing brain and nervous-system damage. Adults are at risk for heart and immune-system damage.
Many streams and rivers in Pennsylvania have advisories warning anglers against eating their catch because of mercury pollution.
The rule passed yesterday by the Independent Regulatory Review Commission calls for an 80 percent reduction in mercury emissions by 2010 and a 90 percent reduction by 2015.
The move for the more stringent state legislation began in 2004, when Hanger's group filed a petition with the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board on behalf of 10 public-health, sporting, women's rights, and environmental and conservation organizations.
Eventually, nearly 70 organizations, including the Pennsylvania State Nurses Association, the Pennsylvania Parent Teachers Association, the Learning Disabilities Association, and the Pennsylvania Council of Churches, supported the effort.
The Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs added its voice. "It seems like hunters and anglers are usually the first ones to see the results of any type of environmental changes," said the group's executive director, Melody Zullinger.
During a public-comment period, the Environmental Quality Board received 10,934 responses, a record for rulemaking in Pennsylvania. Fewer than three dozen opposed the rule.
Joseph Minott, executive director of the Clean Air Council, said Pennsylvania had been struggling with "what the role of coal should be. We're very protective in Pennsylvania of our coal, of our coal jobs. Somehow, there was a feeling that this was going to hurt Pennsylvania coal."
He thinks it does exactly the opposite. "It shows Pennsylvania is willing to make the hard decisions to protect public health, and that may give new opportunities for coal."
The Philadelphia Inquirer
November 17, 2006
Mercury from coal-fired power plants - currently responsible for the bulk of all mercury emitted in Pennsylvania - is expected to fall by 90 percent over the next nine years under a plan approved yesterday by a state regulatory board.
The plan, vigorously debated for two years and heavily opposed by power plants and mining companies, trumps a weaker federal rule. Pennsylvania would join Illinois as the first major coal-producing states to move beyond the federal limits and make them tougher - if measures to do so in both states become final.
"This is a landmark victory for environmental protection and public health in Pennsylvania," Gov. Rendell said in a statement. "We cannot accept that our state is laden with more toxic mercury pollution than nearly anywhere else in the nation and do nothing about it."
While the Republican-controlled state legislature has 14 days to stop the rule approved by the Independent Regulatory Review Commission, observers say that's unlikely.
John Hanger, president of the environmental group Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, which initiated the drive for the rule, praised yesterday's decision but also called for "vigilance."
"The Republican Party - particularly from the southeast - has a lot to gain or lose on this matter," he said. "I don't think the Republican Party wants to be identified as the party of mercury pollution."
Hanger said the rule proved "the birth of a new Pennsylvania that understands a clean environment is essential for not only public health but also a vibrant economy."
However, Douglas L. Biden, president of the Electric Power Generation Association, reiterated that the rule was "not in the best interests of Pennsylvania."
Power-plant owners have warned that complying with a tougher rule would drive up electric bills, force some coal-fired power plants out of business, and send power plant jobs out of the state.
The state has 36 plants and is second only to Texas in mercury emissions. Pennsylvania emits 5 tons of mercury each year, 80 percent of it from power plants.
"If they start shutting power plants down, there's going to be a political price to pay," Biden said.
He said the issue "was never about whether to reduce mercury emissions but how to do it."
A key part of the rule prohibits plants that emit more mercury than permitted from purchasing "credits" from cleaner plants, as the federal rules allow.
Biden said the combination of annual federal caps and the state's refusal to allow credits will actually require emission reductions of up to 98 percent.
"There's no technology that enables us to get to those levels," he said.
Mercury, which becomes airborne in the coal-burning process, is a neurotoxin that can remain in the environment for centuries. Once it falls into waterways, it becomes the more toxic methylmercury, which accumulates in fish and other wildlife.
It poses the greatest danger to the developing fetus and young children, causing brain and nervous-system damage. Adults are at risk for heart and immune-system damage.
Many streams and rivers in Pennsylvania have advisories warning anglers against eating their catch because of mercury pollution.
The rule passed yesterday by the Independent Regulatory Review Commission calls for an 80 percent reduction in mercury emissions by 2010 and a 90 percent reduction by 2015.
The move for the more stringent state legislation began in 2004, when Hanger's group filed a petition with the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board on behalf of 10 public-health, sporting, women's rights, and environmental and conservation organizations.
Eventually, nearly 70 organizations, including the Pennsylvania State Nurses Association, the Pennsylvania Parent Teachers Association, the Learning Disabilities Association, and the Pennsylvania Council of Churches, supported the effort.
The Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs added its voice. "It seems like hunters and anglers are usually the first ones to see the results of any type of environmental changes," said the group's executive director, Melody Zullinger.
During a public-comment period, the Environmental Quality Board received 10,934 responses, a record for rulemaking in Pennsylvania. Fewer than three dozen opposed the rule.
Joseph Minott, executive director of the Clean Air Council, said Pennsylvania had been struggling with "what the role of coal should be. We're very protective in Pennsylvania of our coal, of our coal jobs. Somehow, there was a feeling that this was going to hurt Pennsylvania coal."
He thinks it does exactly the opposite. "It shows Pennsylvania is willing to make the hard decisions to protect public health, and that may give new opportunities for coal."
© Copyright 2006 Philly Online, LLC
posted by Swallowtail at 11:03
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home