After the full release of the EIP report there was some interesting data released and some very poingnant comments made. A MarketWatch article details some of the highlights and comments. I suggest reading the entire article but some excerpts follow;
The report from the Environmental Integrity Project rates the power plants both in terms of sheer mercury pollution and mercury pollution adjusted per kilowatt hour. The 12 states with the most plants in the top 50 in terms of mercury pollution are Texas (7, including half of the 10 worst), Pennsylvania (5), Alabama, (4, including the worst plant and also 2 of the 10 worst), Georgia (4, including 1 of the 10 worst), Ohio (3), Indiana (3), North Dakota (3), Missouri (2, with 1 of the 5 worst), Kansas (2), North Carolina (2), Wisconsin (2), and Arkansas (2). Minnesota was unique in terms of having one of the 10 worst plants, but no second plant among the 50 worst.
[...]
Highlights of the EIP report include the following:
-- Of the top 10 power plant mercury emitters, all but one reported an
increase as compared to 2006.
-- Southern Company's Miller plant, in Jefferson County, Alabama, is
ranked number one in the nation for 2007, reporting nearly a ton of
mercury air pollution in 2007. This represents a nearly 14 percent
increase over the plant's 2006 reported emissions.
-- Texas power plants claim five out of 10 spots among the nation's
highest mercury emitters. Dallas-based Luminant (formerly TXU) has
four plants - Martin Lake, Monticello, Big Brown, and Sandow - ranked
among the nation's top mercury emitters. Together, these four plants
emitted just over two and a half tons of mercury in 2007 - a
staggering 5 percent of the national total.
-- Eight Southern Company plants in Georgia and Alabama are ranked
among the top 50 power plant mercury emitters.
Environmental Integrity Project Senior Attorney Ilan Levin, of the EIP Austin, TX office, said: "When the original Clean Air Act was passed in 1970, the electric utility industry persuaded Congress to not impose strict pollution controls on old power plants, because they would soon be replaced by newer state-of-the-art facilities. Yet despite the industry's promises, many of the nation's oldest and dirtiest power plants continue to operate. Pollution controls that dramatically reduce emissions are widely available, and already being used at many plants. But, until the public and policymakers hold the electric utility industry to its promised cleanup of the nation's oldest and dirtiest power plants, Americans will continue to bear unnecessary health and environmental costs."
Jan Jarrett, president and CEO of Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future (PennFuture), said: "Cleaning up our power plant mercury emissions is vital so that women and their children will not be exposed to unacceptable and dangerous levels of toxic mercury and to reduce mercury levels in our fish and waterways. These continued high mercury emissions from Pennsylvania plants clearly demonstrate the need for Pennsylvania's state-specific mercury rule that was adopted in February of 2007. Our rule requires an 80 percent reduction in mercury emissions from power plants by 2010 and a 90 percent reduction by 2015 and does not allow power plants to trade toxic mercury emissions. We hope that we'll see these emissions drop significantly over the next several years."
Cathy DeSoto, PhD, associate professor of psychology, University of Northern Iowa: "It is important to understand where the current scientific debate actually lies. There are no experts who deny that mercury emissions are causing some damage to developing brains and causing drops in IQ - and there is no debate that there is a monetary cost associated with this loss. There is debate within the scientific community about the actual dollar amount associated with the IQ detriments. Furthermore, recent research has specifically documented the type of damage that low levels of mercury exposure cause to developing neurons. This damage occurs even at levels of mercury exposure that would be unlikely to cause harm in an adult; but at levels that a significant portion of the child-bearing population have circulating in their bodies."
National Parks Conservation Association Program Analyst Bart Melton said: "National parks across the U.S. suffer from high concentrations of mercury pollution - a key source of which are coal-fired power plants. At the Great Smoky Mountains, mercury pollution is continually showered over the park, and then works its way up the food chain, threatening the health of park visitors and wildlife. We need to shut off the toxic mercury spigot at coal-fired power plants to keep national park visitors and wildlife healthy."
For links to the full report, the press release and the streaming audio go here.
Friday, November 21, 2008
States Grapple With Realization They Are Among The Dirtiest When It Comes To Mercury
As we reported yesterday the new EIP report had bad news for the nation and bad news for some individual states.
Arkansas - from the Arkansas Democrat Gazette
Based on emissions at two of its three coal-fired power plants, Arkansas is among the nation’s “dirty dozen” states when it comes to mercury pollution, says a group founded by a former Environmental Protection Agency official.
[...]
According to a project report issued Thursday, Independence ranked 30 th nationwide in total pounds of mercury emissions in 2007, belching 596 pounds of the toxic metal into the air. That’s a 16. 3 percent increase over its emissions in 2006. The White Bluff facility ranked 43 rd nationally with 518 pounds of emissions — down 6. 6 percent since 2006, the report states.
SWEPCO’s Flint Creek plant near Gentry was not listed among the top 50.
Independence and White Bluff are both Entergy plants and James Thompson defended Entergy's environmental efforts. Some excerpts from the Arkansas News Bureau follow;
Entergy Arkansas spokesman James Thompson acknowledged the listing but said both plants were operating within federal and state emission limits, at levels that do not pose significant health hazards.
Thompson said Entergy was the first utility in the nation to voluntarily stabilize greenhouse gas emissions in 2000 and has committed to do so through 2010. Also, he said Entergy is among the top 10 cleanest electricity generators with its balance of sources, including 80 percent from its nuclear power plant near Russellville.
"We've done everything that's been asked of us plus more from a voluntary standpoint in cutting the emissions," Thompson said.
"We can't simply eliminate the use of fossil fuels to produce electricity - coal here in Arkansas accounts for about 20 percent of our generation," he said. "But we maintain a balance between reliability, cost and environmental concerns. We're doing what we can do and what we are being told to do by both federal and state regulators."
Alabama - from The Birmingham News
Alabama Power's coal-fired plant in west Jefferson County released more mercury into the air in 2007 than any other power plant in the country, according to a report released Thursday by the Washington-based Environmental Integrity Project.
And the company's Shelby County plant ranked No. 8 nationally in mercury emissions for 2007, according to EIP's study of emissions information in the Environmental Protection Agency's Toxic Release Inventory report.
Alabama Power spokesman Michael Sznajderman said scrubbers being installed at all of the company's coal-fired plants will significantly reduce those emissions in the coming years.
Arkansas - from the Arkansas Democrat Gazette
Based on emissions at two of its three coal-fired power plants, Arkansas is among the nation’s “dirty dozen” states when it comes to mercury pollution, says a group founded by a former Environmental Protection Agency official.
[...]
According to a project report issued Thursday, Independence ranked 30 th nationwide in total pounds of mercury emissions in 2007, belching 596 pounds of the toxic metal into the air. That’s a 16. 3 percent increase over its emissions in 2006. The White Bluff facility ranked 43 rd nationally with 518 pounds of emissions — down 6. 6 percent since 2006, the report states.
SWEPCO’s Flint Creek plant near Gentry was not listed among the top 50.
Independence and White Bluff are both Entergy plants and James Thompson defended Entergy's environmental efforts. Some excerpts from the Arkansas News Bureau follow;
Entergy Arkansas spokesman James Thompson acknowledged the listing but said both plants were operating within federal and state emission limits, at levels that do not pose significant health hazards.
Thompson said Entergy was the first utility in the nation to voluntarily stabilize greenhouse gas emissions in 2000 and has committed to do so through 2010. Also, he said Entergy is among the top 10 cleanest electricity generators with its balance of sources, including 80 percent from its nuclear power plant near Russellville.
"We've done everything that's been asked of us plus more from a voluntary standpoint in cutting the emissions," Thompson said.
"We can't simply eliminate the use of fossil fuels to produce electricity - coal here in Arkansas accounts for about 20 percent of our generation," he said. "But we maintain a balance between reliability, cost and environmental concerns. We're doing what we can do and what we are being told to do by both federal and state regulators."
Alabama - from The Birmingham News
Alabama Power's coal-fired plant in west Jefferson County released more mercury into the air in 2007 than any other power plant in the country, according to a report released Thursday by the Washington-based Environmental Integrity Project.
And the company's Shelby County plant ranked No. 8 nationally in mercury emissions for 2007, according to EIP's study of emissions information in the Environmental Protection Agency's Toxic Release Inventory report.
Alabama Power spokesman Michael Sznajderman said scrubbers being installed at all of the company's coal-fired plants will significantly reduce those emissions in the coming years.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
New EIP Report Shows Very Little Progress In Mercury Emissions, In Fact We Are Going The Wrong Way
The new Environmental Integrity Project report shows most of the 50 dirtiest coal fired EGUs have actually increased emissions since 2006. The full report will be broadcast live on a two way teleconference at 1:00PM ET.Some highlights of the report include the "Dirty Dozen", the 12 states generating the most mercury emissions. They are Texas, Pennsylvania, Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Ohio, Arkansas, Kansas, North Carolina and Wisconsin.
An excerpt from a MarketWatch article follows with more details of how to join the conference call or listen to a streaming audio replay.
Deadly mercury pollution levels have actually risen since 2006 at the majority of the 50 worst coal-fired power plants in the United States, according to a major new report from the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project (EIP).
The report rates the power plants both in terms of sheer mercury pollution and mercury pollution adjusted per kilowatt. [...] The worst plant was found in Alabama. Texas accounts for five of the 10 dirtiest plants in terms of mercury emissions.
[...]
The EIP report discusses ways in which mercury removal is achievable. It also points out how the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has backed off from strict power plant mercury regulation in the past several years.
News event speakers will be: Environmental Integrity Project Counsel Ilan Levin, of the Austin, TX office; Jan Jarrett, president and CEO of Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future (PennFuture); and a representative of the Southern Environmental Law Center, which operates in Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia.
TO PARTICIPATE: You can join this live, phone-based news conference (with full, two-way Q&A) at 1 p.m. ET on November 20, 2008 by dialing 1 (800) 860-2442. Ask for the "EIP mercury report" news event.
CAN'T PARTICIPATE?: A streaming audio replay of the news event will be available on the Web at http://www.environmentalintegrity.org as of 6 p.m. ET on November 20, 2008.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Bush Requests SCOTUS Review of CAMR
Why am I surprised by this? I should have seen it coming. But all my common sense told me not even 'W' would try for a Hail Mary of this magnitude. Last Friday the Bush administration requested the Supreme Court of the United States to consider hearing arguments to overturn the unanimous US Circuit Court of Appeals vacatur of the Clean Air Mercury Rule.
No one really expects this strategy to do anything but delay future more meaningful attempts at regulating mercury emissions from coal fired power plants. The Clean Air Act is pretty specific in its intentions, and waving mercury as a hazardous pollutant is not one of them. Several attempts to fight this request will be mounted to force EPA and Congress to simply get on with legal regulation of a hazardous toxin.
A brief article and audio broadcast from Pat Bradley at WMAC - Northeast Public Radio has more.
No one really expects this strategy to do anything but delay future more meaningful attempts at regulating mercury emissions from coal fired power plants. The Clean Air Act is pretty specific in its intentions, and waving mercury as a hazardous pollutant is not one of them. Several attempts to fight this request will be mounted to force EPA and Congress to simply get on with legal regulation of a hazardous toxin.
A brief article and audio broadcast from Pat Bradley at WMAC - Northeast Public Radio has more.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Wisconsin Finalizes 90% Reduction Rule; Univ. of Michigan Researchers Discover Mercury Fingerprinting Technique
Wisconsin
The State of Wisconsin, known as a haven for fishermen, has taken steps to see that that reputation remains intact. They become one of only a handful of States to pass tough mercury legislation requiring a 90% reduction in mercury emissions by 2015. A state regulation proposed by the Natural Resources Board will go into effect January 1, 2009.
Some excerpts from a Capital Times article follow;
The rule will require a reduction in the amount of mercury sent into the environment by coal-powered power plants by 90 percent by 2015. Coal plants are a major producer of the toxic substance.
Under the rule, those plants also have an option of moving the full mercury reduction target back to 2021 if sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide are reduced before then.
"DNR Secretary (Matt) Frank can sign the rule Tuesday morning, and it will be delivered immediately to the Legislative Reference Bureau for publication. It would likely be effective December 1, and January 1 at the latest, depending on when it is published," said Paul Heinen of the Department of Natural Resources.
[...]
Rep. Spencer Black, D-Madison, declared victory after a long fight to cut down on mercury emissions. He first filed a legal petition for rules to limit mercury emissions in May 2000, along with 12 environmental and fishing groups.
"Today is a great day for those of us who love the outdoors, especially all the residents and visitors to Wisconsin who love to fish or to eat fish," Black said. "Almost every lake in Wisconsin is under warning for mercury pollution. This rule will ... help to clean up our valuable water resources."
[...]
"Governor Doyle promised to work for a 90 percent reduction in mercury emissions, and he has kept that commitment," Black said. "
[...]
Business organizations including Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, Wisconsin Utility Investors and the Wisconsin Paper Council tried unsuccessfully to obtain a court order blocking the rule before the board acted, saying the DNR did not adequately define the scope of the rule. A Dane County Circuit Court judge dismissed the lawsuit.
U of M Mercury Fingerprinting
Excerpts from an article from PhysOrg.com summarizes as follows;
Oct 8, 2008 - (PhysOrg.com) -- University of Michigan researchers have developed a new tool that uses natural "fingerprints" in coal to track down sources of mercury polluting the environment. The research is published in today's online issue of the journal Environmental Science & Technology.
[...]
"There has been a lot of controversy about how much mercury is coming from different types of industrial activities, compared to natural sources, but it has been difficult to figure out the relative contributions," said co-author Joel Blum, the John D. MacArthur Professor of Geological Sciences and a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology. "And even if you can determine how much of it is coming from natural versus human sources, there's still the question of how much is from global sources, such as coal-fired power plants overseas, and how much is being produced and deposited locally."
[...]
"For some time, we weren't sure that it was going to be technically possible, but now we've cracked that nut and have shown significant differences not only between mercury from coal and, say, metallic forms of mercury that are used in industry, but also between different coal deposits," Blum said.
The fingerprinting technique relies on a natural phenomenon called isotopic fractionation, in which different isotopes (atoms with different numbers of neutrons) of mercury react to form new compounds at slightly different rates. In one type of isotopic fractionation, mass-dependent fractionation (MDF), the differing rates depend on the masses of the isotopes. In mass-independent fractionation (MIF), the behavior of the isotopes depends not on their absolute masses but on whether their masses are odd or even. Combining mass-dependent and mass-independent isotope signals, the researchers created a powerful fingerprinting tool.
Previously, Blum and coworkers investigated the possibility of using the method to identify sources of mercury contamination in fish. The coal project was more challenging because of the difficulty of extracting and concentrating mercury from coal. The researchers developed a system that slowly burns the coal under controlled conditions in a series of furnaces and then traps the mercury that is released.
More work is needed to perfect the fingerprinting technique, but Blum envisions using it in a number of ways to track mercury and assess its environmental effects.
[...]
"Scientists have models and other ways of estimating how much mercury will be deposited locally, but we may, for the first time, be able to directly differentiate between mercury coming from local plants and mercury that has been transported longer distances."
In a project already underway, Blum's research group hopes to pinpoint which of the many mercury sources in the San Francisco Bay area are contributing most to the contamination of fish and wildlife.
"We don't know whether particular sources of mercury are more biologically available than others and thus more likely to accumulate in animals," Blum said. "If we can figure that out, then we can help local agencies decide where efforts will be most productive in terms of preventing wildlife from being exposed to mercury."
[...]
Blum's coauthors on the Environmental Science & Technology paper are two former postdoctoral fellows, Abir Biswas and Bridget Bergquist; Gerald Keeler, director of the U-M Air Quality Laboratory; and Zhouqing Xie of the University of Science and Technology of China. The researchers received funding from the National Science Foundation, the University of Michigan and Sigma Xi.
Maybe someday we will be able to tell exactly which plant is responsible for which local mercury pollution. Many plants burn coal from the same geologic deposit like the Powder River Basin (PRB) in Wyoming. But by refining and improving this technique, adding source spiking for instance, who knows how specific the detection methods will become.
The State of Wisconsin, known as a haven for fishermen, has taken steps to see that that reputation remains intact. They become one of only a handful of States to pass tough mercury legislation requiring a 90% reduction in mercury emissions by 2015. A state regulation proposed by the Natural Resources Board will go into effect January 1, 2009.
Some excerpts from a Capital Times article follow;
The rule will require a reduction in the amount of mercury sent into the environment by coal-powered power plants by 90 percent by 2015. Coal plants are a major producer of the toxic substance.
Under the rule, those plants also have an option of moving the full mercury reduction target back to 2021 if sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide are reduced before then.
"DNR Secretary (Matt) Frank can sign the rule Tuesday morning, and it will be delivered immediately to the Legislative Reference Bureau for publication. It would likely be effective December 1, and January 1 at the latest, depending on when it is published," said Paul Heinen of the Department of Natural Resources.
[...]
Rep. Spencer Black, D-Madison, declared victory after a long fight to cut down on mercury emissions. He first filed a legal petition for rules to limit mercury emissions in May 2000, along with 12 environmental and fishing groups.
"Today is a great day for those of us who love the outdoors, especially all the residents and visitors to Wisconsin who love to fish or to eat fish," Black said. "Almost every lake in Wisconsin is under warning for mercury pollution. This rule will ... help to clean up our valuable water resources."
[...]
"Governor Doyle promised to work for a 90 percent reduction in mercury emissions, and he has kept that commitment," Black said. "
[...]
Business organizations including Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, Wisconsin Utility Investors and the Wisconsin Paper Council tried unsuccessfully to obtain a court order blocking the rule before the board acted, saying the DNR did not adequately define the scope of the rule. A Dane County Circuit Court judge dismissed the lawsuit.
U of M Mercury Fingerprinting
Excerpts from an article from PhysOrg.com summarizes as follows;
Oct 8, 2008 - (PhysOrg.com) -- University of Michigan researchers have developed a new tool that uses natural "fingerprints" in coal to track down sources of mercury polluting the environment. The research is published in today's online issue of the journal Environmental Science & Technology.
[...]
"There has been a lot of controversy about how much mercury is coming from different types of industrial activities, compared to natural sources, but it has been difficult to figure out the relative contributions," said co-author Joel Blum, the John D. MacArthur Professor of Geological Sciences and a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology. "And even if you can determine how much of it is coming from natural versus human sources, there's still the question of how much is from global sources, such as coal-fired power plants overseas, and how much is being produced and deposited locally."
[...]
"For some time, we weren't sure that it was going to be technically possible, but now we've cracked that nut and have shown significant differences not only between mercury from coal and, say, metallic forms of mercury that are used in industry, but also between different coal deposits," Blum said.
The fingerprinting technique relies on a natural phenomenon called isotopic fractionation, in which different isotopes (atoms with different numbers of neutrons) of mercury react to form new compounds at slightly different rates. In one type of isotopic fractionation, mass-dependent fractionation (MDF), the differing rates depend on the masses of the isotopes. In mass-independent fractionation (MIF), the behavior of the isotopes depends not on their absolute masses but on whether their masses are odd or even. Combining mass-dependent and mass-independent isotope signals, the researchers created a powerful fingerprinting tool.
Previously, Blum and coworkers investigated the possibility of using the method to identify sources of mercury contamination in fish. The coal project was more challenging because of the difficulty of extracting and concentrating mercury from coal. The researchers developed a system that slowly burns the coal under controlled conditions in a series of furnaces and then traps the mercury that is released.
More work is needed to perfect the fingerprinting technique, but Blum envisions using it in a number of ways to track mercury and assess its environmental effects.
[...]
"Scientists have models and other ways of estimating how much mercury will be deposited locally, but we may, for the first time, be able to directly differentiate between mercury coming from local plants and mercury that has been transported longer distances."
In a project already underway, Blum's research group hopes to pinpoint which of the many mercury sources in the San Francisco Bay area are contributing most to the contamination of fish and wildlife.
"We don't know whether particular sources of mercury are more biologically available than others and thus more likely to accumulate in animals," Blum said. "If we can figure that out, then we can help local agencies decide where efforts will be most productive in terms of preventing wildlife from being exposed to mercury."
[...]
Blum's coauthors on the Environmental Science & Technology paper are two former postdoctoral fellows, Abir Biswas and Bridget Bergquist; Gerald Keeler, director of the U-M Air Quality Laboratory; and Zhouqing Xie of the University of Science and Technology of China. The researchers received funding from the National Science Foundation, the University of Michigan and Sigma Xi.
Maybe someday we will be able to tell exactly which plant is responsible for which local mercury pollution. Many plants burn coal from the same geologic deposit like the Powder River Basin (PRB) in Wyoming. But by refining and improving this technique, adding source spiking for instance, who knows how specific the detection methods will become.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
US and EU Both Move Forward with Laws Banning Future Exports of Mercury
Last week both the US Congress and the EU Ministers adopted regulations banning the export of mercury. The US version, if signed by President Bush, as expected, would go into effect in 2013, while the EU ban kicks in earlier in 2011. Both measures have been in the works for some time now. The US Senate version was introduced by Senators Obama (D-IL) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and a House companion version was proposed by Rep. Tom Allen (D-ME), both in 2007. An excerpt from an article on All American Patriots website follows;
"I applaud Congress' overwhelming bipartisan passage of this important bill, which will protect millions of the world's vulnerable citizens, particularly pregnant women and children, from the deadly threat of mercury poisoning," said Senator Obama. "We know that mercury can cause serious developmental problems in children and problems affecting vision, motor skills, blood pressure, and fertility in adults. While the United States has improved its efforts to collect and contain mercury, this country remains one of the leading exporters of this dangerous product. Protecting Americans from the dangers of mercury has been one of my top priorities, and I am proud this bill will now remove a significant portion of mercury from the global market. This bill also represents an important agreement between industry and environmental groups towards that goal. I urge the President to immediately sign this bill into law."
[...]
The Mercury Export Ban Act will:
-Prohibit the commercial export of elemental mercury from the United States in 2013.
-Prohibit the commercial sale or transfer of federal mercury stockpiles held by the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense for any purpose except for transfer into permanent storage.
-Provide for permanent storage of collected mercury by the Department of Energy.
This legislation is supported by the Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Council of the States, American Chemistry Council, the National Mining Association, and the Chlorine Institute.
An important issue also covered in the Bill was noted in an article in the Chicago Tribune;
Under pressure from Obama and a handful of other senators, the Energy Department last year agreed to keep its own 1,300-ton stockpile of mercury off the market. The metal once was used to process material for hydrogen bombs.
Meanwhile, EU ministers have been following a mercury strategy since 2005, this measure is the latest embodiment of that strategy. An article on Health & Environment Alliance's website has more.
The Blog, The Great Beyond also picked up on this story and had more insights, an excerpt of which follows;
Europe is the largest exporter of the substance, and concerns about moving mercury prompted the EU to introduce its ban, to both reduce mercury pollution and set an example to the rest of the world. It seems to have worked. The US, also a major exporter, has followed suit and will now have its internal stockpiles safely stored. The EU also plans to lower contamination levels by supply and demand, and protecting the population against exposure.
While all this seems good, and it is, one thing that is unclear is whether shipments within the EU and US will be stopped. Trying to keep the toxin out of the hands of small gold mining operations in third world countries seems to be the focus, but eliminating, (or at least severely limiting and regulating) its use worldwide would be better.
"I applaud Congress' overwhelming bipartisan passage of this important bill, which will protect millions of the world's vulnerable citizens, particularly pregnant women and children, from the deadly threat of mercury poisoning," said Senator Obama. "We know that mercury can cause serious developmental problems in children and problems affecting vision, motor skills, blood pressure, and fertility in adults. While the United States has improved its efforts to collect and contain mercury, this country remains one of the leading exporters of this dangerous product. Protecting Americans from the dangers of mercury has been one of my top priorities, and I am proud this bill will now remove a significant portion of mercury from the global market. This bill also represents an important agreement between industry and environmental groups towards that goal. I urge the President to immediately sign this bill into law."
[...]
The Mercury Export Ban Act will:
-Prohibit the commercial export of elemental mercury from the United States in 2013.
-Prohibit the commercial sale or transfer of federal mercury stockpiles held by the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense for any purpose except for transfer into permanent storage.
-Provide for permanent storage of collected mercury by the Department of Energy.
This legislation is supported by the Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Council of the States, American Chemistry Council, the National Mining Association, and the Chlorine Institute.
An important issue also covered in the Bill was noted in an article in the Chicago Tribune;
Under pressure from Obama and a handful of other senators, the Energy Department last year agreed to keep its own 1,300-ton stockpile of mercury off the market. The metal once was used to process material for hydrogen bombs.
Meanwhile, EU ministers have been following a mercury strategy since 2005, this measure is the latest embodiment of that strategy. An article on Health & Environment Alliance's website has more.
The Blog, The Great Beyond also picked up on this story and had more insights, an excerpt of which follows;
Europe is the largest exporter of the substance, and concerns about moving mercury prompted the EU to introduce its ban, to both reduce mercury pollution and set an example to the rest of the world. It seems to have worked. The US, also a major exporter, has followed suit and will now have its internal stockpiles safely stored. The EU also plans to lower contamination levels by supply and demand, and protecting the population against exposure.
While all this seems good, and it is, one thing that is unclear is whether shipments within the EU and US will be stopped. Trying to keep the toxin out of the hands of small gold mining operations in third world countries seems to be the focus, but eliminating, (or at least severely limiting and regulating) its use worldwide would be better.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Wayward EPA Seeks More Time, Contemplates Supreme Court Appeal of CAMR
Talk about dragging out the inevitable, the EPA has requested a second extension of the deadline to appeal to SCOTUS the D.C. Circuit Courts unanimous decision to vacate the CAMR. The D.C. Circuit Court even denied EPA a chance to have it's ruling reviewed. The problems with CAMR were so clear that to pursue this further via appeal is certainly only a delay tactic. Some excerpts from an article in Energy & Environment News (subscription req'd) elaborate below;
For the second time in a month, the Bush administration is asking the Supreme Court for more time to decide whether to appeal a decision by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that struck down a controversial cap-and-trade program for mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants.
Acting Solicitor General Greg Garre asked the court to extend its deadline until Oct. 17, a full two months from the date by which a writ of certiorari would normally be required. Garre said the additional time "is needed to complete consultation" with U.S. EPA over a number of recent legal setbacks relating to the agency's Clean Air Mercury Rule.
Chief Justice John Roberts already approved the initial request, pushing the date from Aug. 17 to Sept. 18.
[...]
Last March, the same court that struck down the mercury rule agreed that EPA violated the Clean Air Act by exempting coal- and oil-fired power plants from a list of industries subject to regulation of hazardous air pollutants under Section 112 of the act.
EPA in 2000 included power plants on its list of regulated industries under Section 112 but then reversed itself in 2005, saying it was neither "appropriate or necessary" to include power plants on the source list because the power sector's emissions were subject to other statutes that achieved the same or greater public health benefits.
On the heels of that March 2005 decision, EPA announced its new mercury control program for power plants, drawing upon the largely successful 1990s cap-and-trade program for sulfur dioxide, which had helped reduce acid rain pollution in the Northeast.
[...]
With the D.C. Circuit's rejection of both CAMR and the Section 112 delisting, EPA now must figure out how to retool its mercury control program within the more narrow confines of the law and, as Garre wrote, "to assess the legal and practical impact of the [D.C. Circuit] court's ruling."
But critics of EPA's regulatory approaches say the request for more time amounts to little more than a stalling tactic. "They need more time because they need more time," John Walke, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said of the latest application.
This most recent action highlights the wayward nature of the Bush EPA. The politicization of the Agency has long been discussed in oversight hearings on Capital Hill and in the press. An insightful article by Jori Lewis on emagazine.com summarizes some of the more egregious attempts by this off course and out of control agency to hijack the public will in favor of industrial interests and polluters. The mercury rule portion of the article is shown below. The full article can and should be read here.
"What has been most remarkable,” says Vickie Patton, the deputy general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, “is the extent to which the judiciary has provided a very unmistakable check on the EPA’s policies, [policies] that have really strained the nation’s clean air laws in ways that Congress never intended.”
Take the mercury emissions case. Mercury is a persistent neurotoxin that can find its way from fish to humans, where it can cause myriad health problems. Regulations under the Clean Air Act mandated stringent controls—some would have reduced mercury emissions by 90%. In 2005, the EPA passed a regulation that would require coal-fired power plants to reduce emissions by only 70% and use a cap-and-trade system that would allow cleaner plants to trade unused emissions.
“These rules came right out of the White House,” says Dr. Francesca Grifo, director of the Scientific Integrity Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). She says that EPA scientists were told to come up with the data to justify such a change in policy. “Their own inspector general at the EPA found that EPA scientists were pressured to change their analyses and their findings to agree with a predetermined value for a national cap on mercury emissions.”
A federal court ruled in February that the new rules don’t go as far they should to protect the public from mercury.
Grifo says this is an egregious example, but one that is hardly unique in Bush’s EPA. There have been tales of suppressed research; of reports kept in draft form so they don’t have to be released to the public; and of political retaliation for those who stray off message. Read more.
Thank you emagazine and Jori for a reminder of what has been going on in our EPA.
For the second time in a month, the Bush administration is asking the Supreme Court for more time to decide whether to appeal a decision by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that struck down a controversial cap-and-trade program for mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants.
Acting Solicitor General Greg Garre asked the court to extend its deadline until Oct. 17, a full two months from the date by which a writ of certiorari would normally be required. Garre said the additional time "is needed to complete consultation" with U.S. EPA over a number of recent legal setbacks relating to the agency's Clean Air Mercury Rule.
Chief Justice John Roberts already approved the initial request, pushing the date from Aug. 17 to Sept. 18.
[...]
Last March, the same court that struck down the mercury rule agreed that EPA violated the Clean Air Act by exempting coal- and oil-fired power plants from a list of industries subject to regulation of hazardous air pollutants under Section 112 of the act.
EPA in 2000 included power plants on its list of regulated industries under Section 112 but then reversed itself in 2005, saying it was neither "appropriate or necessary" to include power plants on the source list because the power sector's emissions were subject to other statutes that achieved the same or greater public health benefits.
On the heels of that March 2005 decision, EPA announced its new mercury control program for power plants, drawing upon the largely successful 1990s cap-and-trade program for sulfur dioxide, which had helped reduce acid rain pollution in the Northeast.
[...]
With the D.C. Circuit's rejection of both CAMR and the Section 112 delisting, EPA now must figure out how to retool its mercury control program within the more narrow confines of the law and, as Garre wrote, "to assess the legal and practical impact of the [D.C. Circuit] court's ruling."
But critics of EPA's regulatory approaches say the request for more time amounts to little more than a stalling tactic. "They need more time because they need more time," John Walke, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said of the latest application.
This most recent action highlights the wayward nature of the Bush EPA. The politicization of the Agency has long been discussed in oversight hearings on Capital Hill and in the press. An insightful article by Jori Lewis on emagazine.com summarizes some of the more egregious attempts by this off course and out of control agency to hijack the public will in favor of industrial interests and polluters. The mercury rule portion of the article is shown below. The full article can and should be read here.
"What has been most remarkable,” says Vickie Patton, the deputy general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, “is the extent to which the judiciary has provided a very unmistakable check on the EPA’s policies, [policies] that have really strained the nation’s clean air laws in ways that Congress never intended.”
Take the mercury emissions case. Mercury is a persistent neurotoxin that can find its way from fish to humans, where it can cause myriad health problems. Regulations under the Clean Air Act mandated stringent controls—some would have reduced mercury emissions by 90%. In 2005, the EPA passed a regulation that would require coal-fired power plants to reduce emissions by only 70% and use a cap-and-trade system that would allow cleaner plants to trade unused emissions.
“These rules came right out of the White House,” says Dr. Francesca Grifo, director of the Scientific Integrity Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). She says that EPA scientists were told to come up with the data to justify such a change in policy. “Their own inspector general at the EPA found that EPA scientists were pressured to change their analyses and their findings to agree with a predetermined value for a national cap on mercury emissions.”
A federal court ruled in February that the new rules don’t go as far they should to protect the public from mercury.
Grifo says this is an egregious example, but one that is hardly unique in Bush’s EPA. There have been tales of suppressed research; of reports kept in draft form so they don’t have to be released to the public; and of political retaliation for those who stray off message. Read more.
Thank you emagazine and Jori for a reminder of what has been going on in our EPA.
Friday, August 15, 2008
Anishinabek and Other Indigenous People Still Dealing With Life In A Mercury Polluted Habitat
It was over a year ago I first brought to light the plight of the Anishinabek of the Gitchi Gami and their struggle with Canadian Government over mercury pollution on their lands. There has recently been published an update to this tragic situation without a lot of good news to add.
The culprit in this case appears to be Dryden Chemicals Limited and now their parent company Reed, Inc. A near decade of raw releases into the English-Wabigoon River have contaminated a large area covering many indigenous peoples' land. These people deserve to be treated better than we have done so far.
Stories like these should be used as warnings to us that uncontrolled mercury contamination can cause real harm. Yes, these releases were massive and directly into the water and today's EGUs and cement plants release mercury into the air over longer periods of time. But mercury and its long-lasting properties could make these sorts of catastrophic events more common and not so hard to imagine if we do not slow the build-up of this toxin in our waters.
An excerpt from the story is below.
In a message posted on the Friends of Anishinabek of the Gitchi Gami website, John H.W. Hummel, a pollution researcher based in British Colombia, explains that “when mercury or lead levels of 5 ppb to 6 ppb are found in the brain, 25 per cent of the glial progenitor stem cells simply ’shut down’! These particular brain cells are absolutely crucial for building the brain during infancy and beyond. This type of brain cell is also found in adults.”
Hummel believes that the thousands of Indigenous who have been ignored by the government should embark on a class-action lawsuit and has contacted Tony Merchant, from Merchant Law Group. Based in Saskatchewan, Mr. Merchant is the lawyer behind the recent compensation settlement for residential-school victims.
In his reply to Hummel, Merchant said he does not believe anything can be done for Grassy Narrows because of the 1985 settlement, however, “If there are identifiable mercury issues elsewhere” then such a lawsuit is a possibility. “We are prepared to pursue this issue,” Merchant says. “We are prepared to fund the battle which includes a battle regarding experts. If there are projects that we might undertake we will undertake them.”
The Mad as a Hatter story is found here. And a reprint of the story with more links for reference is here.
The culprit in this case appears to be Dryden Chemicals Limited and now their parent company Reed, Inc. A near decade of raw releases into the English-Wabigoon River have contaminated a large area covering many indigenous peoples' land. These people deserve to be treated better than we have done so far.
Stories like these should be used as warnings to us that uncontrolled mercury contamination can cause real harm. Yes, these releases were massive and directly into the water and today's EGUs and cement plants release mercury into the air over longer periods of time. But mercury and its long-lasting properties could make these sorts of catastrophic events more common and not so hard to imagine if we do not slow the build-up of this toxin in our waters.
An excerpt from the story is below.
In a message posted on the Friends of Anishinabek of the Gitchi Gami website, John H.W. Hummel, a pollution researcher based in British Colombia, explains that “when mercury or lead levels of 5 ppb to 6 ppb are found in the brain, 25 per cent of the glial progenitor stem cells simply ’shut down’! These particular brain cells are absolutely crucial for building the brain during infancy and beyond. This type of brain cell is also found in adults.”
Hummel believes that the thousands of Indigenous who have been ignored by the government should embark on a class-action lawsuit and has contacted Tony Merchant, from Merchant Law Group. Based in Saskatchewan, Mr. Merchant is the lawyer behind the recent compensation settlement for residential-school victims.
In his reply to Hummel, Merchant said he does not believe anything can be done for Grassy Narrows because of the 1985 settlement, however, “If there are identifiable mercury issues elsewhere” then such a lawsuit is a possibility. “We are prepared to pursue this issue,” Merchant says. “We are prepared to fund the battle which includes a battle regarding experts. If there are projects that we might undertake we will undertake them.”
The Mad as a Hatter story is found here. And a reprint of the story with more links for reference is here.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Obama Leads Bipartisan Legislation For Mercury Export Ban, S. 906
Last November Hg-ATME had a post about House Bill 1534, a bill proposed by Rep. Tom Allen D-Maine that would ban all exports of toxic mercury from the United States. The bill was nearly unanimously received and passed on a voice vote (no roll call required). At that same time Sens. Barak Obama, D-IL and and Lisa Murkowski R-AK were floating a similar bill through the Senate. At the time, the Whitehouse said it would not support the bipartisan legislation. Now almost a year later we have a marked-up version (S. 906, The Mercury Market Minimization Act) of the two bills that everyone has agreed on.
An excerpt from The Earth Times follows;
"Trading mercury is not like trading potato chips," said Michael Bender, director of the Mercury Policy Project. "While we spend millions of dollars in the U.S. collecting mercury, ironically it is then sold overseas and used in highly dispersive and dangerous ways, such as in small scale gold mining. Released from these practices, it circulates in the global environment and ends up in the fish that Americans eat."
The free trade of mercury and mercury compounds on the world market, at relatively low prices and in ready supply, encourages the continued use of mercury outside of the U.S.
"We applaud Senator Barak Obama's leadership on this bipartisan legislation," said Bender. "We've got to stop this circle of poison, where for example over 1000 tons of mercury are used annually by more than 10 million small scale gold miners in 50 developing countries, exposing themselves, their families and the local and global environment to this deadly neurotoxin."
[...]
While similar versions of the bill were introduced in the House (H.R. 1534) by Tom Allen (D-ME), and Senate (S.906) by Senators Obama (D-IL) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the groups are urging passage of the substitute House-passed version, since it was the subject of subsequent negotiation and compromise, and more accurately reflects the current state of development on this issue.
Lets hope that the President has enough sense at this time to support it.
An excerpt from The Earth Times follows;
"Trading mercury is not like trading potato chips," said Michael Bender, director of the Mercury Policy Project. "While we spend millions of dollars in the U.S. collecting mercury, ironically it is then sold overseas and used in highly dispersive and dangerous ways, such as in small scale gold mining. Released from these practices, it circulates in the global environment and ends up in the fish that Americans eat."
The free trade of mercury and mercury compounds on the world market, at relatively low prices and in ready supply, encourages the continued use of mercury outside of the U.S.
"We applaud Senator Barak Obama's leadership on this bipartisan legislation," said Bender. "We've got to stop this circle of poison, where for example over 1000 tons of mercury are used annually by more than 10 million small scale gold miners in 50 developing countries, exposing themselves, their families and the local and global environment to this deadly neurotoxin."
[...]
While similar versions of the bill were introduced in the House (H.R. 1534) by Tom Allen (D-ME), and Senate (S.906) by Senators Obama (D-IL) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the groups are urging passage of the substitute House-passed version, since it was the subject of subsequent negotiation and compromise, and more accurately reflects the current state of development on this issue.
Lets hope that the President has enough sense at this time to support it.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
10 Years, What's the Rush
Cement kilns across the country are spewing mercury emissions at twice the rate EPA estimated, as recently as 2006. Ten years ago Congress compelled EPA to regulate and reduce these cement kiln emissions, and EPA has pretty much ignored the request. In a recently released study conducted by Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project it is revealed that cement kilns are emitting more than twice the mercury EPA estimated.
An excerpt from a MarketWatch article below;
EPA Ignored Problem For 10+ Years Even Though Some Kilns Emit More Mercury Than Power Plants; Report Focuses on Cement Kilns in AL, CA, IA, IL, MD, MI, MT, NY, OR, SC, TX and WA.
For more than a decade after Congress told it to curb dangerous mercury pollution from cement kilns across the nation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) refused to take action. Now, a new study from Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) documents the consequences of the EPA's failure: Cement kilns emit mercury pollution -- a threat to the health of pregnant women and children -- at more than twice the level estimated as recently as 2006 by the EPA, which only started to collect data on the problem in 2007.
[...]
Entitled "Cementing a Toxic Legacy? How EPA Has Failed to Control Mercury Pollution From Cement Kilns," the Earthjustice/EIP report outlines specific recommendations for EPA and state agency action based on the following key conclusions:
-- Mercury emissions from cement kilns are almost twice as high as the agency has previously acknowledged, and in many states kilns are among the worst mercury polluters. EPA now estimates that cement kilns emit nearly 23,000 pounds of mercury each year, far more than the Agency's 2006 estimate of 11,995 pounds.
-- A relatively small number of cement plants that use extremely dirty raw materials and fuels are among the worst mercury polluters in their states and, in some cases, in the country. For example, some cement kilns release as much or more mercury as coal fired power plants.
-- Since 1974, cement production has increased 15 percent, and further increases are projected for the future. Rising levels of cement production in the U.S. mean that the cement industry's mercury pollution will grow even worse if left unregulated.
Earthjustice staff attorney James Pew said: "EPA's new data confirm that cement plants are among the worst mercury polluters in this country. EPA has refused to acknowledge this problem for more than a decade, and the mercury contamination in our food and waters has grown worse every year as a result. It is high time for EPA to do its job and make this industry clean up its toxic emissions."
The 23,000 pounds, or 11.5 tons, is roughly one quarter of the estimated mercury emissions from all coal fired EGUs in the country (48 Tons). What I find amusing is, many of the cement plants use EGU flyash in their product, thus emitting some of the mercury (trapped in the flyash) that was captured by the air pollution control devices at the power plant. So we play an industrial game of catch and release.
An excerpt from a MarketWatch article below;
EPA Ignored Problem For 10+ Years Even Though Some Kilns Emit More Mercury Than Power Plants; Report Focuses on Cement Kilns in AL, CA, IA, IL, MD, MI, MT, NY, OR, SC, TX and WA.
For more than a decade after Congress told it to curb dangerous mercury pollution from cement kilns across the nation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) refused to take action. Now, a new study from Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) documents the consequences of the EPA's failure: Cement kilns emit mercury pollution -- a threat to the health of pregnant women and children -- at more than twice the level estimated as recently as 2006 by the EPA, which only started to collect data on the problem in 2007.
[...]
Entitled "Cementing a Toxic Legacy? How EPA Has Failed to Control Mercury Pollution From Cement Kilns," the Earthjustice/EIP report outlines specific recommendations for EPA and state agency action based on the following key conclusions:
-- Mercury emissions from cement kilns are almost twice as high as the agency has previously acknowledged, and in many states kilns are among the worst mercury polluters. EPA now estimates that cement kilns emit nearly 23,000 pounds of mercury each year, far more than the Agency's 2006 estimate of 11,995 pounds.
-- A relatively small number of cement plants that use extremely dirty raw materials and fuels are among the worst mercury polluters in their states and, in some cases, in the country. For example, some cement kilns release as much or more mercury as coal fired power plants.
-- Since 1974, cement production has increased 15 percent, and further increases are projected for the future. Rising levels of cement production in the U.S. mean that the cement industry's mercury pollution will grow even worse if left unregulated.
Earthjustice staff attorney James Pew said: "EPA's new data confirm that cement plants are among the worst mercury polluters in this country. EPA has refused to acknowledge this problem for more than a decade, and the mercury contamination in our food and waters has grown worse every year as a result. It is high time for EPA to do its job and make this industry clean up its toxic emissions."
The 23,000 pounds, or 11.5 tons, is roughly one quarter of the estimated mercury emissions from all coal fired EGUs in the country (48 Tons). What I find amusing is, many of the cement plants use EGU flyash in their product, thus emitting some of the mercury (trapped in the flyash) that was captured by the air pollution control devices at the power plant. So we play an industrial game of catch and release.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
