Bangkok Conference Focuses On Global Mercury Agreement, Will USA Sign On Or Kyotoize It?

The Open-Ended Working Group on global mercury issues is currently meeting in Bangkok. The need for a global agreement to combat the spread of the toxic chemical in our environment has been discussed and mostly agreed upon. Hg-ATME has said many times that mercury emissions are a global issue and no one nation can solve the problem alone. We can set good examples for others to follow but without a global approach countries that restrict mercury use and emissions will eventually reach their capacity to effect the change and further reductions will have to come from somewhere else.

Hey, doesn't that sound like the Governors and Senators from New England and New York describing their situation with the Midwest? Its funny how we are all downwind of someone and mercury emissions travel around the globe so only a global approach will work.

From ENN.com an excerpt from their conference coverage is below;

UNEP is urging governments, working with industry and civil society, to begin setting "clear and ambitious targets" to get global mercury levels down and to set the stage for mercury-free products and processes world-wide.

Such targets might include:
- an agreement to phase-out mercury from products and processes, such as in the manufacture of medical equipment and in chlorine factories, with an aim of realizing mercury-free products by 2020.

- Reductions in emissions from coal-fired power stations with the additional benefits of reduced greenhouse gases and improved local air quality.

- Support for initiatives like those of the UN Industrial and Development Organization which has a goal to cut by 50 per cent the use of mercury in artisanal mining by 2017 en route to a total phase-out

"The global public has been watching and waiting for action-it is now time to start delivering it. This meeting, aimed at narrowing the options and resolving outstanding concerns, comes against a background of worries over rising levels of mercury emissions and releases in several key areas" said Mr Steiner.

UNEP's flagship report-the Global Environment Outlook-4-launched last month states that that coal burning and waste incineration account for about 70 per cent of the total quantified emissions of mercury.

"As combustion of fossil fuels is increasing, mercury emissions can be expected to increase, in the absence of control technologies or prevention," says the GEO-4, the peer reviewed work of well over 1,000 scientists and experts.

And some additional coverage by the Environmental News Service below;


One of the world's thousands of coal-burning power plants.
This one is in Selangot, Malaysia.
(Photo courtesy Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries)

Governments need to accelerate the effort to deliver an international agreement on mercury, said Achim Steiner, executive director of the UN Environment Programme, UNEP.

Steiner said scientists have been warning about the dangers to human health, wildlife and the wider environment for more than a century. But still, every person alive today is thought to have at least trace levels of the heavy metal in their tissues.

Mercury is linked with a wide range of health effects including irreversible damage to the human nervous system including the brain and scientists have concluded there is no safe limit when it comes to mercury exposure.

It is true that many countries have, in recent decades, taken steps to reduce mercury uses and releases and to protect their citizens from exposure to this toxic heavy metal. However, the fact remains that a comprehensive and decisive response to the global challenge of mercury is not in place and this needs to be urgently addressed," said Steiner.

"There is no real reason to wait on many of the mercury fronts. Viable alternatives exist for virtually all products containing mercury and industrial processes using mercury," he said.

These global efforts have been tried before with big issues like global warming, but if major contributors like the US do not support them they have little chance of success. The Kyoto protocol is a good example. Some in the US are on board with these issues. My next post talks about just some of those efforts.

Big Mercury Meeting In Bangkok

A News Release from the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) in their Earth Negotiations Bulletin announces the meeting lasting Nov 12 - 16, 2007, In Bangkok, Thailand.

The First Meeting of the Ad hoc Open-ended Working Group (OEWG) to Review and Assess Measures to Address the Global Issue of Mercury begins today at the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Pacific in Bangkok, Thailand.

The OEWG is expected to review and assess options for enhanced voluntary measures, and new or existing international legal instruments on mercury. The meeting is also expected to consider the Analysis of Possible Options to Address the Global Challenges to Reduce Risks from Releases of Mercury report.

I'm sure there will be some interesting discussions over Pad Thai and Singha. I will try to keep everyone up to date on what is discussed. I am not in Thailand for the conference. But you can follow the proceedings yourself at this link.

Northeast States Continue To Tout Their Leadership On Mercury Emissions and Slam the Midwest

It is probably because I am from Illinois that it irks me so much to read the articles day after day coming from the New England States and New York claiming they can do no more on Mercury Emissions in their own States, its up to the midwest if we are goingt to achieve our Clean Water goals.

As far as leadership goes, several Midwest States have stepped up to the challenge and legislated some of the toughest mercury emission laws in the country with compliance dates much sooner than most others. Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan have really done their part. It just doesn't feel right for the Northeast States to keep harping on the Midwest. Face it, the Federal EPA screwed up and left it to individual States to get tough, some have and others haven't.

I agree Missouri, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky and Tennessee, 5 States with a lot of coal fired units, could have done better, in most cases they have done nothing. But don't come down on Illinois or Minnesota, both passed mandatory 90% reductions across the State, no trading, by 2010. And many Midwest States are signatories to the case against the USEPA working its way through Federal courts now.

The Northeast Governors and Senators are asking the Feds to get tough and that is good, but we should have a National standard that achieves the goal for all States and all US citizens.

This excerpt from All American Patriots;

U.S. Senators Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), John Sununu (R-N.H.), Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen Johnson this week to approve the Northeast Regional Mercury Total Maximum Daily Load cleanup plan. As part of the plan, the region requires enhanced federal guidelines for mercury pollution coming into the Northeast from other parts of the country.

In recent years, the Northeastern states of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York have drastically reduced mercury pollution from in-state power plants. Yet the region fails to meet current EPA guidelines because of the mercury pollution brought in from neighboring states. Today’s letter follows a similar plea made recently by the governors of the Northeastern states.

“The Northeastern states, including Maine, continue to be at end of the tailpipe of mercury- spewing coal-fired power plants in the Midwest,” said Snowe. “Maine has led the way in reducing mercury emissions within the state, but we must see strong action on the part of the EPA to reduce mercury emissions that enter our state from sources in other states. The petition from the region clearly identifies that our State simply can not do anything more. The lax approach by EPA in regards to our national problem has failed to protect the health of our children, Maine’s natural resources and the economies that depend on them.”

We are all downwind of someone, the mercury issue is a global issue. US can take a leadership role by demonstrating what can be done economically to reduce this toxin in our environment.

Mercury Emissions in Mainstream Media

Mostly I report on localized issues regarding mercury emissions that may not be so readily apparent to parties interested in the subject of mercury in our environment. I get an article from page 10 of the New York Times, or a blurb from a submission to a scientific journal. Rarely is mercury emissions Page 1, above the fold material. The last few days has been unique in this regard, first there was an article in Forbes magazine about a few Nevada mines misreporting mercury emissions. Excerpt below;

Nevada-based Great Basin Mine Watch, the Idaho Conservation League and Earthworks threatened legal action against the Florida Canyon Mining Co.'s operation near Imlay and the Kennecott Mining Co.'s Denton-Rawhide Mine near Fallon.

Contrary to recent data reported to the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection, the mines reported little or no mercury emissions over the last eight years to the federal EPA, said John Hadder, staff scientist with Great Basin Mine Watch.

In 2006, the Florida Canyon mine sent 440 pounds of mercury into the air and the Rawhide mine reported 350 pounds of emissions, according to the NDEP.

"We now know that hundreds of pounds of mercury are needlessly going into our air from mines that have minimal controls in place," Hadder said. "This new information is a wake-up call. We want the state and industry to agree to get controls in place right away."

Then USA Today runs a front page exposé on mercury emissions with a nifty state-by-state interactive map, and a very cool global and state-by-state map of where mercury is landing. For any of us who follow mercury emissions on a regular basis, all 23 or so of us, none of the information in USA Today was really new. What is important though is that mercury emissions and the health effects caused thereby is becoming more and more a mainstream topic of discussion.

If the issue remains in front of the average news follower then the chances of making meaningful improvements in global mercury emissions are dramatically improved. I want to thank USA Today for their brilliant coverage. When USA Today takes on a topic like this they do a phenomenal job of bringing technical issues to the average reader so that they are then able to walk away with a better understanding of whats going on in their world.

There were three articles in USA Today on Tuesday Oct 30th. I have made links to all of them below.

Mercury emitters rush to meet new U. S. rules, by Larry Wheeler, of Gannett News Service
&
Opposition takes on coal plants, by Bobby Carmichael, of USA Today
&
Power plants are focus of drive to cut mercury, by Larry Wheeler, of Gannett News Service

New England Lobs A Mercury Bomb at the Midwest

In move that should really surprise no one, the Governors of six New England States are calling on the USEPA to come down harder to reduce mercury emissions from the Midwest that are depositing in and around New England. While I agree the Feds could do more nationally to address this issue, lobbing "our poop doesn't smell" bombs toward the Midwest is humorous. If the Feds need to do anything it is to get tough nationally, not just in the Midwest.

Its as though the Midwest's mercury is somehow more dangerous than the mercury from out West or even their own belching stacks in New England, of which there are several. Let's get tough as a nation on mercury emissions and stop pointing fingers at one region or another. It is a problem for all of us to deal with, and I am certain we will.

An excerpt from today's Boston.com follows;

Gov. Patrick is calling on the Environmental Protection Agency to do more to control the mercury pollution that's blowing into New England from the Midwest.

He's joining the governors of the other five New England states and New York in urging EPA action.

Patrick says pollution from the Midwest's coal-fired power plants is contributing to high mercury levels found in freshwater fish in the Northeast.

I know there are a lot of coal burning plants in the Midwest and New England is downwind, but in the big picture we are all downwind of someone. With mercury emissions this is a global issue that needs to be addressed for everyone's sake. Oh, and by the way Go Bosox!

Forest Fires & Other Similar Blazes Roughly Equal Mercury Emissions From Power Plants

A newly released study of forest fires and other blazes reveals that large amounts of mercury are emitted from these fires roughly equal to the amount emitted from coal burning power plants. Scientists, Hans Friedli and Christine Wiedinmyer, from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) have plotted state-by-state estimates of mercury emissions from such fires. It is preliminary research that the authors caution may be subject to 50% error but it is extremely useful information in its current state.

The mercury comes from natural and industrial sources that lands in soil and upon plant matter and gets re-released into the atmosphere when these fire occur. So it is not correct to just say "see, equal amounts are released naturally," and use that as an argument against strict mercury standards because a lot of the mercury is being deposited from industrial sources, so that if they were reduced would reduce these re-emissions too.

An excerpt from this interesting UCAR article follows with a link to the full article here.

The study, "Mercury Emission Estimates from Fires: An Initial Inventory for the United States," is being published online today by the journal Environmental Science and Technology. The research was funded by the National Science Foundation, NCAR's principal sponsor, as well as by the Electric Power Research Institute and the Environmental Protection Agency.

The paper estimates that fires in the continental United States and Alaska release about 44 metric tons of mercury into the atmosphere every year. It is the first study to estimate mercury emissions for each state, based on a new computer model developed at NCAR. The authors caution that their estimates for the nation and for each state are preliminary and are subject to a 50 percent or greater margin of error. A metric ton is about 10% larger than a U.S. ton.

Mercury does not originate in fires. Instead, it comes from industrial and natural sources, often settling into soil and plant matter. Intense fires then release the mercury back into the atmosphere, where it poses a new danger because it can reach sensitive waterways and other areas.

"What we are seeing is that mercury from other sources is being deposited into the vegetation and soil and then being released back into the atmosphere, where it can travel far downwind and contaminate watersheds and fragile ecosystems," says NCAR scientist Christine Wiedinmyer, one of the study's co-authors. "It's important for federal and state officials to have this type of information and to know where mercury is coming from so they can better protect public health and the environment."

IDEM Gets Berated By EPA, First It Was BP and Now US Steel, What Are They Thinking?

It was only a couple months ago that IDEM, Indiana Department of Environmental Management, was giving BP a pass on emissions of heavy metals, including mercury, into Lake Michigan. An immediate outcry from the public sector all around the Great Lakes drew attention to IDEM's plans and they were quickly squashed as BP had to give-in to protect what little integrity they had left after touting themselves as the "green" energy choice and then looking like big time polluters instead. That was then this is now.

Now it is IDEM and US Steel playing lets get lax with emission limits of sludge and heavy metals into our lakes. It is almost unbelievable; who comes up with these ideas? Do they think we are all stupid and won't care?

The outcry on this one is larger and rightly so. The Chicago Tribune ran an article Friday highlighting (or should it be lowlighting) some of the shennanigans IDEM has been playing with US Steel. It not only showed what their plans were for the future, it brought into focus what they haven't been doing for several years. Its as though they want to be exposed as incompetent; mission accomplished!

A few excerpts from the Chicago Tribune story on the subject.

Federal regulators are sending their Indiana counterparts back to the drawing board to ensure that the Gary Works, one of the largest polluters in the Great Lakes basin, cuts the amount of toxic chemicals and heavy metals flowing into a Lake Michigan tributary.

Responding to a Tribune story about a new water permit for the massive steel mill, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said Friday it has blocked the proposal, which would scrap, relax or omit limits on pollution the U.S. Steel Corp. mill dumps into the Grand Calumet River before it empties into the lake.
[...]
The letter, dated Oct. 1 but not made public until now, chided the Indiana Department of Environmental Management for giving U.S. Steel five years to limit several pollutants, including mercury, lead, cyanide, ammonia and a cancer-causing chemical called benzo(a)pyrene.

Federal regulators also criticized Indiana for failing to set more stringent pollution standards that would help clean up the Grand Calumet, one of the most contaminated waterways in the Great Lakes region.

"They have to do more to protect water quality," said Peter Swenson, chief of the water permits section in the EPA's Chicago office.
[...]
Federal law requires states to renew water permits every five years to meet the Clean Water Act goal of eliminating pollution. But Indiana hasn't reissued a permit for the Gary Works since 1994.
[...]
The latest fight about a Lake Michigan polluter comes three months after Indiana regulators gave a BP refinery in nearby Whiting permission to significantly increase pollution discharged into the lake, the source of drinking water for Chicago and scores of other communities.

Faced with a storm of public protest and threats of legal action, BP later backed down and promised to meet the more stringent pollution limits in its old permit.
[...]
"People in the Great Lakes region no longer are going to tolerate these attempts to look the other way or wait another five years for things to get better," U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said in an interview. "It would be helpful if Indiana officials would get with the program and realize Lake Michigan shouldn't be a dumping ground."

If it wasn't so sad it would be funny. What were they thinking?

Idaho Governor Leans Away From Mercury Emissions

Idaho Governor C.L. "Butch" Otter continues the push of former Governor Jim Risch to keep Idaho out of the mercury "cap-and-trade" program, thus eliminating any chance of a coal fired power plant being built in the State. Currently Idaho has no such plants and thus has a Federally allocated mercury emission allowance of zero. In order for any new plants to be constructed they would have to offset their emissions by purchasing credits. But if they opt out of the program then no credits can be purchased and no plants can be built.

An excerpt from the Magic Valley Times News follows;

Idaho should not join a proposed federal mercury cap-and-trade program, at least for now, Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter told the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Board in a letter dated earlier this month.

The Idaho Legislature and former Gov. Jim Risch took steps last year to keep the Gem State out of the federal program and coal-fired power plants - major emitters of mercury - out of Idaho. But the board has re-examined the issue in recent months, prompting some to speculate the DEQ is interested in joining the program and opening the door for coal-based energy production.

Otter's letter could slam that door.

"I believe it was the right decision at that time," Otter said of the Legislature's actions against mercury, "and I believe it is still the appropriate course of action for the near future."

The federal cap-and-trade program limits the amount of mercury each state can emit, but allows states below the cap to trade their emissions allowances to other states.

The program, which the Bush administration expects will lower nationwide emissions from 48 tons to 15 tons a year, is on hold pending a lawsuit.

Otter wants the board to postpone considering the program at least until the lawsuit is resolved. Meanwhile, he encouraged the DEQ to study mercury in Idaho, a state with no coal-fired power plants or other major mercury emitters but high concentrations of mercury in some areas.

The rest of the article can be read here.

As Expected, Indiana Chooses Federal Plan

There were no surprises yesterday when the Indiana Pollution Control Board opted to stick with Federal CAMR standards rather than adopt their own tougher mercury laws. The vote was overwhelmingly in favor, 11-1, but there was some debate.

An excerpt from the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette follows;

The Indiana Air Pollution Control Board on Wednesday voted 11-1 to move forward with the federal minimum in mercury emissions reductions rather than a more stringent regulation sought by environmental advocates.

The seemingly strong vote, however, was marred by several members of the board expressing disappointment that after years of study and months of negotiating no compromise could be reached.

“I feel like we have spun our wheels unnecessarily to get nowhere,” board Chairman James Miner said.
[...]
Gail Charnley, who works for Health Risk Strategies in Washington, told the panel that only 5 percent to 10 percent of the mercury found in Indiana’s fish is attributable to Indiana power plants.

Most of it, she says, comes from other states as well as China and India.

But concerned citizen Lisa Smith said that China and India are probably blaming Indiana.

“Everybody blames somebody else, and all we get is the bare minimum,” she said.

Board member Thomas Anderson said the board ended up focusing on the wrong issues – such as money and technology – and not enough on public health.

You can read the full article here.

Indiana Votes Today On New Mercury Emission Standards

Today the Indiana Pollution Control Board was scheduled to vote on a final rule governing mercury emissions from coal burning power plants within the State. It will be no big surprise that they will follow the Federal CAMR guidelines. IDEM, the Indiana Dept of Environmental Management, has made their recommendations to do just that. While there are a couple other proposals for stricter standards it would be a shock if the Board went in another direction.

An excerpt from Inside Indiana Business follows;

FACTS OF THE SITUATION

-- On Wednesday, October 3, the Indiana Air Pollution Control Board will take final action on a rule to control emissions of mercury from Indiana’s coal-fired power plants.

-- IDEM is asking the board to adopt the rule issued by the US EPA which requires a 66 percent reduction in mercury emissions by 2018.

-- The Hoosier Environmental Council advocates a 90% reduction in uncontrolled mercury emissions by 2010.

-- Improving Kids’ Environment proposes a middle ground on emission reduction targets and the timetable. It would result in thousands fewer pounds of mercury being released.

The whole story can be found here.