Leavitt Defends EPA Emissions Plan

CLEVELAND, Ohio, December 16, 2003 (ENS) - The Bush administration is facing broad criticism for its plan to employ a cap and trade system to reduce emissions of mercury and other pollutants from coal fired power plants. Critics say the proposals relax existing law and ignore increasing evidence of the public health and environmental risks from mercury contamination, but U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Mike Leavitt today defended the plan as the "largest single industry investment in any clean air program in U.S. history."

Leavitt told a Cleveland audience that the air pollution plan, which could cost industry some $5 billion, will make the Ohio city a healthier place to live while maintaining "affordable energy prices for American consumers."

The rules proposed Monday by the EPA would employ a cap and trade system to cut emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and mercury from the nation's 1,100 coal fired power plants.

The proposals mirror in many ways the administration's air pollution legislation called "Clear Skies," which has stalled in Congress and has drawn sharp criticism from environmentalists, public health groups and state air pollution control officials.

The Bush plan is modeled on the cap and trade program that has helped reduced acid rain. It would cut annual emissions of SO2, a leading cause of acid rain and soot, from 10 million tons to 3.2 million tons by 2015 and annual emissions of NOx - the leading contributor to smog - from 4 million tons to 1.7 million tons by the same year.

EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt says the cap and trade plan balances the needs of public health, the environment and the economy. (Photo courtesy Office of the Governor)

Mercury emissions from coal fired power plants are currently unregulated - these facilities emit some 48 tons of mercury each year, accounting for about 40 percent of the nation's mercury pollution.

Under the Bush plan, the EPA would set a set a cap in 2010 on mercury emissions and employ a trading plan to bring emissions down to 15 tons by 2018.

Critics say the nation would be better off if the Bush administration enforced existing law.

"Put simply, this rule means that power plants can pollute more, for longer than the law allows," said Senator James Jeffords, a Vermont Independent. "Once again the Bush administration is doing through federal regulations what it cannot pass through Congress."

In 2001 the EPA said that developing "maximum achievable control technologies" (MACT) as called for by the Clean Air Act would reduce emissions of S02 and NOx more quickly than the Bush plan and could reduce mercury emissions by 90 percent - to 5.5 million tons - by 2008.

The cap and trade plan marks a drastic shift for mercury emissions regulation and requires the EPA to revise its December 2000 finding that it is "appropriate and necessary" to regulate utility hazardous air emissions using MACT standards.

Proponents of the standards say the risks from mercury contamination merit strict regulation - scientists have shown that mercury can cause brain and nerve damage and studies indicate children and women of childbearing age are at a disproportionate risk.

Last week an advisory panel called on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to warn women and children to limit consumption of canned tuna because of mercury.

Industry groups say coal fired power plants are only part of the problem and have lobbied long and hard against the mercury MACT standard, arguing that commercial technologies are too new and expensive to achieve the reductions called for by the standard.

Adoption of such a MACT standard would force utilities will switch from coal to natural gas and cause energy costs to rise, according to industry representatives.

But this has been disputed by the nonprofit association of air quality agencies of the Northeast states, which says the industry's annual mercury emissions of 48 tons could be reduced to 7 tons through existing air pollution controls and utilization of commercially available mercury reduction technologies.

There are currently no regulations to limit mercury emissions from coal fired power plants, but the federal government has reined in the two other large sources of the toxic metal - medical and municipal waste incinerators. (Photo courtesy New Mexico Solar Energy Association)

The proposal "looks like an early Christmas for industry," said Michael Bender of the Mercury Policy Project. "It presents the appearance, if not the reality, of allowing kids and the unborn to be poisoned in exchange for campaign contributions."

Critics worry that the cap and trade plan could produce mercury hot spots, as some power plants opt to buy credits rather than reduce pollution.

A report released last week by the environmental research group Environmental Defense analyzed air pollution modeling date from the EPA and found that local sources commonly contribute 50 to 80 percent of mercury deposition at the nation's current hot spots.

The finding refutes a key argument by supporters of the cap and trade system, who say local hot spots are not a serious problem. Industry representatives consistently cite figures from the Electric Power Research Industry that estimate that on average some 70 percent of mercury deposits come from global sources.

Mercury does not break down and current emissions of mercury add to the existing pool, which is continuously mobilized, deposited on land and water, and remobilized.