Environmental Engineers & Scientists > Geologist > Remedial Contractors
NEW EPA RULES SPLIT POWER INDUSTRY
The Environmental Protection Agency is set to make final new air-pollution standards for coal-fired power plants by mid-December, sparking disagreement among power companies about how quickly aging coal plants need to be pushed offline.
The divergent lobbying tactics could make it easier for the Obama administration to complete the rules, which promise to reshape America’s energy landscape by phasing out plants that emit large quantities of mercury and other pollutants.
The EPA wants to give coal-fired plants three years to comply with the new standards—either by shutting down or going through expensive retrofits—with the possibility of a one-year extension.
Some companies say that is impossible. Interviewed at industry conference in Orlando, Fla., in November, some executives warned that the timeline could put the reliability of the nation’s electricity at risk.
Asked whether Southern Co. could meet a three-year time-line, Chief Executive Thomas Fanning said flatly, “No. And no one else can either.”
Nick Akins, the incoming chief executive of American Electric Power Co., called the proposed time frame “ridiculous.”
If those were the only opinions, the Obama administration might feel overwhelming pressure to back down, as it did on separate rules about smog-forming emission earlier this fall. In that case, where industry was virtually unanimous is arguing that tens of thousands of jobs were at risk, President Barack Obama overruled EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and ordered a delay in more-stringent standards.
This time, though, a section of the industry argues that the EPA blueprint makes sense.
“I think three years is doable,” said Jim Rogers, chief executive of Duke Energy Corp., in an interview. Chris Crane, chief operating officer of Exelon Corp., agreed, saying companies shouldn’t be given an easy excuse for putting off the modernization of their fleet.
There are clear reasons for the split. Exelon relies substantially on nuclear power plants fired by cleaner-burning natural gas, so it stands to sell more electricity if older coal plants come offline. Duke says it has already retrofitted many of its coal plants due to state mandates.
Companies pushing for a more lenient timetable have large coal fleets and are facing high compliance costs. Southern alone says the rule could cost $8.5 billion and has asked for at least six years to comply.
As a result, the industry is not always speaking with one voice when it talks publicly about the issue. “The fact that the utility industry is not unanimous on this issue makes it easier for EPA to stick to its guns,” said Christine Tezak, senior energy and environmental policy analyst at Robert W. Baird & Co.
The EPA rule is expected to affect dozens of aging coal-generation units. Analysts at Bernstein Research estimate about 5% of the generation capacity in the U.S, would be retired as a result of the rule.
Regulations aren’t the only factor affecting the companies’ choice of fuel. The EPA said the low price of natural gas and other factors could lead companies to shut coal units. Lawmakers are also concerned about ensuring reliable sources of power.
The Edison Electric Institute, a trade group for utilities, has crafted a compromise proposal that both industry factions are backing. It asks the EPA to extend the timeline to six year son a case-by-case basis.
Exelon’s Mr. Crane said he believes regulators will make exceptions for plants that are needed to ensure reliability. “If for whatever reason these companies don’t think they can comply, give them some extra time, but make them justify it,” he said.
An EPA official said the administration was considering proposals that would allow non-compliant plants needed for reliability to run when necessary, but he said those instances were likely to be rare.
(By Ryan Tracy – Wall Street Journal – 11/10/11)
EPA ACCEPTS FIRST GHG REPORTING DATA AND LAUNCHES ELECTRONIC GHG REPORTING TOOL
EPA launched a new tool to allow 28 industrial sectors to submit their 2011 greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution data electronically. Prior to being finalized more than 1,000 stakeholders, including industry associations, states, and NGOs tested the electronic GHG Reporting tool (e-GGRT) to ensure clarity and user-friendliness.
EPA’s GHG Reporting Program (GHGRP) launched in October 2009, requires the reporting of GHG data from large emission sources across a range of industry sectors. Suppliers of products that would emit GHGs if released, combusted, or oxidized are also required to report GHG data. Under this program, covered entities are required to submit GHG data to EPA annually and the first round of data will be submitted electronically by September 30, 2011. EPA plans to publish non-confidential GHG data collected through the GHGRP by the end of 2011.
(Environmental Tip of the Week – 8/9/11)
EPA RELEASES FINAL HEALTH
ASSESSMENT FOR TCE
EPA has released the final health assessment for trichloroethylene (TCE) to the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database. IRIS is a human health assessment program that evaluates the latest science on chemicals in our environment. The final assessment characterizes the chemical as carcinogenic to humans and as a human noncancer health hazard. This assessment will also allow for a better understanding of the risks posed to communities from exposure to TCE in soil, water, and air. It will provide federal, state, local, and other policy makers with the latest scientific information to make decisions about cleanup and other actions to protect people’s health.
TCE toxicity values as reported in the assessment will be considered in: Establishing cleanup methods at the 761 Superfund sites where TCE has been identified as a contaminant.
Understanding the risk from vapor intrusion as TCE vapors move from contaminated ground-
water and soil into the indoor air of overlying buildings.
Revising EPA’s Maximum Contaminant Level for TCE as part of the carcinogenic volatile organic compounds group in drinking water, as described in the agency’s drinking water strategy.
Developing appropriate regulatory standards limiting the atmospheric emissions of TCE—a hazardous air pollutant under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
This assessment has undergone several levels of peer review including, agency review, interagency review, public comment, external peer review by EPA’s Science Advisory Board in January 2011, and a scientific consultation review in 2006 by
the National Academy of Sciences. Comments from all reviewers are addressed in the final assessment. EPA continues to strengthen IRIS as part of an ongoing effort to ensure concrete research and science are used to protect human health and the environment. In May 2009, EPA restructured the IRIS program to reinforce independent review and ensure the timely publication of assessments. In July 2011, EPA announced further changes to strengthen the IRIS program in response to recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences. EPA’s peer review process is designed to elicit the strongest possible critique to ensure that each final IRIS assessment reflects sound, rigorous science.
(Environmental Resource Center - 10/3/11)