New EPA Mercury Rule Called Illegal

[Guest guest]

Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:18:04 GMT

" BushGreenwatch " <info

 

New EPA Mercury Rule Called Illegal

 

 

 

 

Bush Greenwatch

 

March 16, 2005 | Back Issues

 

New EPA Mercury Rule Called Illegal

 

With the long-awaited release yesterday of its new rules for reducing

mercury pollution, the Environmental Protection Agency set off a

firestorm of protest and controversy that is certain to wind up in the

courts.

 

As expected, EPA announced new rules that would reduce mercury

emissions from coal-fired power plants 20 percent by 2010, with a goal

of 70 percent reduction by 2018. Environmental health and other groups

assert that greater reductions could be achieved much more rapidly,

and that EPA's decision will endanger the health of hundreds of

thousands of newborn babies.

 

Mercury is known to harm the brain and nervous system, especially in

infants. It can cause learning disabilities, attention deficit

disorder and mental retardation. One in six U.S. women of

child-bearing age is reported to have enough mercury in her blood to

put a developing fetus at risk. [1] The primary means of exposure is

through consumption of certain species of deep ocean fish, such as

tuna and pollock.

 

The Bush Administration is proposing a " cap and trade " system, whereby

a national limit on mercury emissions would be set, but in which

individual power plants could trade emissions credits. This would mean

some states would achieve reductions in mercury pollution while others

would actually experience an increase.

 

John Walke, director of the air pollution program at the Natural

Resources Defense Council, said this would result in enormous

increases in mercury emissions in certain states. For example, an

increase of 841% in California; 176% in Colorado; 241% in New

Hampshire; and 56% in New Jersey. [2]

 

Martha Keating, a former mercury expert at EPA who is now a senior

scientist at the Clean Air Task Force, joined others in saying that

proper enforcement of the current Clean Air Act would be far more

effective than the new mercury rule. " If the Clean Air Act was

implemented as it should be, we would get significant reductions of

mercury, upwards of 90 percent, " she said on National Public Radio.

" So [the new rule] in our mind is a rollback. " [3]

 

" It is unconscionable EPA is allowing power companies to trade in a

powerful neurotoxin--it is unprecedented and illegal, " said William S.

Becker, executive director of the bipartisan State and Territorial Air

Pollution Program Administrators. [4] Becker also heads the

Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials.

 

Recent criticism both by the EPA's own inspector general and by the

non-partisan Government Accountability Office alleged that EPA ignored

scientific evidence in developing its mercury rule, and called for

further analyses. A Washington Post article said Agency staff charged

that Bush Administration political operatives set the framework of the

rule in advance, to support industry's claim that installing the

newest air pollution control technology would be too expensive. [5]

 

Because mercury pollution of the oceans is a global problem, the UN

Environmental Programme held an international meeting in Nairobi last

month in an attempt to set in motion a plan to reduce the trade,

mining and emission of mercury. The European Union has already decided

to phase out mercury-cell chlorine production and close the largest

mercury mine in Europe (located in Spain).

 

But U.S. officials blocked any concrete actions, instead calling for

self-regulation, more studies, more discussion. Noting that the EPA

has defended its new rule by saying mercury pollution is a global

problem and therefore tighter controls on U.S. coal-fired power plants

wouldn't solve it, Michael Bender of the Ban Mercury Working Group--a

coalition of 27 public interest groups from several nations--said " The

Administration is talking out of both sides of its mouth. Today they

are saying the only way to solve the U.S. mercury problem is through

international action. Yet three weeks ago they hijacked the process

and blocked development of a global strategy. "

 

###

 

SOURCES:

[1] CleartheAir.org fact sheet.

[2] " Critics Say EPA Mercury Rule Rolls Back Protections, " NPR, Mar.

15, 2005.

[3] Ibid.

[4] " Mercury Emissions to be Traded, " Washington Post, Mar. 15, 2005.

[5] Ibid.

 

Spread the Word | Back Issues

 

BushGreenwatch | 1320 18th Street NW 5th Floor

Washington, DC 20036 | (202) 463-6670

Web site comments: info

Copyright 2003 Environmental Media Services