Rule aims to cut smog and soot from coal plants

WASHINGTON Thu Jul 7, 2011 5:21pm EDT

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. environmental regulators finalized a rule on Thursday to slash air pollution from coal-fired power plants in 27 states east of the Rocky Mountains that result in unhealthy levels of smog and soot.

The Environmental Protection Agency measure, known as the Cross State Air Pollution Rule, will add costs for some power generators, but should cut health care bills for Americans.

Companies that could see higher costs include large coal burners Southern Co, Duke Energy and American Electric Power.

"No community should have to bear the burden of another community's polluters, or be powerless to prevent air pollution that leads to asthma, heart attacks and other harmful illnesses," said EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson.

The EPA rule will reduce power plant sulfur dioxide emissions by 73 percent by 2014, from 2005 levels, when combined with state environmental laws. It will cut nitrogen oxide emissions by 54 percent by 2014. Those cuts are slightly deeper than ones proposed by the EPA last year.

STEEP COSTS, BUT HEALTH BENEFITS

Power plants have to start cutting their sulfur dioxide emissions in January 2012 and their nitrogen oxide emissions that May.

In addition, the state of Texas will now be required to cut sulfur dioxide emissions in an annual program, a measure that was not included in last year's proposal.

The agency said the rule would prevent up to 34,000 premature deaths, and save $280 billion per year in health costs. The pollution is linked to heart attacks and lung problems including asthma.

Those benefits outweigh the $800 million projected to be spent by power plants and others annually on the rule in 2014 and the roughly $1.6 billion per year in capital investments already underway from previous rules, the EPA said.

The rule will also level the playing field for power plant operators that are already controlling these emissions by requiring more plants to take similar actions, it said.

Not everyone was happy about the regulation.

"The late decision to apply the rule to Texas and the modeling for the rule have resulted in wholly unreasonable mandates and unrealistic timelines for Texas," Luminant, a unit of private company Energy Future Holdings, and the biggest power producer in Texas, said in a release.

Shares of Southern Co were down 0.4 percent on Thursday, while Duke Energy and American Electric Power both rose less than 0.5 percent.

RED HERRING

The rule resulted from a federal appeals court order instructing the EPA to strengthen a similar regulation issued in 2005 by the Bush administration.

It is opposed by many Republicans in Congress, who say it will kill jobs and could make transmission of electricity unreliable because it would force companies to shut some of their coal plants.

But the argument that the rule will hurt transmission is a "red herring" because plants integral to power delivery would not be allowed to shut down, said Susan Tierney, a managing principal at the Analysis Group, an organization of economic and financial consultants.

She said only the oldest, least efficient and smaller coal plants would be shut as a result of rules to be issued this year by the EPA on power plants.

Environmentalists praised the EPA. The Clean Air Task Force said the rule was a "solid victory for clean air and public health."

The EPA will take public comment for 45 days on a supplemental rule that would require six states -- Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma and Wisconsin -- to reduce nitrogen oxide pollution in the summer months. That rule is expected to be finalized late this year.

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
derdutchman wrote:
Senators Tom Coburn and Jim Inhofe will fight this intrusion into private enterprise profits even if they have to sacrifice every last living Oklahoman’s left lung in the process.

Jul 08, 2011 11:06am EDT  --  Report as abuse
jrj90620 wrote:
Hopefully Republicans eventually figure out that stopping someone from polluting another’s environment is a legitimate job of govt.Companies,to remain competitive,will pollute more since it is cheaper than controlling pollution.Therefore govt has to be involved in this.Free enterprise won’t produce low pollution.

Jul 08, 2011 11:30am EDT  --  Report as abuse
robert1234 wrote:
Obama actually did something good? WOW! I’m inpressed. But then, he’s going to screw all the Social Security people so he needs the good publicity, I guess. God, it’s hard to believe that Obama is worse than Bush but it’s true. NO INCUMBENTS for any reason! Voting for bad government gets us bad government. No good choice = no vote on that part of the ballot!

Jul 08, 2011 3:09pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.