Cliffside not the right step

I'll post the article in its entirety below, but here's the link to a Charlotte Observer Op-Ed by Glen Hooks, regional director (Eastern U.S.) of Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign.

---

The landmark Clean Smokestacks Act, which required utilities to better protect citizens from the hazardous pollutants of dirty coal plants, remains one of North Carolina's proudest environmental accomplishments.

And North Carolina continues to inspire today, with the aggressive leadership of Attorney General Roy Cooper, who forced TVA and other out-of-state polluters to clean up their coal-produced pollution drifting into North Carolina.

So it is disappointing to see North Carolina lose the high ground on the very issue for which it distinguished itself nationally.

Last week's decision by the Perdue administration's Division of Air Quality to grant Duke Energy's request to reclassify the massive Cliffside Unit 6 as a “minor source” of toxic air emissions will result in our citizens having less protection from harmful emissions than the citizens in neighboring states, such as Virginia. There, regulators required emissions controls for toxic mercury pollution more than 20 times stronger than would be the case for Cliffside, under the revised permit.

Duke Energy promotes the new coal boiler at Cliffside as a state-of-the-art facility that will replace more polluting and antiquated units on the plant's site. But under the Clean Smokestacks Act, Duke is already mandated to achieve pollution reductions from its existing coal fleet. In promoting how much cleaner Cliffside Unit 6 will be than what came before, Duke Energy is simply taking credit twice for the same cleanup.

The days of conventional coal plants such as Cliffside's new coal boiler are rapidly drawing to a close. National trends are running so heavily against coal that over the past two years, 95 out of a proposed 150 new plants have been dropped or postponed indefinitely due to escalating costs, regulatory uncertainty and concerns over greenhouse gas emissions.

Much of this has to do with the escalating costs of coal, which are rising sharply and expected to increase further over time. But what cannot be ignored is the increasing viability of alternative energy sources. Last year more wind power came on line in the United States than power generated from new coal plants.

Once the Obama EPA begins to regulate CO2 emissions – expected as soon as April – it is unlikely that there will be new applications for conventional coal-fired power plants like Cliffside that can't capture or store carbon. The shortsightedness of Cliffside's design and its failure to be truly state-of-the-art makes Unit 6 obsolete – and assures that it will be costly for ratepayers – before it's built.

Nationwide, governors of both major parties have led the trend away from coal in many states. Gov. Katherine Sebelius of Kansas has steadfastly refused to permit new coal in her state despite repeated efforts by the state legislature to force her hand. Michigan's Gov. Jennifer Granholm recently issued a virtual moratorium on proposed new coal plants in her state. South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford recently came out in opposition to a proposed plant in that state. And Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle directed the conversion of a public coal-fired generator to natural gas, citing the need to move away from coal.

North Carolina seems to be heading in a different direction. In granting Duke Energy's request to be treated as a “minor” source of toxic air emissions, Gov. Perdue, who ran on a clean energy platform, said it was her administration's job to keep “hazardous emissions to an absolute minimum.”

But instead, Duke Energy will now be allowed to emit far higher amounts of more than 50 toxic pollutants – including mercury, arsenic and dioxins – than allowed under the Clean Air Act.

Sadly, while Duke may reap the profits of this short-sighted decision, the health and welfare of North Carolinians will suffer for decades to come.

Controversial Permit goes to Cliffside

FYI - the below is a press release we issued today. I took what I thought was blog appropriate, but you can read the full thing here.

---

Today, the Perdue administration agreed to declare the massive 800-megawatt Cliffside Coal Boiler Unit 6 a “minor” source of mercury and other hazardous air pollutants. The decision helps Duke Energy avoid stringent federal controls on toxic air emissions for the facility, which is under construction 55 miles west of Charlotte.

In contrast to today’s decision, on February 3, Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm put a virtual moratorium on new coal plants in her state through an executive order. Granholm also pledged to reduce Michigan’s reliance of fossil fuels for generating electricity by 45% by 2020. Governor Jim Doyle on February 6 announced that a power plant operated by the University of Wisconsin would begin burning biomass instead of coal. South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford on February 11 announced his opposition to a coal plant planned for the Pee Dee River area in Florence County.

Utilities themselves are increasingly abandoning plans for new coal, citing regulatory and economic uncertainties. Since the US Dept of Energy’s 2007 projections of 150 new coal plants in 2007, plans for 95 have been dropped or put on hold, according to the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign.

The pace with which plans for coal-plants are being put on hold has accelerated in light of recent court actions and anticipated action by the Obama EPA. In February, the US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the Bush era mercury rule. The Obama administration has indicated that it may seek new, stricter limits on mercury from coal plants. And, published reports have indicated that the Obama administration will announce by April 16 that it will begin the process to regulate carbon dioxide, making it further unlikely that there will be new applications for conventional coal plants, which are not designed to capture or control carbon.

Coal ash for Christmas?

(Photo of the Buffalo Creek Flood of 1972.)

No doubt you've heard about the 5.4 million cubic yards of coal ash and sludge dumped on Eastern Tennessee on Dec 22 (Bloomberg, Associated Press, NYTimes). Merry Christmas, Tennesseeans, the arsenic levels of your local water sources are anywhere from 35-300 times the allowable rate. From the Huffington Post article just linked:

"I've never seen levels this high," said Dr. Shea Tuberty, Assistant Professor of Biology at the Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Lab at Appalachian State University. "These levels would knock out fish reproduction ... the ecosystems around Kingston and Harriman are going to be in trouble ... maybe for generations."

The disaster in Tennessee, which TVA is apparently newspeaking as an "ash slide", is just another example of why coal-fired power plants are a persistent threat to public and ecosystem health; too risky as energy sources; and an unwanted source of toxic emissions, like mercury.

In North Carolina, Duke Energy operates 10 coal ash basins, 4 of which are labeled "high hazard" by the state (labels are based on environmental damage should the containment dikes fail, as explained in this excellent report by the Charlotte Observer). We know the degredation to our countryside, our air, and our health, and yet we are building another coal-unit at an estimated ratepayer/taxpayer expense upwards of $2,000,000,000.

There are many, many reasons to move away from coal (how about mountain-top removal coal mining? or climate change?) But, an important question, one of common sense, is this: why handcuff ourselves to an outdated energy source, one that is a terrible, foreseeable waste of state funds, especially when all that money could go towards renewable sources?

The Sierra Club has been opposed to Cliffside expansion since day one. Want to tell the incoming Perdue Administration how you feel about all this? At one of the following public hearings, voice your disapproval and state that Cliffside will not be a "minor" source of toxic emissions:

• 6 p.m. Jan. 22 at Statesville Senior High School, 474 N. Center St. in Statesville.
  


• An initial hearing will be held at 6 p.m. Jan. 15 in Forest City, near the plant, at Chase High School, 1603 Chase High School Road.

Happy New Year - now let's get to work

Alas, the holidays fade away, the egg nog wears off, and we again have public hearings on the Cliffside coal plant. As you know, last month a US Circuit Court Judge ruled that Duke Energy violated the Clean Air Act by not complying with MACT standards for its new coal-unit, currently under construction.

But that was last month, and the wheels turn and life goes on and construction continues; remember, the ruling did not halt construction on the plant. So what's the reality on the ground? You couldn't do any better than Bruce Henderson's analysis at the Charlotte Observer. The quick rundown: Duke is contending that the new coal-unit will be a "minor source" of toxins like mercury. There will be two public hearings on this "minor source" issue - one in Forest City, one in Statesville.

• 6 p.m. Jan. 22 at Statesville Senior High School, 474 N. Center St. in Statesville.


• An initial hearing will be held at 6 p.m. Jan. 15 in Forest City, near the plant, at Chase High School, 1603 Chase High School Road.

For more information, read this article in the Asheville Citizen-Times, which includes instructions on how to mail in your written comments if you are unable to attend.

Monumental EPA ruling on coal plants

In a move that signals the start of our clean energy future, the Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental Appeals Board has ruled that the EPA had no valid reason for refusing to limit carbon dioxide emissions, which cause global warming, from new coal-fired power plants.

(Sierra Club Press Release, Decision)

What's the take home point, you might ask? Carbon dioxide, the principle source of global warming, is a pollutant under the federal Clean Air Act.

Coal plants emit 30% of the nation's greenhouse gas emissions, and this decision will affect all new and proposed plants. What does this mean for the Cliffside unit? Time will tell, but a green economy in NC seems a whole lot closer.

Sierra Club (and petitioners) vs. EPA

On August 19, 2008, the Sierra Club and other environmental organizations won a major court decision on the requirements for pollution monitoring under Title V of the Clean Air Act. The decision issued by the DC Circuit Court reversed a Bush administration regulation that tried to strip away the power of states and localities to require rigorous pollution monitoring from coal plants, refineries and similar industrial polluters. The court found that Title V of the Clean Air Act authorizes state and local agencies to supplement EPA permits with more rigorous monitoring requirements than are required by the federal EPA. (Some federal EPA permits require only one pollution test over the entire 50-year life of a facility!).

Read about it at the NYTimes, the Washington Post, and the Public Record. Also, be sure to check out the Sierra Club press release and the DC Circuit Court's opinion.

A Couple of Great Op-Eds

I direct your attention to a couple of recent op-eds in the Asheville Citizen Times:

Richard Fireman writes about Cliffside and our self-deception in regards to NC air quality:

CEO Jim Rogers’ PR machine manages to get national and international attention by talking green, but when the rubber meets the road we get a new Cliffside power plant that will add 6 million new tons of CO2 to our atmosphere every year. This is the equivalent of 1.5 million new cars...Who owns the air — the atmosphere? Is it Duke Energy? They will claim it if we allow them. To learn more about how you can help, log on to www.stopcliffside.org.

Bill Thomas writes about the Horsepasture River:

I confess that for me personally, it is the majesty and grandeur of the Horsepasture and its surroundings that move my soul and lead me to call for protection and preservation. The time to save something is while you still have it! I and Sierra Club feel strongly that the future welfare of our county depends heavily on protection of our natural assets.

NASA, Climate Change, and Duke Energy (and Jim Rogers)

This past week, an interesting (eg. rather frightening) report was published by leading climate change experts, among them Dr. Jim Hansen of both NASA and the Colombia Earth Institute. As opposed to theoretical models, these researchers used history as their guide.

And the findings, you've probably already guessed, are not so good for the climate.

To study the history of climate change, the researchers drilled core samples from the bottom of the ocean. Then, they compared current atmospheric carbon levels with the levels around the times of past climate disasters.

You can check out the best coverage of the story in the Guardian.

Immediately, the Guardian reported, Hansen et al. called for massive carbon reductions if, "humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilisation developed."

He told representatives of various EU member countries that they'd better slash their carbon emissions to 350ppm (parts per million ). At 550ppm, the EU already has the most stringent carbon controls in the world.

Hansen recently wrote a letter to Duke CEO Jim Rogers, urging him to reconsider construction of the Cliffside Coal Plant Dr. Hansen explains the plant is at the bare minimum a tremendous waste of money as it will have to be shut down in the near future.

In that letter, Hansen urged Jim Rogers to meet and discuss carbon emissions, the role of Duke Power in climate change, and the impact of Cliffside on global warming. As reported in the Washington Post, Rogers accepted. We'll see how productive the meeting really is, but here's hoping the professor can teach something to North Carolina's captain of industry.