Now that spring is breaking out, whatís not to love about ìClear Skiesî? One thing, maybe: George W. Bush has
slapped the term on his latest attempt to sell Americans on ìmarket-basedî
environmental cleanup and the virtues of fossil fuels.
oil and markets rule the big skies of Texas. Now with his federal initiative
--- aimed at retooling the Clean Air Act and its regulatory style --- heís
sending clouds over New York and its environmental movement.
Skies on Earth Day, April 22, in the Adirondack town of Wilmington. The choice
of stage helped George Patakiís act during a gubernatorial election year, but
Bush sought wider political gains by focusing on a regional scourge: acid rain.
ambitious and comprehensive. A White House backgrounder says the approach will
ìreplace a cycle of endless litigation with rapid and certain improvements in
air quality.
would:
percent, to 3 million tons in 2018;
percent, to 1.7 million tons in 2018;
to 15 tons in 2018;
18 percent over the next decade.
thereís the recurrent date 2018, suggesting that Clear Skies actually means Go
Slow. Then thereís stealth language like ìgreenhouse gas intensity,î i.e. the
ratio of greenhouse gas output to GDP. Attacking intensity as opposed to absolute
levels of greenhouse gases could have a perverse effect. Thus a recent Pew
Center on Global Climate Change report says Bushís ì18 percent reduction in
emissions intensity
controls --- for example, forcing the installation of anti-pollution equipment
--- with ìcap-and-trade,î a.k.a. ìpollution trading.î Cap-and-trade would allow
the operator of a dirty plant to buy unused credits from the operator of a
cleaner plant. Such deal-making might lead to lower emissions
to keep on polluting, cap-and-trade can harm local environments and
populations.
relax some current standards. Take one of the worst: mercury, a pollutant that
affects the nervous system and is especially harmful to fetuses and young
children. A Sierra Club rebuttal to Clear Skies notes that under current law
and regulations, mercury emissions could be cut ìto between five and 15 tons by
2008, as much as a 90 percent reduction per plant.î By contrast, says the Club,
Bush would cut mercury emissions by only half as much, and take longer to do
it.
agenda-item: Bush is making a sneak attack on ìNew Source Reviewî or NSR, a
powerful regulatory anti-pollution device.
and later amendments, NSR was aimed at phasing out old dirty power plants. Itís
supposed to work like this: When an old plant is ìretiredî or changed over to
new technology, the new facility must conform to the latest standards. NSR does
allow for routine maintenance.
Some environmentalists and regulators charge that utilities sometimes do major
renovations under the guise of ìmaintenance and repair.î For example, earlier
this year, New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed suit against
Niagara Mohawk (NiMo) and NRG Energy Inc., charging their Dunkirk and Huntley
coal-fired power plants in Western New York were violating the Clean Air Act by
exceeding current emissions limits. (The plants, which NiMo owned and operated
for years, were sold to NRG in 1999.)
NiMo carried out ìmajor modifications at the power plants,î including the
replacement of a turbine and an upgrade of a boiler. These modifications, said
Spitzer, triggered New Source Review; thus NiMo and NRG Energy should have
brought the plants into compliance with the new regs, or shut them down. (An
NRG spokesperson supplied us a written statement from the company. NRG, says
the statement, ìhas been working diligentlyî with NiMo and state regulators
toward an out-of-court solution.)
taken legal action against Rochester Gas and Electricís Russell Station, a
coal-fired plant in Greece. Russell Station is a small plant and does not
contribute much pollution, says RG&E spokesperson Mike Power. He adds
RG&E has done only routine maintenance at Russell and therefore has not
stepped over the regulatory line. In any case, says Power, RG&E is still in
discussions with Spitzerís office.
it close? Will it be made cleaner? Power says it could be converted to
low-sulfur coal or refitted with catalytic devices to remove oxides of
nitrogen, etc.
shrewdly,
the new White House initiative doesnít dwell on NSR.
thorough on this point, however. In a recent New York Times op-ed, for example, A. Denny Ellerman and Paul L.
Joskow of MITís Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research launch a
full-frontal assault on NSR. The concept, say Ellerman and Joskow, is ìan
outdated and obstructive feature of the Clean Air Actî that ìnever made much
sense.î They fall back on a market syllogism: Itís difficult and expensive to
build new plants. Itís relatively easy and cheap to maintain and upgrade old
ones. Therefore, the electric utilities are prone to keep the old plants up and
running. And that inclination, it is suggested, should be our command.
focus international attention on the Adirondacks.
ponds are especially vulnerable. The region is downwind from industrial
pollution sources --- including old fossil fuel plants in the Ohio Valley and
Great Lakes region (like the Huntley and Dunkirk plants) that were ìgrandfatheredî
by federal law. And Adirondack soils and bedrock donít have the alkaline
ìbuffersî which chemically neutralize the acidity.
is severe. Studies done for the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation in the 1980s found that 25 percent of Adirondack lakes and ponds
were heavily affected, and that almost half were at great risk. Anti-pollution
efforts have changed the data for certain pollutants --- but Adirondack waters
are still in mortal danger.
of Whiteface Mountain, he widened a chasm in the statewide environmental
movement.
Adirondack Council, which stood with Bush at the Whiteface photo-op. (Also on
this side are the Nature Conservancy and the Student Conservation Association,
both of which Bush thanked in his remarks, plus some other fishing and hunting
organizations.)
justifies his groupís support. Clear Skies, he says, ìhas the fastest cuts,
itís the least expensive, and itís way to get the Midwestern plants to agree.î
The initiative, he says, is very close to a bill the Council supported in the
mid-1990s, one drafted by Senator Daniel P. Moynihan.
movement? Sheehan turns the question around. Some national groups, he charges,
are reflexively anti-Bush and will avoid doing anything that gives the man
credit. ìAsking for ëperfectí is a good way to get nothing,î says Sheehan. Itís
ìgratifyingî that someone is doing
something in Washington, he says.
Sierra Club --- one of the groups Sheehan criticizes.
Sierra Club spokesperson John Stouffer, referring to the Adirondack Council and
friends, ìseems to be to move to the lowest common denominator to pass
criticisms for Clear Skies, though. He acknowledges the Bush proposal mirrors
the old Moynihan bill; but both, he says, ìwould step up reductions very
slowly.î The problem, says Stouffer, is that the Moynihan bill, now almost a
decade old, is based on a now-obsolete understanding of the air-quality
problems we face.
this issue, according to Stouffer. Allied groups, he says, include
Environmental Advocates, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the League of
Conservation Voters, the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG), the
Adirondack Mountain Club, and the American Lung Association.
US Senator Jim Jeffords (Independent-Vermont) as an alternative to Bush. The
Jeffords bill, S.556, would mandate deeper reductions in sulfur and nitrogen
compounds. Most important, it also would cut carbon dioxide emissions --- a
greenhouse gas the Bush plan conspicuously underplays.
Lung Association is a stand-out on this issue; its involvement backs up John
Stoufferís reminder that clean air policies are about ìpublic health threatsî
as well as acidified lakes.
NYPIRG, the Lung Association issued a report in 1999 that detailed the
problems. Dirty Power on the Rise in New
York says this state ìhas the dubious distinction of having some of the
most unhealthful air to breathe in the nation.î The New York City area is worst
off. But smog and ground-level ozone are troublesome statewide, as is
ìparticulate matterî pollution from fossil-fuel power plants and diesel trucks
and buses.
linked particulate pollution with premature deathÖ aggravation of asthma, and
decreased lung functionÖ In New York State alone, over 3,000 lives are cut
short each year due to fine particulates.î The report draws special attention
to mercury. ìBenefiting from the Clean Air Act loophole, New Yorkís 21 dirtiest
power plants released over 2,000 pounds of mercury between 1995 and 1997,î it
says.
list of 21. Its sulfur dioxide emissions, to cite one category, are around
one-third those of the Huntley plant --- but still nothing to sniff at. And
donít forget, weíre downwind of the Dunkirk and Huntley plants, and lots more
like them in the Midwest.
<ding>n
Comments for "Full of holes" (0)
City Newspaper is not responsible for the content of these comments. City Newspaper reserves the right to remove comments at their discretion.
No comments have been posted. Be the first and add one below.
Leave A Comment
Respond on Your Blog
Create an Account
or
Login
If you have a City Account you can not only post comments, but you can also respond to articles in your own City Blog. It's just another way to make your voice heard.