On January 15, a group of utility companies wrote a letter to Lee Zeldin, then still unconfirmed as Trump administration EPA chief. The letter stated:
“Two matters in particular call for immediate action: (1)
regulations on greenhouse gas (‘GHG’) emissions from existing coal-fired and
new natural-gas power plants that mandate a carbon capture technology that has
not been adequately demonstrated and (2) the unprecedented expansion of the
federal regulation of coal combustion residuals (‘CCR’).”
I agree that the first matter requires immediate action
since it is an unrealistic regulation for the reasons they give, that CCS
technology is not yet at the technology maturity level where it can be widely
implemented so mandating it is counterproductive. It would also be very costly
to implement at the scale required to have an effect. We can encourage CCS at
power plants without mandating it. Thus, I agree entirely with the utility
companies on that point.
On point two, the
expansion of the regulation of coal combustion residuals (CCR), coal ash slurry
ponds, is an issue that should be addressed. Specifically, groundwater
pollution from coal ash needs to be better monitored, prevented in the future,
and cleaned up where applicable. I wrote about coal ash slurry pond cleanup in
July 2024, including the plan then by Biden’s EPA led by Michael Regan, to
include groundwater contamination. I still agree with that decision, and I do
not think that it should be rolled back. Why address surface water pollution
and ignore groundwater pollution? There is no compelling reason to address one
and not the other, except perhaps the high cost required for cleanup.
The Biden EPA
also amended the CCR rule to include cleanup requirements at legacy coal ash
impoundments. The letter also asks that those requirements be dropped as well
as requirements not to reuse coal ash for building up land due to its toxicity.
Canary Media reports:
“The vast majority of coal-ash sites nationwide are
contaminating groundwater, companies’ own data shows. Duke Energy has excavated
ash from a number of sites in North Carolina, following criminal charges
related to the 2014 Dan River spill. Talen’s coal ash in Montana is putting the
Northern Cheyenne Tribe at risk. American Electric Power, former owner of the
Gavin plant, bought out the entire town of Cheshire, Ohio, because of pollution
from the plant.”
“You can’t just revoke a rule and replace it with one that’s
friendly to industry,” said {Earthjustice attorney Linda} Evans. “If the
reality is coal ash is contaminating groundwater at nearly every site in the
country, it’s going to be hard for the Trump
administration to write a rule that allows utilities to continue to pollute.”
According to an
article in Grist, Zeldin plans to delegate authority for coal ash cleanup
regulations to states.
“EPA announced that it will encourage states to take over
permitting and enforcement of the coal ash rule.”
Two states, Alabama and Georgia, did delegate authority to
state agencies, but the results were controversial, with the states allowing
the disposal of coal ash in unlined pits hydraulically connected to
groundwater. Thus, they were following state law but not federal law. In most
cases of environmental law state requirements are supposed to meet or exceed
federal standards but in this case, they don’t. EPA granted approval for
Georgia’s program but denied Alabama’s program. EPA also announced it will be
reviewing the requirement to clean up legacy coal ash slurry ponds. The utility
companies got leniency from the Biden EPA to delay clean-up with deadlines far
into the future.
“Because coal ash’s peak contamination levels aren’t reached
until some 70 years after waste is dumped, longer deadlines can only mean less
effective cleanup. “The longer you ignore those sites, the worse the pollution
gets,” Evans said.”
“Evans said, the directive would prohibit the EPA from
requiring a utility to repair a faulty groundwater monitoring system.
“Utilities have gamed the system at some plants by designing monitoring systems
that intentionally miss detecting leakage from a coal ash dump,” she said,
citing a 2022 report by Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project
that alleged a widespread practice among power companies of manipulating
monitoring data to downplay the extent of contamination.”
I am not sure of the accuracy of that statement but if true
it should be corrected. Groundwater monitoring configurations should be
designed to accurately assess current and future groundwater contamination.
Apparently, Earthjustice published a report in 2022 that claimed that some
baseline groundwater wells that were supposed to assess groundwater quality not
affected by coal ash had in fact been affected by coal ash. According to Grist:
“The report also documented the practice of “intrawell”
monitoring, or simply analyzing the data from each well in isolation, in order
to assess changes in contamination levels over time, rather than contrasted
with uncontaminated wells. This method doesn’t work unless the wells aren’t
contaminated to begin with, and is prohibited by EPA guidelines — but the
report found it was in use at 108 coal plants nationwide.”
Zeldin’s EPA is likely to limit coal ash clean up requirements to situations where an imminent threat to public health is occurring, which effectively means that there will be little to no enforcement of the clean up rules, especially those related to groundwater contamination.
References:
Power
companies would rather not clean their toxic messes. Trump’s EPA is granting
their wish. Gautama Mehta. Grist. March 24, 2025. Power
companies would rather not clean their toxic messes. Trump’s EPA is granting
their wish.
Power
companies pressure Trump EPA to roll back rules on toxic coal ash, Canary
Media. Kari Lydersen. January 29, 2025. Power
companies pressure Trump EPA to roll back rules… | Canary Media
No comments:
Post a Comment