Gas Price Bill Could Come With High Costs Away From The Pump

Public News Service-PA
http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/26495-1

(05/17/12) HARRISBURG, Penn. - Supporters say it could save Pennsylvanians money at the pump, but health advocates are waving a red flag. They caution that a gas-price bill scheduled to be debated by a U.S. House committee today comes with a far higher price tag: human health.

The Gasoline Regulations Act(H.B. 4471) would put a panel in place that could reduce Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on greenhouse gas and sulfur emissions from refineries. Ultimately, it could lower air-quality standards for ozone.

Peter Iwanowicz, head of the American Lung Association Healthy Air Campaign, says his group surveyed likely voters in Pennsylvania about the issue.

"We specifically asked whether the EPA should tighten standards to provide cleaner-burning gasoline, and 60 percent of likely voters want stronger standards there."

Iwanowicz says oil producers see the legislation as another chance to increase production and record high profits.

"Big oil has been looking for over two decades to inject the feasibility and cost test into this process. They've been turned back by EPA; they've been turned back by Congress; they've been turned back, in fact, by a Supreme Court decision."

Factors to consider rise above a cheaper gallon of gas, he adds.

"Air pollution makes people sick; it cuts lives short. The last thing we need right now, particularly in Pennsylvania, is a roll-back in clean air protection or blocking of EPA setting new standards to protect public health."

Kentucky Congressman Ed Whitfield, a co-sponsor of the bill, calls it a reality check on the impact federal regulations can have at the pump. Iwanowicz says a more accurate description of the measure is "a wish list for Big Oil."

Survey: New EPA Rules Offer Breath of Fresh Air to PA

Public News Service-PA
http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/25690-1

(04/04/12) HARRISBURG, Pa. - The new, tougher standards for carbon pollution from coal power plants announced by the Environmental Protection Agency are getting strong public support in a new bipartisan survey, and health experts say those stricter rules also may offer key protections to unborn children in Pennsylvania.

The survey was commissioned by the American Lung Association, whose assistant vice president, Peter Iwanowicz, says it shows that more than seven of 10 respondents support the EPA action.

"The fight against carbon pollution has just begun. The EPA has taken this step to address carbon pollution from power plants but, as we saw in our poll, the public expects the EPA to do more when it comes to dealing with power-plant emissions and other pollution problems."

Judy Focareta, a maternal-child nurse in Pittsburgh, says expectant mothers and their unborn babies are especially susceptible to environmental factors which may be better kept in check under the new regulations.

"I think one of the effects that's broadly seen is the increased rate in premature births that is related to poor air quality and increased emissions."

Besides benefits to the unborn, doctors, nurses and scientists say carbon pollution is dangerous for children in general. It raises air temperatures, which worsens the smog pollution which triggers asthma attacks and can permanently reduce lung function in some children.

Focareta applauds the EPA limits and is hopeful the effort will pay off in Pennsylvania.

"While other states have improved their air quality and conversely reduced their premature-birth rates, we have not been able to move that here."

Opponents claim the new regulations will mean higher prices for electricity and may deal a crushing blow to the coal industry. However, the survey found a 2-to-1 majority believes these first-ever limits actually will create jobs rather than destroy them, by encouraging innovation.

Survey results are online at lung.org.

Click here to view this story on the Public News Service RSS site and access an audio version of this and other stories: http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/25690-1

Estudio: Las nuevas reglas de la EPA ofrecen una bocanada de aire fresco a PA

Public News Service-PA
http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/25718-1

(04/04/12) HARRISBURG, Pa. - La Environment Protection Agency (Agencia de Protección Ambiental, EPA) anunció la aplicación de estándares más estrictos para reducir la contaminación de carbono proveniente de las plantas de electricidad que operan con carbón mineral. Estas nuevas normas recibieron un fuerte respaldo de la ciudadanía en una investigación bipartita, y los expertos en asuntos de la salud dicen que esas reglas más severas también pudieran ofrecer protecciones clave para los bebés que aún no nacen en Pennsylvania. El estudio fue comisionado por la American Lung Association (Asociación Pulmonar Americana); Peter Iwano wicz, Vice Presidente Asistente de dicho organismo, dice que el documento muestra que siete de cada diez respuestas respaldan la acción de la EPA.

“La lucha contra la contaminación de carbón apenas empieza. La EPA dio este paso para enfrentar las emisiones de carbón de las plantas eléctricas pero, como decimos en nuestra encuesta, el público espera que la EPA haga más cuando se trate de las emisiones de plantas eléctricas y otros problemas de contaminación.”

Los detractores de las medidas dicen que significarán un aumento de precios en el servicio eléctrico y que podrían atestar un golpe mortal a la industria del carbón. Pero opiniones aparte, la investigación encontró que una mayoría de 2 a 1 piensa que estos límites puestos por primera vez de hecho generarán empleos más que destruirlos, puesto que impulsarán la innovación.

Jody Focareta, enfermera materno-infantil en Pittsburgh, comenta que las madres embarazadas y sus futuros hijos son tan susceptibles a los factores ambientales, que estarán mejor protegidas bajo la nueva regulación.

“Creo que uno de los efectos que se ve más extendido es el incremento en la tasa de nacimientos prematuros que se relaciona con la mala calidad del aire y el aumento de las emisiones.”

Además de los beneficios que representan para los no nacidos, tanto médicos como enfermeras y científicos están de acuerdo en que la contaminación de carbono es peligrosa para los niños en general. Eleva la temperatura del aire, lo cual empeora la polución atmosférica, y esto dispara los ataques de asma además de que puede reducir permanentemente la función pulmonar en algunos niños.

Focareta aplaude los límites impuestos por la EPA y espera que el esfuerzo fructifique en Pennsylvania.

“Mientras otros estados han mejorado la calidad de su aire y revertido el crecimiento de su tasa de nacimientos prematuros, nosotros no hemos podido lograr lo mismo aquí.”

La investigación está disponible en: lung.org.

Click here to view this story on the Public News Service RSS site and access an audio version of this and other stories: http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/25718-1

PA #2 with most toxic air pollution from Power Plants

Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida Lead List of “Toxic 20” States with Most Toxic Air Pollution from Power PlantsWorst States: OH, PA, FL, KY, MD, IN, MI, WV, GA, NC, SC, AL, TX, VA, TN, MO, IL, WI, NH, IA

WASHINGTON (July 20, 2011) — Residents of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida live in states with the most toxic air pollution from coal- and oil-fired power plants, according to an analysis by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The study used publicly-available data in the Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). The analysis, entitled “Toxic Power: How Power Plants Contaminate Our Air and States” was jointly released today by NRDC and Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR).

Among the key findings:

• Nearly half of all the toxic air pollution reported from industrial sources in the United States comes from coal- and oil-fired power plants.
• Power plants are the single largest industrial source of toxic air pollution in 28 states and the District of Columbia.

“Power plants are the biggest industrial toxic air polluters in our country, putting children and families at risk by dumping deadly and dangerous poisons into the air we breathe,” said Dan Lashof, Climate Center Director at NRDC. “Tougher standards are long overdue. Members of Congress who consider blocking toxic pollution safeguards should understand that this literally will cost American children and families their health and lives.”

Despite the health benefits of reducing toxic pollution from power plants, some polluters and members of Congress are seeking to block EPA’s efforts to update public health protections. Last week, two House Committees voted for amendments by Ed Whitfield (R-KY)/Mike Ross (D-AR) and Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) to block for at least a year the EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics standard. These amendments could move to the House floor as early as this week.

Meanwhile, the chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, Fred Upton (R-MI) has vowed to block EPA’s clean air safeguards. One of the nation’s biggest polluters, American Electric Power (AEP) based in Columbus, Ohio has drafted legislation to block the EPA and has argued against EPA’s current efforts.

The states on the “Toxic 20” list (from worst to best) are:

1. Ohio
2. Pennsylvania
3. Florida
4. Kentucky
5. Maryland
6. Indiana
7. Michigan
8. West Virginia
9. Georgia
10. North Carolina
11. South Carolina
12. Alabama
13. Texas
14. Virginia
15. Tennessee
16. Missouri
17. Illinois
18. Wisconsin
19. New Hampshire
20. Iowa

The EPA estimates that the reductions of toxic pollution required by the pending “Mercury and Air Toxics” standard would save as many as 17,000 lives every year by 2015 and prevent up to 120,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms. The safeguards also would avoid more than 12,000 emergency room and hospital visits and prevent 850,000 lost work days every year. These standards are expected to be finalized in November; the agency is taking public comments on its proposal until Aug. 4, 2011.

“Coal pollution is killing Americans,” said Lynn Ringenberg, MD, of Physicians for Social Responsibility. “It is America’s biggest source of toxic air pollution. Air toxics from coal-fired power plants cause cancer, birth defects, and respiratory illness. Just one of those air toxics, mercury, damages the developing brains of fetuses, infants, and small children. It robs our children of healthy neurological development and native intelligence.

“Poisonous power threatens the health of our kids and families. As a pediatrician for over thirty years, I urge us absolutely to support the EPA’s efforts to reduce the health threat from coal.”

The 28 states in which power plants are the leading source of toxic air pollution reported to the TRI are: Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming.

ABOUT THE DATA

The EPA’s Toxic Release inventory, known as the TRI, is a national database of toxic emissions self-reported by industrial sources. This analysis compared TRI emissions from the electric utilities sector to those from other sectors and ranked sources by total emissions by sector. Releases are calculated and self-reported by covered entities. Emissions of key power plant pollutants are reported to the TRI, including mercury, hydrochloric acid, and other hazardous metals.

Top emitting power plants were identified based on toxic emissions reported to TRI. Power plant ownership information was drawn from “Benchmarking Air Emissions of the 100 Largest Electric Power Producers in the United States (2010).” Data on pollution control systems at specific plants was obtained from EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).

For the full methodology, see the analysis “Toxic Power: How Power Plants Contaminate Our Air and States,” which can be found here: http://docs.nrdc.org/air/air_11072001.asp.

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with more than 1.3 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other environmental specialists have worked to protect the world’s natural resources, public health, and the environment. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Livingston, Montana, and Beijing. Visit us at www.nrdc.org