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

GOP Member of Congress apologizes TO British Petroleum

This morning a Republican Member of Congress apologized to BP. Yes, you heard it right. Congressman Joe Barton (R, TX) apologized to British Petroleum CEO Tony Hayward because the White House got BP to create a $20 billion escrow account to pay for the ecological disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.

I’m astonished. Rep. Barton and his Republican colleagues are more upset that President Obama is forcing BP to pay for its devastation than they are at BP for pouring hundreds of millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf.

Not one Republican Member of Congress from PA has said they disagree with Barton. So we’re going to give every Senator and Representative to answer this simple question: Whose side are you on? BP or the American people?

Click here to send your Senators and Representative an email asking them to take a stand: http://www.keystoneprogress.org/page/speakout/pabarton

Barton is the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee. He should be overseeing BP and other drillers, but instead of holding them accountable, he’s apologizing to them. Perhaps it’s because of the millions in contributions flowing from the oil companies into their campaign coffers.

Here’s exactly what Barton said this morning:

“I'm ashamed of what happened in the White House yesterday. I think it is a tragedy in the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown -- in this case a $20 billion shakedown -- with the attorney general of the United States, who is legitimately conducting a criminal investigation and has every right to do so to protect the American people, participating in what amounts to a $20 billion slush fund that's unprecedented in our nation's history, which has no legal standing, which I think sets a terrible precedent for our nation's future.

"I'm only speaking for myself. I'm not speaking for anyone else, but I apologize," Barton added. "I do not want to live in a county where anytime a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong, [it is] subject to some sort of political pressure that, again, in my words, amounts to a shakedown."

I’m angry at Barton. But I’m also angry that not one Republican Member of Congress has repudiated what Barton said. Email Congress NOW: http://www.keystoneprogress.org/page/speakout/pabarton

Michael Morrill
for the Keystone Progress Team
www.twitter.com/keystoneprogres

How are progressive organizations responding to Palin? Sierra Club

McCain VP Pick Completes Shift to Bush Energy Policy

Washington, DC: Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope issues the following statement in reaction to Senator McCain's pick of Governor Sarah Palin for Vice President:

"With the pick of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin for his running mate, John McCain's race towards the Bush administration's failed energy policy is now complete."

"John McCain was once willing to stand up to his own party, but now that he is running for President, he supports the same Bush policies and powerful special interests that put us in the grip of the oil companies. One of the last remaining independent policies putting him at odds with Bush was his opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, yet he has now picked a running mate who has opposed holding Big Oil accountable and been dismissive of alternative energy while focusing her work on more oil drilling in a wildlife refuge and off of our coasts."

"Palin herself told Roll Call earlier this week, 'When I look every day, the big oil company's building is right out there next to me, and it's quite a reminder that we should have mutually beneficial relationships with the oil industry.'" (Roll Call, 8/25/08)

"No one is closer to the the oil industry than Governo Palin. Along with her support for drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge and off our coasts, she also opposes a windfall profit tax on the richest oil companies. Under her leadership, Alaska has sued the federal governent for considering listing the Polar Bear as a threatened species even though global warming threatens its very existence.

She has been dismissive of alternative energy, saying "alternative-energy solutions are far from imminent and would require more than 10 years to develop" (The Post and Courier Charleston, SC, 8/16/08), when in reality it is the oil she would like to drill that would take a decade to bring to market."

"Senator McCain has lost any chance of having a balanced or moderate ticket with this choice and has instead opted for the same, business-as-usual reliance on the outdated oil companies that has been the hallmark of the Bush-Cheney administration. On the third anniversay of the hurricane that knocked loose oil rigs and spilled millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf Coast that is bracing for another hit, McCain is sending a terribly indifferent message by selecting a candidate who only repeats Big Oil's talking points."

"Senators Obama and Biden share the common goals of putting America back to work by building a balanced clean energy economy, taking on Big Oil and meeting the challenge of global warming. Under their leadership, our economy can become stronger, and our world cleaner and safer."

Paid for by the Sierra Club Political Committee, http://www.sierraclub.org/, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

How are progressive organizations responding to Palin? League of Conservation Voters

Choice of Palin Promises Failed Energy Policies of the Past

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today expressed its deep disappointment with John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate.

“Unfortunately, with her support for drilling in the Arctic Refuge and off our coasts, Governor Palin will simply continue the failed policies of the Bush-Cheney Administration and their Big Oil friends – policies that could make us even more dependent on foreign oil," LCV President Gene Karpinski said.

Governor Palin characterizes McCain’s flip-flop on drilling offshore as a positive step in his transformation from maverick to Big Oil's best friend.

She has implored McCain to change his position against drilling in the Arctic – something she will have plenty of opportunities to pursue as his running mate.

In addition to supporting backward-looking energy policies, Governor Palin has also opposed a crucial clean water initiative, sued the federal government for listing polar bears as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, and opposed other important wildlife protection measures.

This ticket now stands in even starker contrast to the visionary energy plan laid out by Senator Obama last night, which will create millions of new jobs, improve our national security, and reduce global warming pollution.

“Now more than ever, America is in need of real vision and leadership to bring us a new clean energy future, and the McCain-Palin ticket offers nothing of the sort.”

How to Stop a Tire Burning Plant in PA

HOW TO STOP A TIRE BURNING PLANT IN PENNSYLVANIA

What does an urban community do when it is assaulted by plans to build the world largest dedicated tire-burning plant in a downtown residential neighborhood?

It gets PISSED!

Erie Renewable Energy, LLC think it knows a rust-belt sucker when it sees one. A miniscule 60 jobs on a KOZ brown-field are proposed for the site in order to place itself as an electricity provider when the PA electricity rate-caps come off in 2010. (Can you say windfall profits?)

A grass-roots organization named K.E.E.P (Keep Erie’s Environment Protected) formed in Erie in the summer of 2007 to fight this proposed environmental monstrosity in the face of a community revolt and (expected) local governmental inertia.

Environmental expert Mike Ewall, in conjunction with the local Green Party in Erie, has assisted in part with the formation of a grassroots organization that has taken the town by storm.
Here’s what the folks in Erie are saying:

'If this project is developed as planned, we will be faced with potentially having to move our processing plant and likely our distribution plant south of Erie and possibly Erie County for the sake of maintaining food safety and product integrity.”

This quote comes from Bruce Kern, a food processing company owner near the proposed tire-to-toxic-death plant. K.E.E.P. has now to date 29 letters from local business in clear opposition to the construction of the proposed tire-burning plant.

The proposed tire-burning plant filed for its air-quality permit, a signal important hurdle in being granted a go-ahead by the PA DEP in December of 2007. In its application, Erie Renewable Energy (since when are tires renewable?) said its operation would be officially listed as a “major source of hazardous air pollutants” (HAP). The application goes on to reveal that it is designated as a Title V polluter which will produce an estimated (on a good day) over 1,500 tons of pollution each year in the Erie community, translating into just over 4 tons of gas and particulate matter per day. This is in conjunction with two other Title V polluters in the Erie city limits already in operation.

Does the Erie community need this kind of “business investment?”

'It's my home. It's my neighborhood. It's my city. I think I need better assurances than they have given so far,' said Dzuricky, an East Sixth Street resident.

'We are not going away,' Dzuricky said. 'We are still mobilizing. We are in this for the long haul.'

Tim Reim, representative of the local Green Party, and other K.E.E.P. officials also challenged the contention that the type and volume of pollutants the plant would emit would not represent a health threat.

Reim stated, 'How do you dump 229 tons of particulate matter containing things like dioxins in the air and tell the community it is not going to have an effect?'

'Erie must be in the forefront of good environmental standards,' he said. 'This is not an anti-business resolution. This is a pro-environment resolution. Are we willing to jeopardize future businesses, and most importantly are we willing to jeopardize our own citizens for 60 jobs? I'm interested in the health, safety and welfare of residents,' Cappabianca said. 'I want to protect the air in Erie.'

These are the words of our courageous City Councilperson, Pat Cappabianca, backed by a second Erie Councilperson, Jessica Horan-Kunco, in response to a Continuous Emissions Monitoring System Ordinance (CEMS) crafted by Mike Ewall to address the environmental needs of the citizens of Erie.

Six separate surrounding local township governments have publicly stated their opposition to the construction of the tire-burning plant.

And yet the corporate criminals who place profit over people persist in its plans to build the plant in Erie. Its original cost projection has sky-rocketed from an estimated $90 million to now $350 million, while shedding possibly 30 of its projected 60 long-term jobs.

Concerns about possible tire fires, rail and truck traffic issues, local ammonia on-site storage and local tourism, along with regional grape-growers concerns continue to beleaguer the plans of the proposed tire-burning plant’s local construction and out-of-town investors.

K.E.E.P. has had enormous success in garnering support among its many aroused citizenry. Community inspired raffles, fundraisers and anonymous donors have given a growing group of dedicated activists the incentive to continue the fight.

A recent Erie City zoning hearing board ruling which found against a preliminary approval of ERE’s plans has further enhanced K.E.E.P.’s standing in the community as a viable force against the forces of environmental degradation.

In addition, the Erie County Medical Society released a statement this last month which read in part: “…the Erie County Medical Society is concerned that simply meeting DEP standards will not adequately define the health risk to our citizens over time. It is our position that an independent health impact assessment be obtained to further delineate the burning facility.
In other words, an independent health impact assessment study of the data should be conducted before the PA DEP rules to give ERE, LLC its valued air-quality permit.

What can we do to help K.E.E.P. in Erie? Go to: http://www.stopburningtires.com/
Or contact Tim Reim , 2708 W. 33rd Street, Erie, PA 16506(814) 838-1193, (814) 572-6653 – cell, Deaconb60@Hotmail.com

McCain: Not Comfortable With Nuclear Waste Through Arizona, But Just Fine for Pennsylvania

www.sierraclub.org
McCain Nuclear Plan Would Bring At Least 6,349 Casks of Dangerous, Highly Radioactive Nuclear Waste Through Pennsylvania

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania—As John McCain is paying a visit today to the Enrico Fermi nuclear generating station in Monroe, Michigan he can be expected to tout his costly plan to build 45 new nuclear plants by 2030 and 55 more after that. This plan would effectively double the number of nuclear reactors and the amount of dangerous high-level nuclear waste that would need to be transported across the country.

The Sierra Club is today calling attention to the YouTube video that surfaced earlier this year which shows John McCain clearly saying—while shaking his head ‘no’—that he would not be comfortable with nuclear waste traveling through his own home state of Arizona on its way to the unsafe and unproven Yucca Mountain site—something for which John McCain has been one of the Senate’s biggest proponents.

The video can be viewed at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPlaHQCKc34

Transcript (beginning at 1:14): Interviewer: What about the transportation? Would you be comfortable with nuclear waste coming through Arizona on its way, you know going through Phoenix, on its way to uh Yucca Mountain? McCain (Shaking Head): “No, I would not. No, I would not.”

“Why does John McCain think its okay for hundreds of tons of dangerous nuclear waste to go through Pennsylvania but yet too dangerous to go through his own state?” said Hillary Bright, Sierra Club. “John McCain simply can’t have it both ways when it comes to the nuclear waste issue. Right now he supports running hundreds of shipments of dangerous nuclear waste through Pennsylvania and sticking Nevadans with 77,000 tons of it forever, while at the same time saying he’s uncomfortable with it going through his own backyard for even a day.”

The Sierra Club also pointed out that the very nuclear plant that Senator McCain is visiting today once suffered a partial meltdown. Indeed, a book about the incident is entitled “We Almost Lost Detroit.”

John McCain supports the Bush administration’s plan to store our nation’s nuclear waste at the unsafe and unproven Yucca mountain site—a white elephant that has wasted two decades and billions of taxpayer dollars. A plan to transport the waste released by the State of Nevada based on Department of Energy plans details the likely rail, truck, and barge routes that high-level waste would take on its way to Yucca Mountain. Approximately 6,349 casks of waste would travel through Pennsylvania. Each cask would transport between 2 and 15 tons of high-level waste. In total, the dangerous waste would travel through more than 703 counties in 45 states. More than 123 million people live along the proposed truck routes alone. And more than 10 million people live within a half-mile of the proposed routes.

See link for Proposed Pennsylvania Routes: http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/maps2002/roadrail/pa.htm

“John McCain is asking both Pennsylvanians and Nevadans to gamble with our safety, yet it’s not even a bet he’s willing to take for Arizona,” said Hillary Bright, Sierra Club. “Just like with subsidies—he’s against them, except when it comes to nuclear power and so-called ‘clean coal’—John McCain wants to have his cake and eat it too on the nuclear waste issue. He’s all for moving thousands of tons highly radioactive waste through communities across the country, except when it comes to his home state of Arizona.”

In addition to being dangerous, John McCain’s nuclear plan is a costly distraction from the real solutions to global warming. Based on cost estimates for new nuclear power plants put forth by utilities like Florida Power and Light, McCain’s plan for 100 new nuclear plants could cost more than $1 TRILLION.

Over the years McCain has cast vote after vote in favor of Yucca Mountain and billions in subsidies for the nuclear industry, yet he has consistently voted against renewable energy and has refused to support extending key clean energy incentives that are in danger of expiring at the end of this year. While twice trying to extend these incentives in recent months, they failed by just a single vote. Every other Senator voted on these clean energy incentives, but McCain was nowhere to be found. Failing to extend these incentives could throw 116,000 people out of work in the wind and solar industries alone and sacrifice billions in lost economic growth.

Barack Obama, by contrast, opposes storing nuclear waste at the Yucca Mountain site. With regards to the role of nuclear power in general, Obama’s energy plan released yesterday states:

“Before an expansion of nuclear power is considered, key issues must be addressed including: security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation.”

Declare Your Independence From Big Oil

From our friends at Clean Water Action

Declare Your Independence From Big Oil
Eight years of increased oil production has done nothing to reduce gas prices. Instead we are faced with high gas prices for consumers and fat profits for the Big Oil companies.
The only way to free ourselves from expensive oil is to get off oil.
Read more or sign our petition and add your voice to thousands of others who oppose drilling off our most pristine coasts and in our Alaska National Wildlife Refuge.

Al Gore's Call for All-Renewables by 2008

Seems to be the time for ten-year energy plans:


http://www.wecansolveit.org/

The Pickens Plan

T. Boone Pickens has decided to put part of his oil-derived billions into finding energy solutions. What's he talking about doing? Massive solar and wind investment, using natural gas for vehicles and virtually eliminating gasoline. And all by 2018!

If an uber-capitalist like Pickens is suggesting these solutions, it's possible that we might see some serious changes in energy production. Of course, he also wants to use nuclear and coal, so it's not as if Pickens has suddenly joined the Green Party.

Let's reserve judgment until the entire plan comes out. In the meantime, here's the Pickens video:



http://www.pickensplan.com/