The Environmental Protection Agency is moving to scale back limits on toxic emissions from coal-burning power plants, clearing the way for them to emit more hazardous pollutants, such as mercury. Advocates are warning that rolling back limits could harm human health and drive up health care costs. Stephanie Sy discussed more with John Walke of the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Amna Nawaz:
The Environmental Protection Agency is scaling back limits on toxic emissions from coal-burning power plants, clearing the way for them to emit more hazardous pollutants like mercury.
Stephanie Sy has more on these changes.
Stephanie Sy:
That’s right, Amna.
In a statement today, the EPA said the deregulatory action will ensure affordable, dependable energy for American families and restore American energy dominance. Public health advocates are warning that rolling back limits on mercury and other hazardous air pollutants would harm human health and ultimately drive up health care costs too.
To get more on that and the environmental perspective, I’m joined by John Walke from the Natural Resources Defense Counsel, or NRDC.
John, thank you for taking the time to join the “News Hour.”
As you know, the administration can’t really roll back all the mercury restrictions, which courts have upheld under the Clean Air Act since 2012, right? So, what is the Trump administration doing exactly and what do you think is the ultimate goal?
John Walke, Natural Resources Defense Council:
The Trump EPA today rolled back safer limits on mercury pollution by 70 percent. They rolled back safer limits on toxic soot pollution by two-thirds, and they rolled back any need for continuous emissions monitors.
They claim affordability, but in the fine print of their own document, they admit that this repeal will have no impact on electricity prices, and indeed the safer limits and better monitoring would have had no impact on electricity prices.
Stephanie Sy:
Now, we did ask a representative with the Trump administration’s EPA to join us. They declined, at least for today, but they pretty much share the power industry’s perspective on this, which is that the additional regulations Biden’s EPA put forth were harmful to the coal industry and energy security.
The head of America’s Power issued a statement today that stated that — quote — “Repealing the 2024 rule helps prevent premature retirements of coal plants and strengthens grid reliability at a critical moment.”
John, how much of a lifeline does this rule change give to the coal industry, which has been on the wane for many years? And what are the greater repercussions of that?
John Walke:
No lifeline at all, actually.
EPA, again, in the fine print, found that this would have no impact on coal plant retirements. And the Biden EPA, when it strengthened the standards, also found it would have no impact on retirements. The truth is that the coal industry has faced headwinds from competition with cleaner renewable energy from plants that burn methane gas.
And there has been a steady downward spiral of electricity generated from coal over the past decade. And that will continue notwithstanding this attack on health safeguards and clean air protections.
Stephanie Sy:
We have seen the Trump administration strip away greenhouse gas emission limits as well. But what makes this EPA rule different, from what I understand, John, is, this directly impacts human health?
Remind us what the science tells us about exposure to mercury, its impacts on the human body, particularly babies and developing fetuses, and what you see as truly at stake here.
John Walke:
What’s at stake is more mercury emissions that are a brain poison. And they poison and harm the developing brains of the fetus, of young children, babies, children all the way up to 12 or later, actually.
So it is causing learning deficiencies. It is causing I.Q. lost. And that’s in addition to all the other health hazards from rolling back the toxic soot pollution limit, which contributes to cancer and birth defects and infertility, miscarriages and much more.
Stephanie Sy:
You mentioned that the amendments put forth by the Biden administration included a requirement for so-called continuous emissions monitoring at power plants. That goes away with this rule change under Trump. Talk about the significance of that.
John Walke:
I was even floored by this when I read EPA’s documents today.
They admit in the fine print that eliminating a continuous emissions monitor at a coal plant — and there are about 200 in the United States — will save that coal plant $14,000. Now, coal plants and coal companies in this country have revenues of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars.
And they are saving coal plants $14,000 per year for each monitor. The truth is that Americans would have gotten far more benefit and transparency from requiring continuous monitors that show hourly emissions of toxic pollution, which in turn drives better reductions in pollution and better compliance.
The Trump administration wanted to eliminate all of those goods in order to save $14,000.
Stephanie Sy:
That is John Walke with the NRDC.
John, thank you for joining us.
John Walke:
Thank you, Stephanie.
