In late June, Maine senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins voted for our health when they voted against a proposal to block the Environmental Protection Agency's Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) for power plants. The new standards, finalized in December 2011, are the first to limit mercury and other toxic emissions. (Never mind that the Clean Air Act amendments mandating the creation of those standards were passed 20 years ago!)
According to the EPA, MATS would reduce emissions of heavy metals, including mercury, arsenic, chromium, and nickel, as well as acid gases and sulfur dioxide. All of these are known or suspected to cause everything from certain cancers to asthma, bronchitis, and respiratory illness. Oil- and coal-fired power plants are the largest remaining source of mercury emissions into the air, and from there into the water, where toxins pollute water sources and fish populations. The EPA estimates that once the new rules are implemented, the human health savings will be between $37 billion and $90 billion per year.
Apparently these facts fell on some deaf ears. In early 2012, Republican senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma introduced a bill to "disapprove" of MATS — thereby nullifying both its force and effect. In an opinion piece published at CNN.com, Inhofe called MATS "the centerpiece of President Obama's war on coal. . . . this rule will destroy jobs and cause energy prices to skyrocket."
Maine's Republican senators rejected this.
In its own defense, the EPA claims that MATS will create 46,000 short-term and 8000 long-term jobs, that upgrades will not lead to utility-rate increases, and that the total national cost of this rule will be under $10 billion.
Three plants in Maine are covered by the new standards — the oil-fired Wyman plant in Yarmouth (see "This is Why We're So $%&@^# Hot," by Christian MilNeil, July 29, 2011), as well as ones in Rumford (coal) and Ashland (oil). They, along with about 1400 other plants, have four years to comply with the new rules.
"Certainly, the bulk of mercury pollution comes from coal-fired power plants, and Maine gets a lot of 'tailpipe' pollution from those out-of-state power plants," says Ben Seel, a clean air organizer for the advocacy organization Environment Maine. "The effects of the mercury pollution in Maine are reflected in statewide advisories from the Maine Bureau of Health, which recommend that pregnant women, women of childbearing age, and young children limit their fish consumption based on the type of fish they consume."
Another nearby plant that may have to upgrade its existing pollution controls or install new ones to be in accordance with MATS is the Schiller Station in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. This coal power plant — visible from the bridge that crosses into Maine — recently came under fire from both the Maine and New Hampshire chapters of the Sierra Club, which claim that Schiller is polluting Portsmouth and Southern Maine with high levels of sulfur dioxide (SO2). The Schiller Station will violate new SO2 regulations when they go into effect, the Sierra Club says.
However, "New Hampshire has a mercury-reduction law in place," says Martin Murray, a spokesman for power plant owner Public Service of New Hampshire. "We are in compliance with that law." He also notes that in addition to replacing one of three coal-burning boilers with a wood-burning one, Schiller has begun mixing cocoa-bean shells (cast off from a nearby Lindt chocolate factory) into its remaining coal-firing boilers. "This is some evidence of our creativity and our willingness to look at . . . addressing some of the environmental issues," Murray says.
When and if "federal laws go in place that require us to do more," he adds, "we anticipate being able to be in compliance."
Power plants face challenges on many fronts. Yet another pollution standard is currently under consideration at the EPA — the proposed Carbon Pollution Standard, which has garnered a record-breaking 2.2 million supportive comments nationwide (including more than 15,000 from Maine). The public comment period for that rule is now closed; the EPA's timeline for finalizing it is unknown.
Presidential Memorandum -- Flexible Implementation of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards Rule
MEMORANDUM FOR THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SUBJECT: Flexible Implementation of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards Rule
Today's issuance, by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), of the final Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule for power plants (the "MATS Rule") represents a major step forward in my Administration's efforts to protect public health and the environment.
First Mercury, Air Toxics Standards Imposed on U.S. Power Plants
WASHINGTON, DC, December 21, 2011 (ENS) - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today issued the first national standards that regulate power plant emissions of mercury and toxic air pollutants such as arsenic, nickel, selenium, cyanide and acid gases. Exposure to these emissions has been linked to developmental disorders and respiratory illnesses
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told reporters on a conference call that the rule "has been 20 years in the making." The rule is "a great victory of public health, especially for the health of our children," declared Jackson, who said that her 15-year-old son spent his first Christmas in the hospital struggling to breathe. "Millions of families, including my own, will benefit."
[...]
Inhofe has called for an investigation by the EPA Inspector General of the process the agency used to finalize the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards.
Other elected officials support the new standards. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said, "Today, the President has done the right thing by ignoring the false claims of a narrow special interest and siding with the public health and the public good. The new EPA mercury standards will save countless lives and improve the quality of life for millions. The new rules will also accelerate the country's move away from heavily polluting coal power plants to cleaner energy sources that will continue to stimulate investment and economic activity long into the future."
pro_se -- what the heck is the all-time record high up there? (113 here, highest last year 110) -- http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?site=tsa&zmx=1&zmy=1&map.x=133&map.y=82 -- "Late afternoon [today] -- Isolated showers and thunderstorms. Mostly sunny and hot, with a high near 113. South southwest wind around 10 mph. Chance of precipitation is 20%." (reporting 109 at 2:53 pm CDT)
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
