Lawmakers on the House Science Technology and Energy Committee heard nearly three hours of testimony today on the most recent bill to reduce mercury emissions.Mercury is a neurotoxin and New Hampshire lakes have some of the highest levels of mercury in the nation. The bill has wide ranging support, from the Governor to environmental groups to the state's largest utility, Public Service of New Hampshire. But it is also has its critics.
New Hampshire Public Radio’s Rebecca Kaufman has more.
The main source of mercury in the state is Public Service of New Hampshire's coal burning power plants.
The Merrimack Station in Bow alone emits more than 120 pounds of mercury a year.
Previous bills sought to reduce mercury emissions from PSNH’s plants by 50 percent by the year 2009.
The new plan makes no cuts until the year 2013.
At that point, emissions would be reduced by at least 80 percent.
This would be done by installing technology called “wet scrubbers†at the two units at the Merrimack Station.
Scrubbers are not only effective at reducing mercury…they are also expected to cut sulfur dioxide emissions by 90 percent.
That additional benefit is the key ingredient that makes the scrubbers affordable. Right now, PSNH is forced to buy sulfur dioxide credits from cleaner plants.
Bob Scott, director of the air resources division at the department of environmental services, said this paves the way for PSNH to offset the cost of the scrubbers.
"There are significant SO 2 reductions required at the facilities, they currently meet those by buying SO 2 credits on the national market, because of the cost of those credits, PSNH would be able to pay the control equipment off by not having to pay for those credits, which is a wonderful incentive."
Scott says the cost of installing the scrubbers would be around 197 million dollars.
And he predicts about a 20 dollar rate increase for customers when the technology is first installed in the year 2013.
Those environmental gains seem too far off for one coalition of environmental and public health groups. They are pressing for a 90 percent reduction in emissions by the year 2009.
A member of the coalition, Nancy Girard, with the Conservation Law Foundation, says a hard look at the numbers is in order.
"A careful analysis must be performed of the economic benefit to the rate payer of installing scrubber technology as soon as possible by 2009 as compared to delaying the installation to 2013."
But supporters of the later target date say there is no feasible alternative.
One key advantage the mercury bill has this year that was absent in the past, is the support of Public Service of New Hampshire.
Donna Gamache is with PSNH.
Gamache said that due to lengthy engineering and permitting processes that the new technology will require, pushing up the date is unrealistic.
"Its very good to have all the interests come before the legislature and tell you what they need to have done what they’d love to have done what their list is and that drives good legislation but its very different when you’re the party that has to be accountable and comply with the end result, whatever we come up with we have to be in full compliance."
Several environmental groups are joining PSNH in support of the bill including the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests, the New Hampshire Lakes Association, and the Audubon Society.
Joel Harrington policy director at the Audubon Society told committee members that if there was a technology out there that could achieve significant reductions before 2013 Audubon would support it.
"Wet scrubber technology is one of the only that we know to date at this particular plant at the Bow plant that would work to comply with such deadlines that are worked to being addressed in this legislation, we want to support a proposal that is achievable and not be part of something that at best sounds good but is not feasible."
In a nod to those who would like earlier reductions, the bill provides economic incentives for PSNH to clean up sooner, if it can.
For NHPR news, I’m RK.
