State lawmakers and environmental groups have unveiled a plan they’re calling a “break-through compromise†to reduce mercury emissions in the state. If the full legislature approves the plan, it will cut mercury emissions at coal burning power plants 80-percent by 2013.
New Hampshire Public Radio Correspondent Doug MacPherson has more.
MERCURY IS A POWERFUL NEUROTOXIN. THE BIGGEST SOURCE OF MERCURY IS COAL FIRED ELECTRIC PLANTS. BUT PEOPLE ARE OFTEN SURPRISED TO LEARN THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS YET TO IMPOSE ANY RESTRICTION ON HOW MUCH MERCURY POWER PLANTS CAN EMIT. MERCURY CONCENTRATIONS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE LAKES ARE AMONG THE HIGHEST IN THE NATION. EVEN SMALL AMOUNTS OF MERCURY CAN BE HIGHLY DANGEROUS. 1/3 OF A GRAM CAN CONTAMINATE ALL THE FISH IN A 25 ACRE LAKE.
P-S-N-H’S COAL FIRED PLANT IN BOW EMITS MORE THAN 120-POUNDS OF MERCURY A YEAR.
NEW HAMPSHIRE HAS BEEN TRYING TO REACH AGREEMENT ON A STATE IMPOSED RESTRICTION FOR YEARS. THE LATEST PROPOSAL DIED IN THE LEGISLATURE LAST SPRING.. NOW, AFTER A SUMMER AT THE BARGAINING TABLE, STATE LAWMAKERS AND ENVIRONMENTALISTS SAY THEY’VE REACHED A WORKABLE COMPROMISE. P-S-N-H HAD OPPOSED THE PREVIOUS PLAN. GARY LONG, PRESDIENT OF P-S-N-H, SAYS THE NEW BILL ACHIEVES ALL THE OBJECTIVES OF THE OLD BILL, IN A WAY THAT P-S-N-H CAN LIVE WITH.
TAPE 1, GARY LONG 384 the way I view those objectives is, first, to have local reductions. Meaning reductions from our plants, in the state. The second was no trading. This bill has that. A third objective was sooner is better and more is better. So, create an environment were we have both a desire and an incentive to reduce mercury as soon as possible in the short term, as well as, in the long term. :26
THE LATEST PROPOSAL WOULD REQUIRE P-S-N-H TO INSTALL EMISSIONS REDUCTION EQUIPMENT CALLED WET SCRUBERS. THESE WOULD REDUCE MERCURY EMISSIONS BY AT LEAST 80-PERCENT, AND SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS BY 90-PERCENT. P-S-N-H LIKES THIS PROPOSAL, BECAUSE IT BELIEVES IT CAN EVENTUALLY OFFSET THE COST OF THE NEW EQUIPMENT BY SELLING SO-2 CREDITS TO OTHER PLANTS THAT CAN’T MEET THEIR EMISSIONS REGULATIONS.
BUT THE SCRUBBERS DON’T HAVE TO BE IN PLACE UNTIL 2013. MEANWHILE THE BILL PROVIDES ECONOMIC INCENTIVES FOR P-S-N-H TO ACHIEVE SHORT-TERM MERCURY REDUCTIONS THROUGH THE USE OF OTHER EQUIPMENT, KNOWN AS CARBON INJECTION TECHNOLOGY. CRITICS OF THE PROPOSAL, INCLUDING NANCY GIRARD OF THE CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION, SAY FORGET ABOUT INCENTIVES –
P-S-N-H SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL CARBON INJECTION RIGHT AWAY.
TAPE 2, GIRARD, 055 what I think is very interesting is that Massachusetts, new jersey, they have put in place requirements of reducing by 90% by 2008, 2010 – no trading, no sulfur credits, do it. And they’re doing it with activated carbon injection. And they’re telling their plants: you get it done. :20
ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS OPPOSED TO THE PLAN INCLUDE THE SIERRA CLUB, CLEAN WATER ACTION, AND NEW HAMPSHIRE PIRG.
BUT OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS SUPPORT THE COMPROMISE, INCLUDING THE FOREST SOCIETY, NEW HAMPSHIRE LAKES ASSOCIATION, AND NEW HAMPSHIRE AUDUBON. AUDOBON’S JOEL HARRINGTON SAYS THOSE GROUPS CONCLUDED THEY COULDN’T WIN LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT FOR ANY PLAN THAT WOULD RESULT IN SIGNICANTLY HIGHER ELECTRIC RATES.
TAPE 2 HARRINGTON 310 my concern is when this bill is heard in feb, march and april, particularly feb, we’re going to have ratepayers all across this state opening up their utility bills, and they’re going to see some of the highest rates they’ve ever seen. :15
BACKERS SAY THE MOST THE NEW PROPOSAL COULD COST RATEPAYERS IS 20-DOLLARS A YEAR. HARRINGTON CONCEDES THAT’S A SMALL FRACTION OF THE INCREASES CONSUMERS HAVE BEEN PAYING FOR GASOLINE. BUT HARRINGTON SAYS MOST CONSUMERS WON’T ASK WHERE THAT EXTRA 20-DOLLARS COMES FROM – OR WHAT IT MIGHT ACHIEVE IN TERMS OF A CLEANER ENVIRONMENT. HE SAYS THE POLLITICAL REALITY IS – RATEPAYERS WON’T SUPPORT ANY MEASURE THAT COULD RAISE THEIR ELECTRIC BILL.
TAPE 2 HARRINGTON 334 we HAVE to think of energy costs. Because, I can tell you in the next 5 years, this is not going to be the only energy bill dealing with the environment that’s going to come across this legislature. We have a regional greenhouse gas initiative, we’ll have a renewable portfolio standard – all of these things will impact ratepayers. So we got to ask ourselves: how much do we want for an environmental benefit, and then also think about the cost, if we want it all. :24
THE LEGISLATURE WILL LIKELY TAKE UP THE PROPOSAL WHEN IT
RECONVENES IN JANUARY. FOR N-H-P-R NEWS, I’M DOUG MACPHERSON.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo