6/26/2003

Coal, Power Plants Say Bush's Clear Skies Initiative Cost Effective, Critical to Industry

By JOANN C. ELMER
jelmer@statejournal.com 

When members of Congress head back to work after the July 4th holiday, they will debate legislation that could make the current Clean Air Act history or firmly establish it as the law of the land.

Industries dependent on coal-fired electricity want legislation passed that would replace the Clean Air Act. The proposed Clear Skies Legislation is President Bush's plan to reduce three key pollutants emitted by coal-fired power plants by 2018. Unlike the Clean Air Act, which focuses on a variety of air pollutants, Clear Skies focuses only on sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury. The three pollutants are known to cause health problems for people living in the areas of electric power plants.

Advocates of the coal and electric industries support Clear Skies, saying the proposed legislation is cheaper, less complicated and will provide quicker results. Opponents of the legislation say Clear Skies is more about the bottom line and less about cleaner air.

"The biggest problem we have here is that people can walk into a room, flick a light switch and, boom, a light comes on. Gasoline is the only conscious decision we have to make about energy these days," said Bill Brier, president of the Edison Electric Institute, an advocacy agency for electric companies.

"No one has to think about where the energy comes from to turn that light on. It's just always there. But without coal, it wouldn't be. That's the key. We need to find ways to burn coal and still be environmentally responsible. That's what Clear Skies tries to do."

Brier is trying to garner support for Clear Skies from states that are somewhat reliant on coal mining. But he is not promoting Clear Skies as a permanent solution to the country's air pollution problems. To most of EEI's members, Clear Skies simply is a bridge to sustain the electric industry until clean-coal technology is fully developed.

"This plan has never been promoted as a permanent fix, and it is not meant to stall advances in clean-coal technology," Brier said. "This is just legislation that would provide some sanity to the morass of regulations that currently exist."

Since its inception, the Clean Air Act has been criticized by various industries for being "too complicated and fickle." The Bush administration has contended the Clean Air Act creates too much uncertainty for the electric industry because of the strain it puts on older power plants to be updated. Brier said Clear Skies allows for gradual improvements and cleaner air.

But environmental groups want the Clean Air Act to remain intact. Enforcement of the act has resulted in some reductions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. Since 1980, electricity generated from coal has increased by 64 percent. At the same time, emissions from coal-based generation have declined by more than 30 percent. The Clean Air Act also calls for reductions in pollutants that cause global warming. Clear Skies does not consider global warming pollutants.

Clear Skies or 'Clear Lies?'

According to David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defense Council, Clear Skies would let power plant carbon emissions grow by 13 to 16 percent between 2000 and 2010. Doniger said the Clear Skies would require power companies to clean up the three identified pollutants but not address carbon emissions. Such a strategy, he said, could be costly to power companies should the federal government later mandate carbon reductions.

"If there were requirements for truth in government labeling, the 'Clear Skies' initiative would be called 'Clear Lies.' This is just another sadly typical case of doublespeak, which the administration uses in attempts to hide the truth about its environmental policies," said Vivian Stockman, coordinator for the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition.

"We have to remember that the so-called Clear Skies initiative came out of Vice President Dick Cheney's secret meetings with energy executives and their lobbyists. Once they got their boys in the White House, they were able to write their own dream-law. They've been salivating for this change, and they sure weren't thinking about our kids' lungs when they colluded on this plan."

Environmental groups want stricter enforcement of the current Clean Air Act. Stockman said stricter enforcement actually would result in greater emission cuts than what is proposed by Clear Skies.

"Last summer, both the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy did studies that showed enforcing the Clean Air Act would lead to bigger pollution cuts than Bush's Clear Skies plan," Stockman said. "For the power industry's lobbyists to claim otherwise is hogwash, as is their claim that the Clean Air is too complicated to obey."

So what does this all mean for West Virginia? Coal-dependent electric companies often rely on western coal because it burns cleaner. Eastern coal, including West Virginia coal, typically emits more pollutants than coal shipped from the west. But Clear Skies calls for significant equipment upgrades that could make West Virginia coal more competitive.

"Clear Skies means regulations that would force electric companies to burn coal cleaner than what is being done now," said Jim Owen, spokesman for the Edison Electric Institute. "That means companies in the east could actually use eastern coal without worrying about emissions. That's how it should be. There's no reason for companies in the east to be buying coal from the west and vice versa."

But it's not as simple as it sounds, and Clear Skies, like the Clean Air Act, comes with a hefty price tag for electric companies. Clear Skies means equipment upgrades, stiffer penalties and, in some cases, new power plants to replace outdated facilities.

"We're talking billions of dollars to refit the plants. Some of the current power plants may have to be shut down if the cost to renovate is more expensive than shutting it down, but that's part of it," Brier said. "The initial upfront cost is where money will be the largest factor for companies. But over the long term, they will end up saving money because they will have set standards to meet. The Clean Air Act is constantly changing, and it creates instability."

Another place where Clear Skies gains favor is in the boardroom. With the electric industry in Wall Street limbo since Enron's collapse, limiting pollution reductions to three emissions could ease tension among investors, said Owen of the Edison Electric Institute.

"It seems to me, if you get something like Clear Skies enacted into law, it sends a huge signal to investors that coal has a future in this country," Owen said. "It can create momentum to further improve coal-powered facilities instead of always trying to eliminate them."

The electric industry has a battle on its hands. Environmental groups have vowed to fight Clear Skies. But for Brier, he said he's ready to work with environmental groups and debate the issue.

"The electric industry has done a poor job educating the public about coal use," Brier said. "Wouldn't it be a good thing for West Virginia if we quit looking at coal as an industry of the past and start looking at it as an industry of the future?"