Current work in wildlife, rivers, public lands, and climate
Press Releases
Utah Haze Plan Promises More Coal Pollution
“Just like sulfur, Utah’s haze plan stinks,” said Jeremy Nichols, Climate and Energy Program Director for WildEarth Guardians. “Far from protecting clean air,it actually allows more sulfur dioxide pollution from the state’s coal-fired power plants, putting Utah’s most cherished landscapes and countless communities at risk.”
The suit, filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Denver, challenges the Environmental Protection Agency’s December 14, 2012approval of a plan that was supposed to curb haze pollution in the American West by cutting sulfur dioxide emissions. In reality, the plan allows Rocky Mountain Power, a subsidiary of PacifiCorp, to spew more air pollution from its Utah power plants.
The action comes as parts of Utah, including the Wasatch Front and the Uinta Basin,are struggling to meet clean air standards to protect public health and welfare.
The EPA’s approach relied on a “milestone,” or cap on sulfur dioxide emissions. That cap presumed that PacifiCorp’s Hunter and Huntington coal burning power plants in central Utah emit at a rate of 0.12 pounds for every million Btus of heat input (essentially a measure of coal consumption). However, power plants in Utah are not only already emitting at rates far below the 0.12 presumption.
Click here to see a chart showing the differences between EPA’s presumed emission rates and current emissions at the Hunter and Huntington coal-fired power plants.
An example of this is with the Huntington Power Plant power plant. The EPA presumed that the plant emitted as much as 100% more sulfur dioxide than it does in reality. The Agency presumed the plant emitted at a rate of 0.12pounds per million Btus of heat input, when in fact its emission rate is as low as 0.06 pounds per million Btus.
Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA’s cap is supposed to achieve emission reductions that are better than the “best available retrofit technology.” An expert report prepared by a coalition of conservation and health organizations estimates that if best available retrofit technology was utilized at Utah coal-fired power plants, sulfur dioxide emissions would be reduced by more than2,600 tons below EPA’s cap, about a 1/3 greater reduction.
These reductions could be achieved through the better use of scrubbers, which are already installed at the Hunter and Huntington power plants.
Click here to download the conservation and health coalition’s expert report (see tables 12and 15) and click here to download a table illustrating the differences between EPA’s cap and achievable emission reductions.
“EPA’s plan defies reality, defies what is necessary to safeguard our clean air, and worse seems to give PacifiCorp a virtual blank check to pollute,” said Nichols. “Ultimately, it puts people at risk.”
According to the EPA, sulfur dioxide is not only a poisonous gas that can lead to a number of respiratory conditions, but it also creates particulate matter pollution,acid rain, and haze. Nationally, 75% of all sulfur dioxide emissions are generated by coal-fired power plants.
The EPA’s “milestone” approach to reducing sulfur dioxide emissions is being applied in the states of New Mexico and Wyoming as well. EPA also presumed inflated sulfur dioxide emission rates from coal-fired power plants in those states. Estimates indicate that overall, sulfur dioxide pollution could be reduced by nearly 20,000 tons throughout the American West if EPA’s cap reflected achievable emission rates.
WildEarth Guardians’ suit will challenge the validity of EPA’s cap and the agency’s claim that its approach to limiting sulfur dioxide pollution will be better than the“best available retrofit technology.” Under the Clean Air Act,challenges to EPA decisions are filed directly with federal appeals courts. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals is likely to issue a ruling on the lawsuit in a year.