Texas Deluged by Mercury: EPA Must Strengthen Rules to Protect Our Health
by Karen Hadden, June 2004
The EPA is proposing rules for toxic mercury that would pose enormous risks for the health of children. Instead of requiring coal-burning power plants to clean up mercury at all sources, the lame plan would let Texas coal plants off the hook. The “get out of jail free” card the EPA proposes to give utilities would accomplish this goal by removing mercury from the “toxic” category. One outraged woman recently responded, “Mercury not toxic? It’s only brain damage in children.” What appears to be a bad joke is all too real, but the good news is that there’s still time to comment and urge EPA to require real reductions of power plant mercury.
Texas is already the nation’s mercury hotspot, and our children shouldn’t be suffering from this toxic exposure. Texas leads the nation in mercury pollution from coal plants, with 11% of the 48 on national total. Nineteen coal-burning power plants spew out nearly 9,000 pounds of toxic mercury per year in Texas. Coal wastes contain mercury that can leach into waterways as well. Utilities, the largest source of mercury (34%), are the only industry unregulated for this dangerous pollutant.
What are the health risks from mercury exposure? Young children and babies are at risk for brain damage, learning disabilities, and attention deficits. Low birth weight, severe mental retardation, cerebral palsy, deafness, blindness and seizures are all possible. Every year 633,000 newborns are born at risk due to high levels of mercury in their bloodstream.
The EPA plan lets utilities “trade” credits. Trading has never before been allowed for a toxic pollutant due health risks. Our Texas coal plants should reduce mercury at every plant, but under this plan they could buy their way out of clean up instead. With new coal plants proposed for the Waco area and San Antonio, Texas may end up with more toxic mercury, instead of long overdue reductions.
The EPA plan would allow 5-6 times more mercury for the next ten years than with enforcement of the Clean Air Act. EPA has said that its possible to go from today’s 48 tons to 5 tons by 2008, but the current plan doesn’t get this reduction. It would cap mercury at 34 tons in 2010 and is supposed to get 70% reductions by 2018, although experts now doubt that even this weak goal would be achieved. The mercury reductions are clearly too little, too late.
The mercury risk to humans comes mainly from eating contaminated fish, and 44 states have consumption warnings. Large fish and predator species have the highest mercury levels. Our independent tests found some seafood being sold in Dallas/Ft. Worth grocery stores with mercury levels up to six times EPA's guidelines. Twelve Texas water bodies have mercury fish consumption advisories, including the entire Gulf of Mexico (for king mackerel),Caddo Lake, and Sam Rayburn, B.A. Steinhagen, and Toledo Bend Reservoirs.
Power plant controls exist that could reduce mercury by 90%, using activated carbon injection, but these controls aren’t required by the EPA plan. Medical and municipal waste incinerators have had to make 90% mercury reductions, but the EPA plan lets utilities get away with catching a smaller percentage of mercury, obtained as a byproduct of other (non-mercury) pollution controls.
Reducing mercury works and an extensive Florida study showed that rapid local improvement results. Pollution controls typically become more affordable over time. $5 billion would reduce mercury by 90% at all of our nation’s coal plants. Compare this to the cost of one stealth bomber - $2.1 billion. For the cost of 2 or 3 bombers, we could protect our children from brain damage and learning disabilities.
Investigations of EPA’s mercury maneuvers are in order. Longtime EPA staffers told the Los Angeles Times that they “were told not to undertake the normal scientific and economic studies.” Key language in the mercury proposal matches wording from utility lobbyist documents. Jeffrey Holmstead, now heading the EPA Office of Air and Radiation, formerly represented utilities at Latham and Watkins, as did William Wehrum, a Holmstead advisor. In the wake of national outrage, EPA Administrator Michael Leavitt suggested a possible tightening of the mercury rule and the comment period was extended until April 30.
What can you do? Don’t let Texas to become a toxic sacrifice zone. Talk to friends, neighbors and policymakers. Urge the EPA to require 90% mercury reductions at all coal plants by 2008, with no trading of toxic mercury, and go to Seed Coalition to send a free, editable fax to the EPA.
Karen Hadden, Executive Director
Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition
