EPA orders pollution cuts Missouri among states affected; Utility rates could go up

By Michael Mansur, environment writer Copyright 1998 Kansas City Star September 25, 1998

To clear a harmful haze of pollutants over   the East, federal
regulators ordered deep cuts   Thursday in pollution from coal-fired
power   plants in the Midwest, including some in   western Missouri.

The new rule intends to   reduce the levels of ozone, a strong   lung
irritant, by cutting nitrogen oxide   emissions in 22 states and the
District of   Columbia by 2003.  Much of those emissions come   from
coal-fired power plants and drift with the   prevailing winds to East
Coast states.

The   reductions are likely to increase local utility   rates, an
electric utility industry spokeswoman   said.  But the amount is
uncertain.

"It's   going to be a fairly heavy cost," said Linda   Schoumacher
of Edison Electric Institute, a   trade association of
shareholder-owned electric   companies.

Kansas City Power & Light Co.,   which serves much of the area, has
yet to   calculate the effect on its plants or rates,   said Pam
Levetzow, a KCP&L spokeswoman.

The company owns three coal-fired plants in   western Missouri,
including the Hawthorne plant   in Kansas City.  It also owns a
coal-fired   plant in eastern Kansas.

"This new rule   applies to an entire region, and how it   affects
KCP&L or any individual plant is   uncertain," Levetzow said. "We
need a chance   to look at it."

The new rule also proved   a bit of a surprise - and disappointment
- for   Missouri regulators.

The Missouri   Department of Natural Resources had pushed the   U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency to exclude   from the new regulation
the western two-thirds   of Missouri.

The biggest pollution sources   for nitrogen oxide are on the
state's eastern   side.  Also, computer modeling had shown   that
regulating nitrogen oxide sources in   western Missouri would not
greatly improve the   air quality in Chicago, said Nina Thompson,   a
spokeswoman for the Natural Resources   Department.

"We're disappointed they   didn't follow the recommendation,"
Thompson   said.

Now, emissions from western Missouri   power plants regulated under
the new rule will   flow over unregulated Iowa to Chicago, she   said.

"It's not logical."

It's true   that Kansas City's location on the western edge   of the
regulated area means it will benefit   less from any pollution
reductions, said Wayne   Leidwanger, the EPA's regional director of   air
planning and development.

"I think   Kansas City will see some benefits,"   Leidwanger said,
"but it's going to be more   limited.  St. Louis will see a little
more."

EPA had good reason for extending the   regulation's western border
to the   Missouri-Kansas line, Leidwanger added. "I   know there's some
concern about (including the   entire state).  But EPA had to draw a
line   somewhere, and we felt it was best to draw it   at the state
border."

Missouri regulators   had contended that if the line was moved as
far   west as Kansas City, why not move it farther   west to include
Texas, where plants may   contribute pollution to western   Missouri's
air.

"The EPA didn't see fit   to include Texas and Oklahoma in this
rule,"   Leidwanger said. "But there will be some   reductions in Texas
as a result of their having   to address ozone problems in Dallas.

"We've not completely let these other states   off the hook."

By including all of   Missouri, Leidwanger added, utilities   should
have more flexibility to comply with the   new rule.  That's because the
EPA is   encouraging utilities in a state to trade   pollution credits.

For example, a utility   that can easily reduce emissions can sell
those   pollution credits to another company that has   plants that can't
comply.  A similar system has   helped reduce acid-rain-producing   sulfur
dioxide emissions.

Edison Electric   Institute, however, criticized the EPA's   proposed
rule, saying the structure of the   nitrogen oxide trading program was
different   from the acid-rain trading program.

"EPA's proposal presents possible constraints   that could
undercut states' ability to create a   robust trading system," said
John Kinsman, the   institute's atmospheric science manager   in
Washington.

Environmental groups   cheered EPA's proposed rule, focusing not   on
costs but on health benefits it is designed   to produce.

"After the number of high   pollution days we experienced this
summer, it's   especially important that states begin to   address the
serious health threat both within   and beyond their own borders,"
said Steve   Cochran, legislative director at the   Environmental Defense
Fund.

The EPA rule   should reduce nitrogen oxide emissions by   1.1
million tons a year, a 28 percent reduction   for the affected 22
states and the District of   Columbia.  Missouri must reduce its
emissions   by 35 percent.

Nitrogen oxide mixes with   other chemicals in sunlight to form
ozone, a   key component of urban smog.

The new EPA   rule marks the first effort by EPA to protect   public
health in "downwind" states from smog   produced in other states.  EPA
estimated the   reductions from power plants can be achieved   for $ 1,500
a ton, which the EPA said is cheaper   than any alternative.

Similar reductions   from cars would cost more than twice   that
amount, the EPA calculated.

"This   action will bring health benefits to millions   of
Americans," said EPA Administrator Carol   Browner. "It is the
centerpiece of our efforts   to cost-effectively implement EPA's new
public   health standard for smog, announced last   year."

The states affected: Alabama,   Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia,
Illinois,   Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts,   Michigan,
Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North   Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island,   South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West   Virginia,
Wisconsin.

The interstate flow   of pollutants from the Midwest to the East
has   been a source of contention among those states   for years.

Northeast utilities contended they   had spent millions of dollars to
clamp down on   pollution, but Midwest coal plants continued to   spew
the same pollutant into air currents that   flowed east.

Ozone has been regulated   until now on a local or metropolitan
basis.

The Associated Press contributed to this   article.

Comments on this posting?
Click here to post a public comment on the Trash Talk Bulletin Board.
Click here to send a private comment to the Junkman.

---

Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of Steven J. Milloy.

Copyright © 1998 Steven J. Milloy. All rights reserved on original material. Material copyrighted by others is used either with permission or under a claim of "fair use." Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.