Rural Missouri - January 2011 - (Page 10)

A ﬂurry of government regulations are set to hit your electric bill he cost of electricity hinges on several things — availability, prices for power plant fuels and materials, and the amount of power consumers demand. Now a slew of volatile federal rule-making has hit power producers. Perhaps the most pressing challenge facing electric utilities involves U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulation of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases as pollutants under the federal Clean Air Act. On Jan. 2, the EPA began restricting the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by fossil fuel-burning power plants and other stationary industrial sources. This action will signiﬁcantly impact electricity production. Fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas fuel 70 percent of America’s electricity generation. Since electric co-ops are more dependent on coal than investor-owned utilities and municipal electric systems, the end result will be higher electric bills. “Clearly, the EPA is wielding the Clean Air Act as a bludgeon, pressing it into service because the outgoing Congress was unable to agree on how to curb greenhouse gas emissions blamed for contributing to climate change,” says Glenn English, CEO of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) based in Arlington, Va. By failing to pass legislation addressing carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases, Congress essentially left the decision-making up to the EPA. But the Clean Air Act was never intended to regulate carbon dioxide. It was enacted to ﬁght smog and acid rain with proven technologies. No viable, commercially tested solution exists to remove carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. “Co-ops expect the EPA’s rule-making will eventually have the practical effect of eliminating coal as a power plant option, absent breakthrough technology,” remarks English. “On top of this, the cost of switching from coal, which has traditionally been plentiful and affordable, to other fuels will be high.” Only two alternate baseload generation sources can meet America’s demand for safe, reliable and affordable electricity: natural gas, which is priced on a volatile commodities market (and has carbon dioxide emissions to contend with); and nuclear power, which requires a long lead time for construction. “Electric co-ops are urging Congress and the White House to approve a two-year moratorium on EPA regulation of carbon dioxide greenhouse gases giving lawmakers the opportunity to fashion climate-change legislation that T by Perry Stambaugh mailbag@ruralmissouri.coop protects consumers and keeps electric bills affordable,” English sayss. Even if Congress grants a reprieve on greenhouse gas regulations, red tape from other EPA and various government rule-making efforts — the Clean Air Transport Rule, cooling water intake requirements, and a decision on treating coal ash as hazardous waste, for starters — will trigger higher electric bills. tial impact on American energy reserves. If strictly enforced, NERC contends one-third of U.S. electricity capacity may need to be retired. Coal Ash Debate To ensure the safe disposal of fly ash and other residues produced by coal-fired power plants, the EPA is considering designating the materials — for the first time — as hazardous waste. Clean Air Transport Rule Classifying these “coal combustion byproducts” (CCBs) as hazardous could cost billions and force Released in 2010, EPA’s Clean Air Transport Rule increases in electricity rates. Each year, the U.S. aims to cap emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen electric utility industry produces about 130 million oxides from power plants across 31 eastern states tons of CCBs (roughly 8 percent from power supply and the District of Columbia. The regulation enables cooperatives). “downwind” areas, whose air quality is compro“In previous analysis, the EPA determined CCBs mised by power plants to their west, to meet federal do not warrant regulation as hazardous waste under standards. By 2014, the EPA claims the Transport the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Rule, when combined with other state and federal Oversight was generally in place at the state level measures, will reduce power plant sulfur dioxide to ensure adequate manemissions by 71 percent and agement,” Johnson says. nitrogen oxides emissions “Nothing about CCBs has by 52 percent at a cost to changed since then. Elecutilities of $2.8 billion per tric co-ops contend coal year. ash is appropriately reguThe Transport Rule lated and oppose efforts requires 180 coal-ﬁred power to have it branded as hazplants to install new polardous waste.” lution-control technology, Carrying the hazardous activate existing pollution label in any form — the controls or shut down. A EPA could classify CCBs second-round version under as “special wastes,” makconsideration could impose ing them subject to all even tighter standards. permitting, handling and “We’re expecting a numdisposal requirements ber of existing power plants that apply to toxic items to simply be retired,” says — will severely hamper Kirk Johnson, NRECA vice Kirk Johnson, NRECA beneﬁcial uses of CCBs, president of energy and Johnson warns. “No environmental policy. “The matter how you slice it, cost to comply with the regCCBs will be considered ulation will be too much.” unsafe.” Currently, one-third of ﬂy ash (used as a cement Cooling Water Intake Requirements replacement) and more than one-fourth of scrubber sludge (converted into synthetic gypsum for wallPower plants use water from lakes or rivers to board manufacturing) are recycled. For every ton of cool generating equipment. The federal Clean cement replaced by ﬂy ash, a ton of greenhouse gas Water Act Section 316(b) sets standards for cooling emissions is avoided. water intake structures, requiring plant operators More than 10,000 co-op consumers sent letters to use “best available technology” to protect the to the EPA in 2010 voicing their concern and asking environment. the agency not to brand coal ash as hazardous. The The EPA began reviewing the standards in 2010, agency had not reached a ﬁnal decision as of press launching a cost-beneﬁt analysis of imposing stricter time. regulations. The rule is expected to be unveiled in February. Perry Stambaugh writes on consumer and cooperative The North American Electric Reliability Corp. affairs for NRECA. Megan McKoy-Noe contributed to (NERC), the nation’s bulk power grid watchdog, this article. estimates this EPA rule will have the greatest poten- “We’re expecting a number of power plants to simply be retired. The cost to comply with the regulation will be too much.” 10 WWW.RURALMISSOURI.COOP http://WWW.RURALMISSOURI.COOP

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Rural Missouri - January 2011

Rural Missouri - January 2011
Contents
Comments
Columns
Doing Wood Right
Mail Bag
Blackwater’s Bucksnort
Out of the Way Eats
Huntin’ With Hawks
Hearth and Home
News Briefs
Billards Meets Bowling
Getting $mart in the New Year
Meet Yorik, One Tricky Dog
Marketplace
Around Missouri
Neighbors
Just4kids

Rural Missouri - January 2011