Deaths from dirty coal-fired power plants cost more than the value of the electricity

EIP Report: Cost Of Deaths From 18 Coal-Fired Power Plants' Pollution Higher Than Value Of Electricity Generated

Yates Plant in Georgia Is Found Most Out of Balance in Terms of Social Cost/Produced Electricity Value; "Net Loss" Analysis Highlights Premature Mortality Linked to Coal-Fired Power Plants in 13 States: AL, GA, KY, MI, MO, NC, OH, SC, TN, TX, VA, WI, and WV.

WASHINGTON, June 7, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Up to 5,700 deaths a year can be attributed to 51 of the dirtiest coal fired power plants in the United States with no announced plans for sulfur dioxide (SO2) clean-up measures, according to a new report from the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project (EIP). Even using the most conservative estimate, the estimated cost to society of the premature deaths caused by 18 of the power plants actually exceeded the retail value of the electricity generated by each facility in 2011. (See the full list below.)

Available online at http://www.environmentalintegrity.org, the new report titled, "Net Loss: Comparing the Cost of Pollution vs. the Value of Electricity from 51 Coal-Fired Plants," reviews U.S. coal-fired power plants with the largest emissions of sulfur dioxide in 2010 and 2011 that do not yet have plans to install or upgrade scrubbers. For the report, Dr. Jonathan Levy of the Boston University School of Public Health estimated the premature deaths in 2011 due to fine particle exposures caused by emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and particulate matter from each of these plants, using a peer-reviewed approach consistent with EPA methods and an upper and lower bound for premature mortality based on two benchmark studies the EPA has relied upon in rulemaking.

Key findings include:

• The 51 plants contributed to between 2,700 and 5,700 premature deaths in 2011 alone.
• Estimated pollution-related premature deaths were highest at the following plants: Labadie, MO (140 to 290); Eastlake, OH (120 to 240); Yates, GA (110 to 220); Martin Lake, TX (100 to 220); and Mill Creek, KY (100 to 210).
• Applying the same standard statistical value for human life used by EPA, the 2,700-5,700 premature deaths identified in the report are linked to social costs of $23 to $47 billion.
• Using the most conservative benchmark in the study, 18 of the 51 plants in this survey contribute to premature deaths that cost society more than the estimated retail value of the electricity they generated in 2011. When using the upper bound to estimate premature deaths, an additional 20 plants had social costs exceeding the estimated retail value of their electricity in 2011.

Eric Schaeffer, director, Environmental Integrity Project said: "A closer look suggests that the social cost of many of the dirtiest plants far outweighs the value of the energy they produce. Coal helped to power America's industrial revolution, and electricity is obviously vital to our economy today. But we have better choices now than we had more than forty years ago, when most of these plants were built. Investments in advanced emission controls can greatly reduce the dangerous buildup of fine particles, and investments in renewable energy and efficiency improvements can secure our supply of electricity - and generate the jobs we need - without the death and disease that are the price we pay for dirty coal plants."

Jonathan Levy, professor of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, said: "My analysis estimates that fine particulate matter concentrations attributable to the 51 power plants I was asked to review contributed to between 2,700 and 5,700 premature deaths in 2011. This was based on reported emissions data and outputs based on my peer-reviewed model of health damages from power plants. The relationship between fine particulate matter pollution and premature mortality is well established, and the data are sufficient to provide a reasonable estimate of the number of premature deaths that will result from power plant emissions that increase fine particulate matter concentrations."

For example, Dr. Levy estimates that fine particle pollution from the Southern Company's Yates plant in Georgia contributed to between 100 and 220 deaths in 2011, at a cost to society of between 800 million and 1.8 billion dollars. The retail value of the electricity the plant generated in 2011 was estimated to be roughly $400 million, which means that the social cost of premature mortality caused by the plant's pollution was between $450 million and $1.4 billion greater than the value of the electricity it generated.

In order, the full list of the 18 coal-fired power plants mentioned above is as follows:

1. Yates Steam Generating Plant, Coweta County, GA; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$461 million; 2011 premature deaths: 100 - 220; cost of premature deaths: $870 - $1800 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $409 million.
2. Eastlake Power Plant, Lake County, OH; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$375 million; 2011 premature deaths: 120 - 240; cost of premature deaths: $980 - $2000 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $605 million.
3. Green River Generating Station, Muhlenberg County, KY; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$299 million; 2011 premature deaths: 44 - 88; cost of premature deaths: $360 - $730 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $61 million.
4. Johnsonville Fossil Plant, Humphreys County, TN; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$269 million; 2011 premature deaths: 85 - 170; cost of premature deaths: $700 - $1400 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $431 million.
5. Kammer Plant, Marshall County, WV; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$260 million; 2011 premature deaths: 48 - 98; cost of premature deaths: $400 - $810 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $140 million.
6. Mill Creek Generating Station, Jefferson County, KY; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$226 million; 2011 premature deaths: 100 - 210; cost of premature deaths: $870 - $1700 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $644 million.
7. Greene County Steam Plant, Greene County, AL; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$190 million; 2011 premature deaths: 49 - 100; cost of premature deaths: $410 - $850 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $220 million.
8. Canadys Steam Electric Generating Plant, Colleton County, SC; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$162 million; 2011 premature deaths: 37 - 75; cost of premature deaths: $300 - $620 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $138 million.
9. Yorktown Power Station, York County, VA; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$156 million; 2011 premature deaths: 34 - 68; cost of premature deaths: $280 - $570 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $124 million.
10. Nelson Dewey Generating Station, Grant County, WI; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$132 million; 2011 premature deaths: 29 - 61; cost of premature deaths: $240 - $500 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $108 million.
11. Jack McDonough Steam Generating Plant, Cobb County, GA; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$119 million; 2011 premature deaths: 40 - 82; cost of premature deaths: $330 - $680 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $211 million.
12. Trenton Channel Power Plant, Wayne County, MI; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$102 million; 2011 premature deaths: 56 - 110; cost of premature deaths: $460 - $950 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $358 million.
13. Phil Sporn Power Plant, Mason County,WV; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$102 million; 2011 premature deaths: 27 - 53; cost of premature deaths: $220 - $440 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $118 million.
14. L V Sutton Steam Plant, New Hanover County, NC; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$75 million; 2011 premature deaths: 24 - 48; cost of premature deaths: $200 - $400 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $125 million.
15. H F Lee Steam Electric Plant, Wayne County, NC; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$58 million; 2011 premature deaths: 19 - 39; cost of premature deaths: $160 - $330 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $102 million.
16. Big Brown Steam Electric Station, Freestone County, TX; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$54 million; 2011 premature deaths: 94 - 200; cost of premature deaths: $780 - $1700 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $726 million.
17. Shawnee Fossil Plant, McCracken County, KY; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$23 million; 2011 premature deaths: 70 - 140; cost of premature deaths: $580 - $1200 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $557 million.
18. Meramec Power Plant, Saint Louis County, MO; 2011 net value (retail sales - cost of premature deaths): -$13 million; 2011 premature deaths: 57 - 110; cost of premature deaths: $470 - $950 million; 2011 retail value of electricity: $457 million.

Coal-fired power plants are a major source of this pollution, which is caused by sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and unburned particles released from boiler stacks. Fine particle exposure is starting to decline in many areas, as utilities install scrubbers and other equipment to meet long-delayed Clean Air Act requirements. But some plants have yet to install the advanced pollution controls that have been commercially available for many years.

SOURCE Environmental Integrity Project, Washington, D.C.
Web Site: http://www.environmentalintegrity.org

National Poll Shows Strong Disapproval for President Obama's Smog Rule Delay, Unfavorable Ratings for Congress' Assault on Clean Air Act

9 Battleground States Also Surveyed: Suburban Women in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Latino Women in California, Florida and New Mexico Disagree With Obama Decision; Health Also Trumps Polluters in Colorado, Nevada, and Virginia.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 13, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- President Obama's decision to block new public health standards for ozone and smog pollution may have pleased big business, but it sorely disappointed key demographic groups, including Latinos and women nationally and in nine key 2012 battleground states, according to 10 new polls conducted for the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the League of Women Voters of the US (LWV), and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

Among the national poll's major findings:

• Nationwide, 70 percent of Americans disapproved of Obama's decision to block the ozone pollution standard while only 30 percent approved.  Roughly eight out of 10 women (79 percent) overall and 71 percent of Latino women disapproved of Obama's decision on ozone.
• Nearly four out of five Americans (78 percent) want the EPA to hold corporate polluters accountable for what they release into the community.  Better than four out five women (83 percent) and 80 percent of Latino women share this view.

Americans don't buy the line from some in Congress that EPA safeguards are bad for jobs and the economy and they support stricter safeguards against the toxic chemicals released by power plants. Women and Latino women particularly want stronger protections from toxic air and carbon pollution.

• Roughly seven out of 10 Americans (69 percent) agree with health experts who support reducing toxic air pollution from industrial sources and oppose those in Congress who say they must overrule the EPA to protect jobs; three out of four women overall and 73 percent of Latino women agree with health experts.
• Seven out of 10 support the EPA requiring stricter limits on the amount of toxic chemicals that industrial facilities can release and 69 percent are in favor of the EPA limiting the amount of carbon pollution that power plants and industrial facilities can release. Among women overall, 77 percent support stronger toxics limits and 78 percent support limiting carbon pollution; 76 percent and 77 percent of Latino women support those limits, respectively.

The polls, conducted between October 6-9, 2011  by Public Policy Polling (PPP), surveyed 1,249 registered voters nationwide (as well as a national oversample of 200 Latino women); and surveyed voters in nine 2012 battleground states: Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, California, Florida, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Virginia with oversamples of suburban women and Latino women in several states.  To access all PPP survey results, go to http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/polls_obamas_ozone_retreat_dis.html.

"Delaying clean air standards endangers Latino communities across the country.  This poll shows how disappointed the Latino community is with President Obama and Congress when it comes to cleaning up our air," said Brent A. Wilkes, national executive director, League of United Latin American Citizens. "Latinos are more likely to live in counties with air pollution levels that are unhealthy due to fine particulates and ozone -- two dangerous and prevalent pollutants that cause or worsen respiratory problems.  Latino children are 60 percent more likely to have asthma than non-Hispanic Whites."

Support for the EPA and stricter pollution limits is particularly strong among Latino women in key states. Asked whether they support the EPA's work to hold polluters accountable, 80 percent of Latino women in California, 79 percent in Florida and 86 percent in New Mexico said yes.

"Americans clearly are very displeased that politicians are interfering with EPA scientists.  It's wrong to play politics with the health of our children and seniors," said Elisabeth MacNamara, president of the League of Women Voters of the US.   "From the president's decision to delay smog pollution standards to the Congress's attempts to block EPA action on everything from mercury to soot to carbon, the voting public is fed up with politicians second guessing the science.  It's fundamentally unfair for polluters to force us to live with unhealthy air, which causes asthma attacks, heart attacks and even premature death."

Support for stronger pollution limits and opposition to blocking the EPA is markedly strong among suburban women in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

• 79 percent of suburban women in Michigan, 76 percent in Ohio and 87 percent in Pennsylvania disagreed with Obama's decision to block stronger smog standards.
• 78 percent of suburban women in Michigan, 78 percent in Ohio and 82 percent in Pennsylvania support reducing toxic air pollution from industrial sources and oppose those in Congress who say they must overrule the EPA to protect jobs.Independent respondents also expressed strong support for the EPA's mission and efforts to reduce pollution, and disagree with those who would block the EPA.  More than three out of four (77 percent) support the EPA's efforts to hold polluters accountable and 68 percent say the President should not have blocked stronger smog standards and that Congress should not block stronger limits on toxic air pollution.

"What is clear from this polling is what we've known all along:  Americans want cleaner, healthier air and want corporate polluters held accountable for their actions.  President Obama's decision to delay the ozone air pollution standard puts him out of step with most Americans, and notably with independents, women and Latinos," said Wesley Warren, director of programs at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Tom Jensen, director, Public Policy Polling, said: "The shorthand version of these findings is clear:  Attacks on clean air and the federal agency charged with protecting the environment and the health of Americans is an unpopular position with most Americans, including those in nine key 2012 battleground states.    These poll findings provide more than ample evidence that assaults on the Clean Air Act and the Environmental Protection Agency are likely to be perceived as decidedly extreme and well outside of the mainstream of the public's thinking."

About the national poll:  The margin of error for the national survey is +/-2.8 percent. Margins of error for oversamples and states vary. Public Policy Polling surveys are conducted through automated telephone interviews.  PPP is a national survey research firm located in Raleigh, North Carolina.  It was named by the Wall Street Journal as one of the two most accurate polling companies in the country for its swing state polling in 2008. More recently it was recognized by the Washington Post and Politico for its pinpoint polling of the surprising results in the Delaware Republican Senate primary and the Massachusetts Senate special election.

SOURCE  League of United Latin American Citizens, League of Women Voters, and Natural Resources Defense Council
League of United Latin American Citizens, League of Women Voters, and Natural Resources Defense Council
CONTACT: Leslie Anderson, +1-703-276-3256, landerson@hastingsgroup.com

 

Poll to Show Strong Disapproval of Obama, Congress on Smog Rule Delay and Assault on EPA

LULAC, League of Women Voters, NRDC Survey Finds Hispanic and Women Voters in Nine Battleground States - CA, CO, FL, MI, NV, NM, OH, PA and VA - Trust Public Health Experts Over Congress on Pollution Matters

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A major opinion poll to be released at 1 p.m. EDT Thursday (October 13, 2011) will show that recent actions by President Obama and Congress on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules and Clean Air Act protections are meeting with widespread disapproval, including key battleground state constituents groups (Hispanics and women).

The poll, which was conducted between October 6-10, 2011 by Public Policy Polling for the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the League of Women Voters in the US (LWV), and the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), surveyed 1,249 voters nationwide and also within a subset of nine key 2012 battleground states: California, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.

News event speakers are:

• Brent A. Wilkes, national executive director, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC);
• Elisabeth MacNamara, president, League of Women Voters;
• Wesley Warren, director of programs, Natural Resources Defense Council;  and
• Tom Jensen, director, Public Policy Polling.

TO PARTICIPATE: You can join this live, phone-based news conference (with full, two-way Q&A) at 1 p.m. EDT on October 13, 2011 by dialing 1 (800) 860-2442. Ask for the "Voters and the EPA" telenews event.

CAN'T PARTICIPATE?:  A streaming audio replay of the news event will be available on the Web at http://www.nrdc.org as of 5 p.m. EDT on October 13, 2011.

MEDIA CONTACT:  Leslie Anderson, (703) 276-3256 or landerson@hastingsgroup.com.

LULAC is the largest and oldest Hispanic Organization in the United States. LULAC advances the economic condition, educational attainment, political influence, health and civil rights of Hispanic Americans through community-based programs operating at more than 900 LULAC councils nationwide. The organization involves and serves all Hispanic nationality groups. For more information, see: http://www.lulac.org.

The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization, has fought since 1920 to improve our systems of government and impact public policies through citizen education and advocacy. The League's enduring vitality and resonance comes from its unique decentralized structure. The League is a grassroots organization, working at the national, state and local levels. For more information, see: http://www.lwv.org.

NRDC is the nation's most effective environmental action group, combining the grassroots power of 1.3 million members and online activists with the courtroom clout and expertise of more than 350 lawyers, scientists and other professionals. For more information, see: http://www.nrdc.org.

SOURCE  League of United Latin American Citizens, League of Women Voters, and Natural Resources Defense Council
League of United Latin American Citizens, League of Women Voters, and Natural Resources Defense Council
Web Site: http://www.nrdc.org

AFVI Show: Ways to save billions of gallons of fuel at the nation's airports

Airports are basically the epitome of using fuel as if it's abundant. Jet aircraft can only exist and be economically used when fuel is cheap and easily available. In any case airports are centers of air pollution due to all the vehicles flying in and out all day long, plus all the ground vehicles. There are service vehicles and a dizzying array of other vehicles running around, including those shuttling people around the airport, and to or from the airport.

While there isn't much which can be done to increase fuel efficiency for the aircraft, or reduce emissions due to the aircraft, the ground vehicles are another matter. The article goes into several programs meant to decrease emissions from the ground vehicles.

Article Reference: 

AFVI Show: Ways to save billions of gallons of fuel at the nation's airports