Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sometimes I think citydata should be paying me for debunking b.s. thread!!
"Luminant's Martin Lake coal plant is consistently among the dirtiest in the entire nation and one of the worst polluting coal plants in Texas every year," stated Neil Carman, Clean Air Program Director for the Sierra Club's Lone Star Chapter. "Martin Lake has the highest total air pollution (168,000 tons) among more than 2,000 industrial plants statewide. In fact, Martin Lake accounted for 13 percent of all industrial air pollution in Texas in 2008 and 20 percent of all coal plant pollution. That’s a huge amount of pollution from this one source."
Texarkana, Texas — More than 50,000 air pollution violations at the massive Martin Lake coal-fired power plant led the Sierra Club, represented by Earthjustice and Environmental Integrity Project, to file a lawsuit today in federal court against plant owner Luminant (formerly TXU).
The Martin Lake plant, located near Longview, Texas, is one of the dirtiest coal plants in the nation. It is the worst power plant for mercury pollution among all U.S. coal plants, emitting 1,764 pounds in 2008, according to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Toxics Release Inventory. In Texas, Martin Lake ranked third for asthma-causing soot pollution and was responsible for 13 percent of all industrial air pollution in the state.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has ignored years of repeated excessive soot pollution and other violations at the Martin Lake plant, putting the health of nearby communities at risk. Texas Coal Plant
Luminant - Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR)
Today, Luminant issued a press release regarding the EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. In response, EPA Assistant Administrator issued this statement:
"The Cross State Air Pollution Rule will prevent tens of thousands of premature deaths and thousands of asthma attacks by ensuring Americans do not have to breathe pollution emitted by facilities in other states.
Prior to announcing this important rule, EPA did extensive outreach to industry to ensure there were an array of compliance options, and in recent weeks, we have continued to work specifically with Luminant, making the Administrator, Deputy Administrator and EPA technical staff available to assess their needs and continue to ensure they have options to meet these important new standards – including exploring additional flexibility for the company and encouraging more reliance on technologies the company has already installed. As recently as yesterday EPA offered to share additional information that shows the potential for a no-shut down, no-layoff solution for statewide compliance. It is unfortunate that company leadership rushed to a decision that needlessly puts their workers' jobs at risk.
This administration agreed with the previous administration's 2005 decision that these facilities threatened the health of Americans living downwind, and this action by Luminant represents an abrupt change of direction. Since the Bush Administration, these facilities have made business decisions to comply with a rule that is very similar to what we announced in July - staying within pollution limits without needing to make serious investments in pollution controls at several facilities . EPA's Region 6 News and Events | US Environmental Protection Agency
So the EPA tried to work with a company that knew it was out of compliance, who knew their actions were contributing to the deaths and health issues of untold thousands, and it decided it was cheaper to temporarily halt operations instead of continuing to work with the EPA.
According to the crazies on the board, it doesn't matter if you poison my land, air, and water; my family dies of cancers, and entire populations are written off for profits.
Nope none of this matters as long as I have a job and can ignorantly bash Obama.
I see that you are willing to accept anything the Sierra Club tells you even though they are the worst tree huggers in the world.
What do you and the Sierra Club intend to replace the missing electricity that the EPA is taking away with? Not wind power since we don't have nearly enough of that kind of power on line. Not solar power since the companies Obama gave money to to produce that stuff are going bankrupt daily? What are you going to use to replace what you are taking away? Obama and his EPA don't give a damn if it is replaced.
I see that you are willing to accept anything the Sierra Club tells you even though they are the worst tree huggers in the world.
What do you and the Sierra Club intend to replace the missing electricity that the EPA is taking away with? Not wind power since we don't have nearly enough of that kind of power on line. Not solar power since the companies Obama gave money to to produce that stuff are going bankrupt daily? What are you going to use to replace what you are taking away? Obama and his EPA don't give a damn if it is replaced.
I see you are willing to dismiss the direct link to the EPA that I have provided in each post.
Most telling is that the EPA tried to work with this company to prevent a shut down.
I can't waste my time arguing with the uninformed, read the EPA finding and then get back to me with a reasonable argument.
Prior to announcing this important rule, EPA did extensive outreach to industry to ensure there were an array of compliance options, and in recent weeks, we have continued to work specifically with Luminant, making the Administrator, Deputy Administrator and EPA technical staff available to assess their needs and continue to ensure they have options to meet these important new standards – including exploring additional flexibility for the company and encouraging more reliance on technologies the company has already installed. As recently as yesterday EPA offered to share additional information that shows the potential for a no-shut down, no-layoff solution for statewide compliance. It is unfortunate that company leadership rushed to a decision that needlessly puts their workers' jobs at risk.
The arguement is that air pollution generated in one state crosses state lines and negatively effects people in other states. Lets think about that. The pollution is generated during the creation of electricity. If the pollution caused by it's creation can not be allowed to cross state lines, why should the power generated in one state be allowed to cross state lines? Those that want to eliminate the means of electric production should be the first to do without power.
I wonder if any of these left leaners can come up with an answer for you. They will try but will never really make it.
LOL at you!!!...so now the EPA is not a credible source. LOL!!
Please remove the tinfoil hat slowly, it can cut you.
No bureaucratic agency should be taken 100% correct since they always try very hard to keep their jobs and in the case of the EPA it seems worse to me than anywhere else. Of course, they are going to say that they are 100% right since all of them need their jobs.
I see you are willing to dismiss the direct link to the EPA that I have provided in each post.
Most telling is that the EPA tried to work with this company to prevent a shut down.
I can't waste my time arguing with the uninformed, read the EPA finding and then get back to me with a reasonable argument.
Prior to announcing this important rule, EPA did extensive outreach to industry to ensure there were an array of compliance options, and in recent weeks, we have continued to work specifically with Luminant, making the Administrator, Deputy Administrator and EPA technical staff available to assess their needs and continue to ensure they have options to meet these important new standards – including exploring additional flexibility for the company and encouraging more reliance on technologies the company has already installed. As recently as yesterday EPA offered to share additional information that shows the potential for a no-shut down, no-layoff solution for statewide compliance. It is unfortunate that company leadership rushed to a decision that needlessly puts their workers' jobs at risk.
I called you just a minute ago on accepting what the EPA says in order to keep their jobs. They have not tried to work with anyone in that they want all their orders obeyed immediately and any longer than that is grounds for fine and punishment. We all knew what they would come up with but the plants they closed down, or forced the companies to close down, were targeted in the beginning.
I support nothing at all that EPA does, especially since Obama started using them to do what he tried to do with Cap and Trade and couldn't get done with a Democrat controlled Congress. Lisa Jackson will soon be gone along with her boss, I hope.
“We have hundreds of employees who have spent their entire professional careers at Luminant and its predecessor companies,” Luminant CEO David Campbell said in a statement. “At every step of this process, we have tried to minimize these impacts, and it truly saddens me that we are being compelled to take the actions we’ve announced today. We have filed suit to try to avoid these consequences.”
The company said it has been trying to meet the new standards, but won’t be able to do so without closing down several facilities and eliminating 500 jobs.
“As always, Luminant is committed to complying fully with EPA regulations,” Campbell said. “We have spent the last two months identifying all possible options to meet the requirements of this new rule, and we are launching a significant investment program to [COLOR=green !important][COLOR=green !important]reduce [COLOR=green !important]emissions[/color][/color][/color] across our facilities.”
“However, meeting this unrealistic deadline also forces us to take steps that will idle facilities and result in the loss of jobs,” Campbell adds.
When it comes to protecting the environment, the question that has to be evaluated is how clean is clean enough? We have already cut emmissions dramatically since the 1950s. Automotive ones have been cut some 98%, at a considerable cost. It took some 30 years and massive investments by the auto industry to get to where we are today, where we maintain the degree of performance consumers demand, while still meeting emmissions regulations. You hit a point of diminishing returns at some point. If you can cut 85% of pollution for X dollars, and 90% for ten times X, you're there.
This regulation is supposed to save some number of lives. But if it drives up power costs, that indirectly costs lives. Air conditioning, so important in much of the country, gets more expensive. Transportation, heating, virtually everything requireing electricity, all go up. Those costs take money out of other areas, like food, medicine, health care. Will the end result be saving lives, or costing them? The EPA, or others in the government, will never discuss the negative impacts of their decisions.
I don't support the EPA or big conglomerations 100%, but I do know that it is easier to destroy the environment than it is to repair it.
Cancers, respiratory diseases, spontaneous abortions, abnormal births, decline in life expectancy are all common knowledge when living in the vicinity of most of these sites that fight and bemoan EPA regulation.
I put the health of people and the planet over corporate greed because I guarantee my first born, they are not going to live or retire 100 miles near the sites they own.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
