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.
SCOTUS ruled that the EPA had to consider costs in the control of emissions on power plants. The EPA estimated an annual cost of $9.6 Billion with only $6 Million in benefits. So all of the mercury emissions rules that were to shut down the coal-fired plants are no longer in place.
Yet, the EPA seems to think that it has an easy fix. But, given that the Supreme Court explicitly held that you can't create a rule (under the Clean Air Act) that costs many billions of dollars and only saves dollars ($6 million benefits to $9.6 billion in costs is a huge disparity), I don't know how the EPA gets past that. If they someone manage to up their benefits estimates, then that would be convenient and suspect, and subject to litigation.
The cost may even be way underestimated depending on the cost of other energy in particular natural gas.
The reason the benefits are so small is because mercury is a global issue. US coal plants account for less than 1% of the global pool, the US as a whole accounts for about 3 percent. The EPA estimates most of that is deposited outside of the US. The primary source that can be accounted for somewhat reliably is Asia and in particular China. Another primary source is gold mining in third world countries and that is one source that is hard to estimate, whatever it is it's a lot.
One estimate on these mercury rules concluded they would have decreased deposition rates inside the US from 1 to 10 percent. The EPA's own estimate said IQ's would increase 2/1000 of one point which is not even measurable.
So all of the mercury emissions rules that were to shut down the coal-fired plants are no longer in place.
This may already be a done deal, the coal plants that already closed were old and would have closed soon anyway. The ones still in operation would have already implemented or begun to implement this.
If they someone manage to up their benefits estimates, then that would be convenient and suspect, and subject to litigation.
They did do a cost benefit analysis but apparently after they began the process which seems to be the issue here. Most of the benefits listed in that analysis are co-benefits unrelated to mercury.
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.
