Coal-fired Power Plants Are Big Contributors to Sooty Particle Pollution in Eastern States

Posted: 02-Jul-2004; Updated: 24-Apr-2007

Anyone who has spent a day outdoors in a bustling city, near a construction site or a factory is unlikely to forget the black sooty grime washed off at the end of the day. Technically known as particulate matter (or PM), soot is spewed out in the black smoke billowing from tailpipes and smokestacks -- from factories and power plants, diesel-powered trucks, buses, ships, boats, locomotives and tractors. But sooty particles are more than just a nuisance -- they are one of the nation's most pressing public health problems.

Particulate pollution is a mixture of soot, smoke, and tiny particles formed in the atmosphere from sulfur dioxide (SO2) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) pollution.  Sooty particles are most dangerous when very small as they can penetrate deep into the lungs (and the lungs are not effectively able to expel them), where they cause serious health impacts. Children are especially vulnerable because their lungs are still developing. Breathing in air heavy with tiny particles can be dangerous even over a short time; because these particles are so minuscule, they can enter the circulatory system and damage blood vessels.

Coal-fired power plants are a big contributor to the problem. "Power plant smokestacks are public health enemy number one for their contribution to deadly particulate pollution across the eastern United States," said Dr. John Balbus, a physician and head of our health program. "Particulate pollution contributes to tens of thousands of premature deaths annually, heart attacks, strokes and asthma attacks."

California's San Joaquin Valley, home to some of the nation's most polluted air also claims the nation's highest asthma rates in children -- and dangerously high levels of particulate pollution. Although air pollution has not been shown to cause asthma, particulate pollution worsens asthma cases. In California, a complex mix of sources contribute to unhealthy particulate pollution including motor vehicles, diesel freight trucks, locomotives, construction and agricultural equipment, commercial ships, aircraft, large-scale animal feeding operations and industrial sources. 

EPA Unveils List of Counties Violating Particulate Pollution Rules

EPA has just proposed its list of areas failing to meet the health-based air quality standard for particulate pollution. (In April, EPA announced its designations of ozone "nonattainment" areas.)  States submitted their recommendations to EPA in February and now have three months to respond before EPA issues a final list.  After that, local officials must devise plans to reduce the pollution.

EPA has identified 243 counties in 22 states (largely in the Eastern states and California) as not meeting the health-based standards, whereas the states' recommendations covered only 145 counties in 18 states. Among the major cities EPA cited as having unhealthy particulate pollution are Los Angeles, San Diego, and the San Joaquin Valley; Atlanta; New York City; Philadelphia and Pittsburgh; St. Louis; Indianapolis; Knoxville; Washington, D.C.; Chicago; Cincinnati and Cleveland; and Detroit.  (For a full listing of counties recommended by the states compared with those listed by EPA, click here [pdf]; for a map, click here [PDF] -- Adobe Acrobat required.)

Our Push for Healthy Air

While EPA's action is a welcome move toward lowering air soot levels, Environmental Defense is pressing for more comprehensive protection. Our own detailed analysis shows that over 400 counties are not meeting the particulate health-based standards, meaning that more than 116 million people across the U.S. are still breathing unhealthy air. Our team of air pollution experts and other concerned groups submitted a detailed evaluation to EPA. (Click here [PDF] to read the letter submitted to EPA in June 2004). 

One reason for the discrepancy between the states' low number of counties and our higher number is that many states identified only counties that monitor air for particulate pollution and did not account for the fact that dirty air knows no boundaries -- county, state or otherwise -- and that neighboring counties suffer from the airborne pollution. EPA's policy calls for the whole metropolitan area to be designated in violation of clean air rules if one county is in violation, recognizing that a violating monitor represents a more far-reaching problem.  And the Clean Air Act directs EPA to include contributing sources in nearby areas.

Curbing the Emissions That Produce Dangerous Soot 

To its credit, EPA has taken significant steps to reduce tailpipe pollution by setting tough emission standards for passenger vehicles, diesel trucks, diesel buses and diesel equipment, although it will take many years for these standards to phase in.  In the meantime, we are encouraging federal and state diesel retrofit programs and use of low-sulfur diesel to clean up existing diesel-powered vehicles and equipment.

At the same time, power plant pollution that leads to harmful particulates has not been adequately controlled. Although EPA has implemented a mandatory reduction program for Eastern states to reduce NOx emissions from power plants, which have been on the rise for the last 20 years, these restrictions are only in effect during the summer smog season. We are pushing for year-round NOx controls in these states. (For more on NOx and Power plants, click here.)

But SO2 is another story. Although overall emissions of this pollutant have gone down in our country thanks to the cap-and-trade program we help create to curb acid rain (part of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments), there is a large body of research that indicates that SO2 emission must be reduced dramatically to curb the formation of sooty particles and protect public health.  EPA's proposed Clean Air Interstate Rule, which aims to address power plant pollution through a cap-and-trade system provides an opportunity to move forward with long overdue power plant pollution cuts. 

Michael Shore, Environmental Defense air quality expert, says, "EPA's power plant control program is just a proposal so no one will even begin to breathe cleaner air until it is finalized  -- and it must be strengthened to achieve essential public health protections."

Power plants are one of the biggest emitters of SO2, generating more than 60% of all sulfur dioxide released from all pollution sources nationwide.  There are some 1,200 electric generating units nationally (at over 500 power plants) and less than one-quarter have installed scrubbers for sulfur dioxide, even though scrubber technology has been available for thirty years.

Our analysis identifies 155 coal-fired power plants immediately in and near areas with unhealthy particulate pollution levels. These plants collectively discharge more than 5 million tons of harmful sulfur dioxide each year.  Many more power plants release pollution from tall smokestacks that is carried hundreds of miles downwind and impacts people living in areas with unhealthy particulate pollution.

But EPA's proposed boundaries miss the mark. EPA has omitted 41 power plants that are either in or directly adjacent to nonattaining metro areas.  The biggest polluters that were left out are the J.M. Stuart coal-fired power plant in Adams County, Ohio, which is adjacent to the Cincinnati metropolitan area.  In 2002, this plant discharged over 117,000 tons of SO2 and over 46,000 tons of oxides of nitrogen.  The Homer City coal-fired power plant in Indiana County, Pennsylvania and adjacent to the Pittsburg metropolitan area was also left out.   In 2002, this plant discharged over 105,000 tons of SO2 and over 25,000 tons of NOx.

FIND OUT MORE

• Press release: Particulate Spewing Power Plant Smokestacks Public Health Enemy No. 1 (6/29/2004)
• Asthma and Dirty Air
• Nitrogen Oxides and Power Plants
• Diesel Nonroad Engines
• Schoolbus Blues: Waiting to Exhale

Scorecard -- Find out who the top polluters are of fine particles in the United States and the top polluters of sulfur dioxide on www.scorecard.org. Get answers to your questions aobut local pollution.

Environmental Protection Agency

• Fine Particle Designations
• Clean Air Rules of 2004
• State Recommendatons versus EPA Recommendations on PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas [PDF]