New coal regulations not worth the risk

Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency released the details of its new plan to roll back federal pollution restrictions on coal-burning power plants in an attempt to buoy the languishing coal industry and replace stricter Obama-era regulations.

The Trump administration’s new energy proposal, called the Affordable Clean Energy rule, is intended to replace Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which would have phased out most coal-fired power plants by 2030. In contrast, the Affordable Clean Energy rule would shift power plant regulation to individual states and eliminate several government regulations on carbon emissions.

Unfortunately, the announcement was accompanied by a startling report. The Trump administration’s own analysis concluded that the new regulations could lead to many as 1,400 premature deaths annually by 2030 from an increase in microscopic airborne particulates known as PM 2.5, which have been linked to heart and lung disease and are known for their ability to trigger chronic problems like asthma and bronchitis.

The technical analysis conducted by the current administration is hundreds of pages long, and says “implementing the proposed rule is expected to increase emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and increase the level of emissions of certain pollutants in the atmosphere that adversely affect human health.”

It also states that the new rules would result in up to 15,000 new cases of upper respiratory problems, 48,000 new cases of what it described as “exacerbated asthma,” and at least 21,000 missed days of school each year because of the increase in atmospheric pollutants.

The mortality numbers for the Affordable Clean Energy rule are calculated using a modeling system reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences.

As these damning numbers roll in, one has to wonder — is forestalling the retirement of a few coal plants via the new regulations worth the heavy toll it will take on human health? Is it too much risk for too little payoff?

If the new rules were likely to save or revive coal production, maybe you could ignore those deaths or justify the children missing school. Maybe you could argue that saving an entire industry and its jobs would be worth it.

But that’s not what’s happening here.

If the Clean Power Plan had taken effect when it was proposed in 2014, coal generation would have dropped 29 percent below today’s levels by 2030. The EPA estimates that coal generation would drop 23 percent in the same time frame without any climate regulations at all. And even if the Trump administration’s proposal is finalized, coal generation in the next 12 years is estimated to drop by 20 percent.

No matter how you slice it, the coal industry is on the decline, as agencies move away from coal toward gas, solar and wind energy in order to present more attractively to investors.

But what about clean coal, you may ask? Politicians have been tossing the phrase around for a decade, confusing average citizens, scientists and coal industry experts alike.

The fact is, “clean coal” never existed. The term is a misnomer, a marketing term popularized by coal industry groups in 2008 when the conversation about global warming was mounting and Congress was considering climate change legislation. The term is used to refer to a variety of different coal storing and mining methods, but these methods are incredibly rare at best and nonexistent at worst, and arguing that any of them are truly “clean” is deliberately misleading.

According to a New York Times report, more than 250 coal plants have shut down since 2010, and another 40 plants have announced they will close in the years ahead.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the coal employment has plummeted, losing nearly 40,000 jobs since 2012.

Virtually no new coal plants are being built due to natural gas, wind and solar power’s emergence as the cheapest readily available sources for electricity.

Even the Kentucky Coal Museum in the heart of coal country runs on solar panels, which speaks volumes about how outdated coal is as an energy source.

Time for some harsh truths. The reality is that coal is dying, and staving off its inevitable demise for a few extra years isn’t worth the catastrophic damage it could wreak on our and our children’s health.

Sometimes you have to know when to let things go, and for coal, that time has come.

Shannen Talbot can be reached at shannen@cheneyfreepress.com.