The green trio of PennFuture, Sierra Club, and NRDC today blasted new rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency. The activists say the rules create loopholes for dirty diesel and
gas electricity generators, allowing them to avoid installing pollution
controls for toxic and other air pollution emissions.

“These proposed rules sacrifice local air quality and public health,
distort energy markets, and could endanger electricity reliability in
our region,” said Christina Simeone, director of the PennFuture Energy
Center, a program of Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future. 

Several years ago, EPA adopted rules limiting the amount of toxic air
emissions — like formaldehyde and benzene — that are released from small
diesel and gas-fired generators. 
In a news release the organizations say that EPA is now proposing to allow dirty
generators to increase by six times the number of hours they may operate
in electricity planning programs without any pollution controls.

“EPA’s proposal would create a loophole allowing dirty generators to
participate in profitable electricity market programs, giving them
additional revenue while avoiding life-saving pollution controls,” said
Courtney Lane, senior policy analyst at PennFuture.

“The loophole in these rules could result in reduced reliability and
will result in increased air pollution, by making the electricity system
more dependent on small, dirty sources of electricity. Closing this
loophole will send market signals to invest in cleaner generation and
conservation while better protecting Americans’ health,” said John
Walke, clean air director and senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

“Nobody gets a free pass,” said Mark Kresowik, eastern region deputy
director for the Sierra Club‘s Beyond Coal Campaign. “Even the local
operators of the electric grid say that our energy supply is secure.
Don’t tell mothers that the only way to ensure a stable electric supply
is to put their kids’ health in danger… The
technologies exist to reduce this pollution, and that’s why EPA should
close the loophole.” 
Do you agree?  Is there another side to the story?  Tell us what you think in the box below. If one isn’t visible, activate it by clicking on the tiny ‘comments’ line. 

************************************************************************************************************

For
thorough coverage of environmental news, issues, legislation and
regulation
in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, try a free, 30-day subscription to our daily
newsletter
EnviroPolitics. We track environment/energy bills–from introduction to enactment.

***********************************************************************************************************

Verified by MonsterInsights