Lindsay Beebe
January 26 was a day of tense emotions, ranting locals, and unwavering environmentalists. The downtown public library in Salt Lake City, Utah, was an eight-hour roller coaster of public outcry vs. support for the Beehive State’s widespread coal industry. Concerned citizens and members of environmental groups fought back, claiming the coal boom results in the state’s equally widespread haze and smog industry that coats the landscape eight out of every ten days in many of the state’s iconic national parks. It’s only Canyonlands, Arches, and Zion we’re talking about here— areas that attract tourists nationwide and abroad who congregate to bathe in the glow of red canyons and ancestral Pueblo remnants.
The heated debate concerns a pair of emission reduction plans, one issued by the State of Utah and the other by the EPA, to keep the dirty toxins spewed by two of the oldest and dirtiest coal-fired nuclear power plants at a drastic decrease. Both owned by Rocky Mountain Power, Emery County’s Hunter and Huntingdon coal plants are currently up for the installation of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology that would decrease harmful pollutants. It has been documented that both of these plants are responsible for producing 40 percent of Utah’s nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions, which is a major player in causing global climate change and the production of haze.
“These emissions must be accompanied by ammonia nitrate to create haze, which is only part of the problem,” says Alan Matheson, executive director of Utah’s Department of Environmental Quality.(1) The arid desert of southern and southwestern Utah, where most of these parks are located, are not high in concentrations of the latter compound. Matheson and other scientists view the installation of SCRs as not only the sole cause of nitrogen oxide emissions, but also an ineffective method for solving the problem (1). Furthermore, the power plants are located 80-100 miles northeast of economic boosters such as Arches and Canyonlands National Parks, which stands as a testament to the far-reaching danger of haze and smog ensuing in the state.
One of the major themes surrounding the hearing is that of ‘environmentalists’ vs. coal miners and mining communities. Utah is the last of the Western states to phase out coal, which serves as a backbone of economic prosperity for many towns throughout the central part of the state. Some coal supporters were outraged the meeting place was 150 miles from the actual coal plants, insisting the EPA had intentionally planned it that way to spin the case towards the environmentalists, outdoor enthusiasts, and representatives from a few national parks. (2) They felt that holding the hearing in Salt Lake City painted an inaccurate picture of the quality of air and environmental health in that region, instead of holding it in central Utah where the air is much cleaner. (3)
The 250+ coal miners and locals, arriving in buses sponsored by the Bowie Resources coal company, supported the state’s clean air plan, which lauds the recent closure of a much smaller coal-fired plant. A few individuals, such as central Utah resident Dave Thomas, shirked their previous staunchly pro-coal attitudes in favor of the EPA’s plan to scrutinize the environmental issues of air quality that plague Utah today. Said Thomas to the EPA:
“I would say this is not easy for me. My father was a coal miner. His father was a coal miner. I'm well aware of the things that happen when coal mines and jobs close down, but I am still asking the EPA to reject the state implementation plan. My basis is that I have absolutely no faith that the Utah environmental regulators will do anything to clean up the air in Utah unless there is a federal presence."(3)
Carbon County’s Phillip Jensen added, "Coal is not the end all boogeyman that so many people portray it to be. The EPA really needs to look at the reality of pollutants and their sources and stop trying to destroy these industries. Stop trying to destroy whole communities, and stop trying to destroy the people's lives all for this holier-than-thou crusade." (4)
Not surprisingly, the EPA’s more incisive plan was supported by environmentalists, National Park Service representatives, and outdoor enthusiasts. Proposing an amendment to the state’s Regional Haze Implementation Plan, the document would address the requirements of the Regional Haze Rule and partially approve or disapprove Utah’s Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP), and instead propose a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for the elements of the SIP that are being questioned. (5) From a fiduciary perspective this would require both coal-fired plants to spend $500-700 million to upgrade their old emissions control technology with new clean air equipment.
Ultimately, the decision rests with Shaun McGrath, the EPA’s Denver-based Region 8 administrator. The public comment period for both sides is open until March 14, which is followed by a final deadline of June 1for the EPA to respond to public comments and issue a final decision. In the meantime, the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign and other allied organizations have been working tirelessly to help spread awareness of coal pollution throughout the nation. Utah-based Beyond Coal organizer Lindsay Beebe is continuing to work on climate policy with Rocky Mountain Power, pushing for a transition towards a sustainable clean energy economy and away from fossil fuels.