Debunking email hoaxes and exposing Internet scams since 2003!


Hoax-Slayer Logo Hoax-Slayer Logo

DividerDivider
Home    About    New Articles    RSS Feed    Subscriptions    Contact
DividerDivider
Bookmark and Share









Issue 137 - August 2012 (2nd Edition) - Page 27

US EPA Regulations Force Power Plant Closures

Issue 137 Start Menu

Previous Article            Next Article

Outline
Link being forwarded directs readers to a page that illustrates the number of US coal-fired power generation plants that will be forced to close due to new EPA regulations. 



Brief Analysis
The information in the report is mostly accurate, and is in part supported by other sources.  The issue encompasses a multitude of impacts both positive and negative, including environmental concerns, utility rates, health and well-being of residents in the vicinity of the power plants, and employment.  The report being presented is one side of the argument, and while the agency that produced the report is a non-profit, it is also heavily funded by a foundation set up by a large private energy company and run by individuals whose work history was in the energy sector.

Bookmark and Share
Detailed analysis and references below example.





Scroll down to submit comments
Last updated: August 3, 2012
First published: August 3, 2012
Article researched and written by David M. White
About Hoax-Slayer


Example
Power Plant Closures



Detailed Analysis

On December 21, 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency in the United States initiated new federal standards on toxic pollutants and mercury emissions from coal power plants.  However, the regulations are to some extent simply a more stringent enforcement of emissions standards the EPA was charged by the US Congress to establish and enforce 20 years ago.  Although charged by the US Congress in 1990 to develop standards and limits on emissions from power plants, existing regulations notably excluded any reference to mercury.   Other EPA regulations impacting other industrial operations (e.g., waste incinerators) included limits on mercury, but those regulations excluded oil- or coal-fired power plants.  The new “rule”, originally scheduled to be effective in 2015, is yet to be finalized and will now likely not take effect until 2016.  The EPA has acknowledged that it may have underestimated the number of plant closings the regulations would create, and on July 21, 2012 indicated they would defer finalizing the regulations until March 2013 while they conducted a reconsideration of the rule based on updated information from industry stakeholders.

The actual report being forwarded on Facebook does have some truth in it; however it must also be noted that the report cannot truly be considered as unbiased given the funding sources of the agency that produced it – The Institute for Energy Research.  An advocate for free market energy solutions, they also receive substantial financial support from Koch Industries, a company owned by two brothers who are notorious for their animosity towards the Obama administration.  Being an election year, the new EPA regulations naturally will be used as a political football.   Opponents of the regulation were quick to recall statements made by Obama in 2008 when, as a supporter of ‘cap and trade,’ he stated during an interview “If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them.” He later added, “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”  Even some Democrat members of Congress have a political stake in opposing the regulations due their states’ being large coal producers.

This article is not intended to take any particular side in this issue, and the perceived impact of the regulations depends largely on the political leanings of who is interpreting them.  Some of the data points made in the article are, however, quite speculative and entirely debatable. 

To address a few of the claims made in the article:
More than 34 gigawatts (GW) of electrical generating capacity are now set to retire... shuttering over 10 percent of the U.S.’s coal-fired generating capacity”

Overstated.  In 2009, the 600+ coal-fired power plants in the US were running at an average of 64% capacity.  2007 was the highest capacity factor on record, and was still less than 75%.   Most reliable sources identify 32 power plants that will definitely retire at least one power generation unit, and an addition 37 plants that have at least one unit at risk of retirement.  As many of these plants have more than one unit, power generation would not cease at all 69 of those plants entirely.  To put in better perspective, there are a total of 615 power plants in the US.  In those plants, there are a total of 1,466 generating unitsIF all the units listed were shuttered, and IF they were all running at full capacity, it would still only reflect a 7% reduction in capacity.  The reduction in generation capacity would also be a factor of the capacity of the units being shuttered versus those whose output could be increased – the capacity of these units targeted for closure ranges from less than 40MW to over 1200 MW, and those are a fraction of some of the units with 60,000MW capacity that are not on the closure list.  Any reduction in generation could be offset by utilizing currently stagnant capacity of other units.

34.7 GW of electrical generating capacity will close

Absolute worst case scenario and not supported by other reports.

Michigan and Ohio Hit Worst By Recent Announcements
Those ‘recent announcements’, especially as it affects Michigan, should be tempered by the fact that they were coming at a time that the industry was pushing for reconsideration of the rule.  Ohio, which is a heavy coal production state to start with, could conceivably lose over 17% of generation capacity (not necessarily actual power generation, but total capacity).

EPA Regulations are Already Causing Electricity Prices to Dramatically Rise
Not everywhere, and not necessarily due to new regulations.  In many states, utilities actually have to ask permission to raise rates from the state’s public services commission, and those rate increases can be denied.  (Electrical cooperatives are generally exempt from this.)  And there are other reasons power companies request increases – including covering the cost of building new plants that were already being planned for prior to the regulations or maintaining a failing power grid.

There are a great many other arguments bouncing back and forth regarding the regulations, ranging from job loss in the generation units to the health benefits of shutting them down.  And it wouldn’t be a truly American political argument without debating the financial cost/benefit

The topic will almost certainly remain a bone of contention between the current administration and the opposition, so be prepared to filter the rhetoric from the facts.

Bookmark and Share



References

http://www.epa.gov/
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/21/health/epa-mercury-rule/index.html
http://www.epa.gov/captrade/
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=9240BE1A-E623-44A0-A78B-20938EA4A997
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/21/epa-take-second-look-coal-rules/
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Existing_U.S._Coal_Plants
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45716312/ns/business-oil_and_energy/t/list-power-plants-retiring-face-epa-rules/#.UBn31qNdDK4
http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/viewart/20120801/NEWS01/208010319/Justices-deny-Miss-Power-request-rate-increase
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bs-ed-bge-outages-20120801,0,143841.story
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/coal-fired-power-plant-closures_n_1160115.html
http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/takingtoxics/p1.html
http://www.epi.org/publication/combined-effect-obama-epa-rules/


Previous Article            Next Article

Issue 137 Start Menu

Pages in this issue:
  1. Anti Text-Driving Message - Car Wedged Under Truck Image
  2. Nationwide Phishing Scam Emails
  3. Faux Image - Double Sunset on Mars
  4. Microsoft Cyber-Crime Department Phishing Scam
  5. Does A Photo Depict A Puppy Being Forced to Drink Vodka?
  6. Post Circulating Claims Hotel Made Disabled US Veteran Crawl Down Stairs
  7. AFL vs NRL - Wrongdoings of Australian Members of Parliament Hoax
  8. Three.co.uk Phishing Scam
  9. Another Facebook Sick Baby Hoax - Baby With Brain Cancer
  10. Circulating Opinion Piece - 'Democratic, Republican Liberal-Progressive's Worst Nightmare'
  11. Fake Three (Or Seven) Headed Snake Image
  12. Misleading Health Advice Email - 'Mayo Clinic on Aspirin and Heart Attacks'
  13. Facebook Survey Scam - Free Argos Gift Card
  14. 'Email Deactivation Warning' Phishing Scam
  15. Anti-Obama Youtube Video Compiles Multiple Conspiracy Theories
  16. Fake AT&T Bill Emails Point To Malware
  17. Messages Claim Coca Cola to be Banned In Bolivia
  18. 'Free Apple Product' Text Message Survey Scam
  19. Circulating Warning - Facebook May Close Down Animal Rescue Account'
  20. 2012 FIFA World Cup Online Lottery Advance Fee Scam
  21. Email Claiming US Gold Medal Gymnast Gabrielle Douglas Faces Lifetime Ban Used to Spread Malware
  22. Bigpond Security Service Phishing Scam
  23. Wrestling Star John Cena is NOT Dead
  24. Hoax - NASA Predicts Total Blackout of Planet in Dec 2012
  25. Wrestling Star Undertaker is NOT Dead
  26. Colin And Chris Weir Donation Programme Advance Fee Scam
  27. US EPA Regulations Force Power Plant Closures
  28. 'View Facebook Followers' Scam Targets Twitter Users
  29. Lloyds TSB 'New Banking Authentication' Phishing Scam
  30. Faux Image - Pilots Protesting Chemtrails
  31. Telstra Bill Account Update Phishing Scam
  32. McDonald's Signboard Supporting Chick-Fil-A
  33. ABSA 'Authorized EFT Payment Received' Phishing Scam
  34. Hoax Picture - Obama Holding Phone Upside Down
  35. 'eBay Item Not Received' Phishing Scam Email
  36. Wells Fargo 'Security Check' Phishing Scam
  37. False Warnings - 'Cleaning out Friends List' Questions on Facebook Contain Viruses or are Posted by Hackers