Clean Error Act (Titles 2 and 3) Mobile Sources and Air Toxics ©2006 Dr. B. C. Paul

Title 2 - Mobile Sources  Target is primarily vehicles –Requirements can be especially stringent in ozone non-attainment areas –Was part of what was fueling the 1999 SIP call  Implications for mining will impact primarily quarries in urban areas with ozone non- attainment –New law will go after heavy and off road trucks with special engine and fuel requirements –Is becoming more general in all areas now.

Title 3 - Air Toxics  Title provides for listing certain emissions as hazardous or toxic –Any source that could emit 25 tons in a year would be a major source - could need remediation  Could impact mining in two ways –Some gasoline additives could be considered to produce hazardous air pollutants (HAPS)

The Mercury Issue  Trace amounts of Mercury found in coal –Mercury is easily volatized and not easily condensed –Law required ruling on trace toxics by Dec 2000 One of Clinton’s EPAs last acts was to rule power plant mercury emissions required regulation, other toxics did not (specifically arsenic was not listed)

The Mercury Problem  Debated on Which Part of Clean Air Act to Use –Some wanted a Title 1 regulation requiring any available technology as part of a good neighbor policy MACT (Maximum Available Control Technology) –Other was Air Toxics limits which could use a cap and trade approach  Bush’s EPA went cap and trade –Since Clinton had hinted at MACT some called this cutting Clean Air Act

Controlling Mercury from Power Plant Emissions  How to control mercury –First Get Real US power is about 1% of worlds mercury load –53% from Asia / Europe South Africa bigger generators 50% of mercury deposited in the US comes from outside our boarders (Asian economies mostly) Power plants are largest consumer of mercury containing products but only about –40% of total in U.S. (that after almost a 50% reduction in 10 years –If idea is that getting power plants will fix the mercury problem – maybe I could sell you a bridge in Brooklyn instead.

Available Control Technology  Fuel Choices –Generally Lignite very high 30lbs/TBTU, Bituminous ave around 15, Sub-bituminous around 10 or 12 PRB is selectively mining lowest Hg stuff around 8 lb – lower regional ave Some region Bituminous around 8 to 10 such as Illinois Basin (lowest Bituminous reserve)  Washing –Lowers Illinois coal around 60% or better (distributed differently sulfur and cuts more effectively) –May be able to lower sub-bituminous similar but only limited data and not a commercial practice

Control Technology  Regulatory structures have been based on assuming only stack reductions count  Stack Technologies –Scrubbers, ESPs and baghouses with right temp profile Ionize the mercury so it has a charge Get right temps so it will condense onto something you can get Most Illinois coal mercury will Ionize – Most PRB will not

Control Technology Cont  Charcoal injection and baghouses –Get 90% reduction with medical waste incinerators (actually most reductions in other sources have been through reduced mercury in feedstocks not emissions controls) –Scale up from a lab furnace to a power plant is not even funny

Bush’s Clean Air Act.  Assembled with regulatory interpretations no Congressional Action –Repealed Title 4 for 2/3rds country using an obscure provision of Title 1 to supersede it –Implemented a Cap and Trade under Title 3 Allocated mercury credits to states primacy programs Exempted the high mercury coals in Texas from significant reductions –Made cuts for bituminous coals Allocations were based on demonstrated stack technologies only  Blogoviech looking for Illinois Primacy program based on MACT but may consider a start to finish approach