We would have preferred that states be given more time and cooperation from the feds in complying with a 2011 Environmental Protection Agency emissions rule governing pollution that crosses state lines. But the Supreme Court ruling this week that sided with the EPA is still a victory not only for the Obama administration in its push for cleaner air but for states and populations affected by downwind pollution.
In Wisconsin, that should mean cleaner air and healthier citizens as states that foul our winds are required to clean up their acts. It also means that Wisconsin utilities need to curb the pollutants emitted from their plants, but that work has been under way for a while and should not now impose any undue difficulties.
Brian Manthey of We Energies, the largest utility in the state, told us in an email this week that the “We Energies generation fleet is actually well-positioned to comply … due to all of the investments we have already made in air quality controls and emission reductions.”
The utility has added controls to existing units at Pleasant Prairie and Oak Creek, and new units at Oak Creek were built with modern emission controls. The utility also is converting a coal plant in the Menonomee Valley from coal to natural gas.
“With the completion of the Power the Future Plan, we’ve increased the generating capacity of our fleet by about 50 percent and dropped combined emissions (Nitrogen Oxide, Sulfur dioxide and Mercury) by 80 percent since 2000,” Manthey wrote. “That’s before the conversion of Valley.”
The environmental group Clean Wisconsin praised the ruling, saying in a statement that, “In Wisconsin alone, it’s estimated that there will be 440 fewer premature deaths annually because of improved air quality as a result of this rule. Improved public health also carries an estimated economic benefit for Wisconsin of up to $3.5 billion annually.”
Similar benefits also should accrue to the citizens of other states as noxious emissions from upwind power plants are reduced. Although upwind states could have used more time to comply, the underlying principle was never in doubt: Air pollution is best handled on a regional and federal basis; single states downwind from heavy polluters have no defense against those emissions.
The wind doesn’t recognize political boundaries, and, as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the 6-2 majority, “In crafting a solution to the problem of interstate air pollution, regulators must account for the vagaries of the wind.”
The ruling could have implications for EPA rules expected next month on carbon emissions with opponents worried that the decision could encourage the EPA to overreach. But EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy has said the agency will be flexible and work with states on the first-ever controls on power plants for the gases blamed for global warming.
That would be a good approach. Working with states and utilities yields better results than coercion.
— Copley News Service
