By Leslie Wolcott
How clean is the air that you breathe? How many industrial pollutants are released into the air and water in or near your neighborhood?
Some residents of a Chicago neighborhood were so worried about their air quality that they created an organization to fight the disproportionate amount of pollution they felt they were subject to. Though the group originally coalesced to investigate lead pollution from a brass smelting plant, the neighborhood is also home to a power generating station. Members of PERRO, the Pilsen Environmental Rights and Reform Organization, work to simultaneously educate community members about sources of pollution in the area, and to try to reduce the amounts of pollution from industrial sources in their community all without reducing business opportunities in the area.
Members of this group felt that because of their neighborhood’s location, industrial legacy, lower-than-average median income, and minority population, they were more likely to host industries that emit pollutants that can be dangerous to human health. PERRO also recently held a candlelight vigil to remember the 40+ Chicago area residents they say die each year as a result of two aging coal plants in the area.
While newer coal plants don’t release the same amount of pollution as those built decades ago, there are still a number of health concerns associated with living near any coal-fired power generating station. The Lansing Board of Water and Light has proposed a new coal fired power plant that would be built in Delta Township, near the Erickson power plant. Though the proposal been put on hold, like many new projects in a down economy, the issue will come up again.
Coal plants produce air pollution and solid waste. They also release greenhouse gases into the air. No matter how “green” a new plant may claim to be, those living around the potential new project should ask important questions about it. Are there long-term health effects of this decision? Short term effects? Does the community immediately surrounding the new industry understand the implications of the project? Who will bear the burden of this industry, and who will benefit from it? In other words, are the potential negative effects of such a project going to be equally distributed over the population that benefits from it?
There are solid and airborne wastes that come with plants like this. According to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, in 2007 the Erickson plant released 10.59 lbs of lead or lead compounds into the air at the facility, 24.79 lbs. to land at the facility, and transferred another 366 lbs. of lead/lead compounds to an offsite facility for disposal (The EPA, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Occupational Health and Safety Organization each have rules determining the ratio of lead in the environment that are considered dangerous to human health). At Erickson, 74.78 lbs. of mercury were released into the air in 2007. Calls to the Lansing Board of Water and Light inquiring about the new facility’s projected emissions were not returned.
Wastes released by plants like this have the most impact in their immediate vicinity. Coal plants, no matter how old or new, do emit greenhouse gases (newer plants tend to emit fewer of these wastes, though they still emit them). According to the EPA, so far we have not experienced major health effects of greenhouse gases. However, the agency made news just recently when it declared that greenhouse gases do, in fact, contribute to air pollution that could endanger human health. This is important because it will allow the EPA to more closely regulate emissions under the Clean Air Act. In the future, according to the EPA, effects of global warming on human health could range from simple changes in temperature to the spread of infectious diseases and reductions in air quality, which affects lungs and breathing. Just recently reports have surfaced of that some people who lived near Papau New Guinea have become the first refugees forced to flee their homes due to the effects of global warming. While global warming is a cumulative effect of many pollutants, we are beginning to realize that the cumulative effect of those pollutants can be quite frightening.
One claim made by the BWL in proposing this plant is that the project will bring many new jobs to the area. Lansing certainly needs jobs. It might be useful for residents to ask how many of those jobs would be temporary, and how many would be permanent. According to SourceWatch, power plants tend to employ about .18 people per megawatt of power produced?or an average of about 54 permanent jobs in 300megawatt generating plant. The BWL frequently asked questions page for the new plant claims thousands of new jobs for the area. At a time when Michigan’s unemployment rate has reached record numbers, the conversation that weighs many short-term and some long-term jobs against human health and relying on new technologies for alternative energy production becomes a crucial one. I hope you’ll consider joining that conversation.
You can find out more about some of the problems with our current power system, and the many alternatives for power creation and distribution in the future, on my blog at www.greenscales.org.
