Comment: Conservation a better option than CPS coal plant

01/01/2005

Erin Zayko
Special to the Express-News

City Public Service is about to spend $1 billion to build a new coal plant. In addition, the plant will burn $100 million in fuel each year for the next 30 years to fire its boilers. That adds up to $4 billion.

Not only will this plant cost a lot of money, it will unnecessarily emit a variety of harmful contaminants into our skies.

CPS says it is building one of the cleanest plants in the country while also reducing emissions at its existing coal plants, but let's look carefully at the facts.

The proposed plant would add a lot of pollution to our atmosphere: more than 6 million tons of carbon dioxide; 140 pounds of brain-damaging mercury; particles that trigger asthma and heart attacks; silica, which causes black lung disease; hydrochloric acid; sulfur dioxide; and nitrogen oxide. This pollution is dangerous and will affect citizens' health and the climate for the 30 to 50 years this plant is expected to run.

Carbon dioxide contributes to global warming. Almost every scientist who studies the problem agrees that the climate is changing and that the results will be bad for public health.

The impacts on Central Texas will be severe. We'll see more heat waves and droughts like we experienced in the late '90s, followed by torrential rains and floods. Far-fetched? Ask the flood control experts. They'll tell you we've had two 500-year floods and a 250-year flood in the past six years.

Almost every other industrialized country has agreed to limit their emissions of carbon dioxide. As a result, those limitations are now international law. Without U.S. compliance, trade sanctions may kick in, and we may end up paying $25 per ton for carbon emissions. Applied to all carbon dioxide emissions from this plant, this would add another $200 million a year to the cost of operating the facility.

Mercury causes brain damage. Less than one teaspoon of mercury can contaminate a 20-acre lake. The proposed plant would add up to 140 pounds of mercury to the air each year. If a pregnant woman eats mercury-contaminated fish, her child may suffer permanent brain damage, learning disabilities or attention deficits.

In economic terms, that means more taxes paid by the average citizen for programs for children with special needs. CPS says fish in the lake near the existing coal plants aren't contaminated, but fish in the San Antonio River have mercury levels that exceed EPA guidelines.

Silica causes black lung disease, and the proposed plant would emit five times more silica than the state standard, or effective screening level. Fine-particle pollution is known to trigger asthma and heart attacks. This plant would also expose people to levels of hydrochloric acid gas that exceed the state's effective screening level.

CPS will tell you these emissions would only exceed safe limits for a few hours each year, but such exposure can have serious health impacts.

This coal plant isn't needed. An internal CPS study has found that conservation measures could save 1.6 times more energy than this polluting plant will produce. Some energy conservation methods include tightening leaks, high performance windows and new high-tech lighting, appliances and air conditioners that use a third of the energy consumed by the systems most of us have in our homes today.

The choice that faces the city is simple. Would we be better off investing $1 billion into a polluting coal plant or investing that same money (or less) in making our homes and apartments cooler while reducing our electric bills?

That $1 billion divided by the 500,000 houses and apartments in the city is about $2,000 per home. That's a lot of efficiency.

Some say that San Antonians will never grasp energy conservation, but that's what they used to say about water conservation. San Antonio reduced water use by 30 percent and avoided spending billions of dollars to build an unneeded reservoir.

We don't need this plant. It will impact our health, and it will cost far more than energy efficiency.

Erin Zayko is a member of Smart Growth San Antonio.

Fair Use Statement

© All Rights Reserved SEED Coalition