By J.R. Pegg

WASHINGTON, DC, February 25, 2003 (ENS) - The Bush administration intends to roll back efforts to reduce mercury pollution despite increasing scientific evidence of its health risks, according to public health and environmental advocacy groups.

Critics contend the administration's Clear Skies initiative would allow coal fired power plants, the leading U.S. source of mercury pollution, to emit three times the amount of the toxic substance into the atmosphere than allowed under existing law.

The administration's policy is "outrageous," former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Carol Browner told reporters at a National Press Club briefing.

"It means more mercury in the air for longer," said Browner, who served as EPA chief from 1993 to 2001 under President Bill Clinton.

Carol Browner headed the U.S. EPA during the Clinton administration. (Photo courtesy U. of St. Thomas)

Under the Clean Air Act, Browner explained, EPA must issue "maximum achievable control technology" standards for coal-fired power plants, with compliance by the end of 2007.

In December 2001, EPA said these standards could reduce mercury emissions from power plants by about 90 percent, reducing the total to some five tons by 2007.

But under the Clear Skies initiative, Browner said, mercury emissions are capped at 26 tons in 2010 and capped at 15 tons by 2018.

"Mercury is the poster child for what is wrong with the President's plan," said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of Clean Air Trust, a nonprofit environmental group.

"The administration appears motivated by a desire to weaken and delay controls of mercury," he said.

Current emissions of mercury add to the existing concentration, which is continuously mobilized, deposited on land and water, and remobilized.

The primary health risk from mercury occurs when airborne mercury falls into surface waters where it can accumulate in streams and oceans. Bacteria in the water transform mercury into methylmercury, which fish absorb when they eat aquatic organisms. Humans absorb it when they eat fish.

Scientists have shown that methylmercury can cause brain and nerve damage, and studies indicate children and women of childbearing age are at a disproportionate risk.

Yesterday EPA released its second annual report on environmental factors affecting children's health, which found eight percent of women of childbearing age have unsafe levels of mercury in their bodies. This puts the number of babies at risk at about 300,000.

Coal fired plants are the nation's largest source of mercury emissions, contributing some 33 percent of the U.S. total emissions from industrial sources.

Currently these plants are exempt from clean air standards, but the other two large sources of mercury, medical and municipal waste incinerators, are tightly regulated.

Browner said that the EPA's success cutting mercury emissions from these two sources demonstrates that the Clean Air Act is the proper law to address reductions from power plants.

Municipal waste incinerators, or combustors, were responsible for some 20 percent of the nation's mercury emissions in 1990. Regulations finalized in 1995 have reduced emissions from these facilities by some 90 percent, according to EPA.

Medical waste incinerators were responsible for some 24 percent of the total national mercury emissions in 1990. Emissions controls finalized in 1997 are credited with cutting emissions from medical waste incinerators by some 94 percent, the EPA says.

Yet the Bush administration, along with the coal fired power plant industry, argues that the technology to cut mercury emissions is unproven and too expensive to be forced upon the industry at this time.

"EPA should first determine what levels of mercury reduction can be gained as a result of controls on other air pollutants before pursuing substantial additional reductions of mercury," said Scott Segal, director of the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council (ERCC), a lobbying group of power generating companies.

"At that time, EPA must carefully consider what levels of control are technologically feasible before pressing on," said Segal.

Browner contends that technologies for reducing mercury emissions do exist and adds that whenever EPA mandates any sort of pollution reductions, market forces rapidly push forward improvements to existing control technologies.

Coal fired power plant in New Mexico (Photo courtesy New Mexico Solar Energy Assn.)

"No one in the industry can say with a straight face that there aren't existing technologies to cut mercury emissions," Felice Stadler, national policy coordinator of the Clean the Air Campaign for the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) told reporters. "We shouldn't even be having this debate."

Segal says the ERCC is concerned that Browner and other critics of the Clear Skies initiative are supporting "draconian levels of mercury reduction" that are scientifically unproven.

Still, there is rising evidence of the health and environmental risks from mercury pollution beyond yesterday's new EPA report.

Last weekend, five of California's largest grocery retailers began displaying signs cautioning consumers about the dangers of mercury in fish.

Forty-four state governments now warn women and children to limit or avoid eating some fish for fear of mercury contamination.

Browner criticized the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for its lack of action. Last July, an FDA food safety committee recommended that pregnant women and children be warned to limit consumption of canned tuna due to mercury. But the FDA has yet to act on these recommendations.

"There is very little visibility about this problem," said Dr. Robert Goyer, former chairman of National Academy of Sciences committee on mercury. "There is a lack of public awareness."

The EPA report on children's health released yesterday provides additional evidence that the agency's regulatory efforts can protect public health, Browner said.

The report, "America's Children and the Environment," shows a decline in the number of children with elevated blood levels and a reduction in children's exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke. Both reductions were prompted by agency regulatory action.

The report cites mercury as an "emerging issue," but offers little specific guidance for future agency efforts to reduce mercury pollution.

"The administration should follow the law on the books," Browner said. "The science is there, the technology is there and so is the law. We now how to solve this problem."

Criticism of the Bush administration's policies on mercury extends to its international efforts, which many contend are designed to impede strong action to address the issue on a global scale.

In early February, the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) agreed to crack down on sources of mercury emissions around the globe.

"Mercury is a huge problem, a traveler without a passport, that spreads around the world in air and water," said Klaus Töpfer, executive director of UNEP. "Action is necessary. We have to reduce drastically and as soon as possible the risk it poses to a lot of people."

But objections from the U.S. delegation prevented the Governing Council from adopting binding limits on emissions from power plants and other major mercury sources.

Several members of Congress, including Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Representative Henry Waxman of California, also a Democrat, sent a joint letter yesterday to the President and key administration officials expressing concern about the U.S. positions during these negotiations.

The letter details a confidential U.S. negotiating document that revealed the administration's strategy to "oppose efforts" to develop a binding international agreement on mercury.

"Under previous administrations, the United States had a well deserved reputation as a world leader on the environment," the letter says. "The series of decisions you are making diminishes that reputation."

"Even more importantly, it threatens incalculable harm to the environment and the health of our children."

The EPA's report on children's health can be viewed at: http://www.epa.gov/envirohealth/children/