EPA’s move to regulate mercury emissions rejected

WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court today struck down a market-based effort by the Bush administration to regulate emissions of mercury from coal- and oil-fired power plants, agreeing with critics that the Environmental Protection Agency had violated the Clean Air Act when it established the rule.

A coalition of environmental groups and 17 states, California among them, challenged the policy, which was slated to take effect in 2010. The EPA had planned to establish a mandatory national cap on mercury emissions and then allow power plants that fail to meet their targets to buy credits from less-polluting plants.

Environmentalists have criticized this approach because mercury tends to accumulate near its source, rather than dispersing like other pollutants that have been regulated under so-called cap-and-trade mechanisms. Cap-and-trade has been used for sulfur and there are proposals in Congress to use that form of control for the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide.

Mercury “hot spots” could endanger children living near power plants that use the credits to send extra pollution into the air, the challengers said. The three-judge panel agreed unanimously.

Mercury is a powerful toxin that can cause nerve and brain damage.

The mercury rule “represented what was perhaps the biggest sellout to industry in the history of EPA,” said Scott Edwards, legal director of Waterkeeper Alliance, one of the plaintiffs. “It’s a real tragedy that we’ve had to spend two years getting this industry-scripted scheme struck down while energy companies continue to poison our children.”

But Scott Segal, director of an industry group called the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, said: “Ironically, with their aggressive litigation posture, the environmental community and their state allies have again caused uncertainty and delay in regulating mercury.” The EPA, he said, “essentially must return to the drawing board in developing a new mercury rule.”

judy.pasternak@latimes.com