What’s that smoke coming out of that smokestack?
Obviously, more industrial pollution

Or maybe not – unless you define “pollution” to include water vapor and carbon dioxide. Because that’s about 95% of what comes out of factory and electrical power plant smokestacks these days.

We certainly don’t think “pollution” should include water vapor or steam – the gaseous form of the liquid we drink and bathe in, fish swim in, and all life needs to survive.

And we strongly disagree with claims that “pollution” should include carbon dioxide – the air we exhale, the airborne fertilizer that helps plants grow, the bubbles we see in soda pop, beer and champagne.

Some people still think CO2 causes manmade global warming disasters. But thousands of scientists vigorously disagree, and other experts point out that trying to slash CO2 emissions would send energy costs skyrocketing and hammer companies, jobs, families, human health and welfare, and civil rights.

Other people remember an Ad Council public service spot with the young woman holding a “Stop pollution” sign in front of a half dozen power plant smokestacks. “Saving the world isn’t easy,” the caption said. “Saving one life is. Give blood.” It was a nice message, but highly misleading – because the “pollution” was water vapor and carbon dioxide.

OK. But older folks still talk about the horrible pollution that used to plague London, New York, Detroit, Gary and Pittsburgh. The smog hung in brown and gray clouds over our cities. It was real pollution. It sickened and killed thousands of people.

If today’s smokestacks aren’t emitting gobs of pollution anymore, what happened to it? That’s an excellent question. We’re glad you asked.

We passed laws, like the Clean Air Act. We implemented regulations. We developed new technologies to “scrub” sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxides, particulates (soot) and other pollutants out of the air. We improved the efficiency of industrial furnaces and electrical power plants. The results were spectacular.

Between 1970 and 2004, the US population grew by 40% … our Gross Domestic Product soared 187% … miles traveled increased by 171% … our electricity consumption expanded by 115% to power computers, toys and household gadgets for all those people… and America’s coal burning shot up 80 percent.

And yet, during the same period, we cut our total combined air pollution in half. We shrunk lead and certain other pollutants by 90% or more. Unhealthy power plant pollutants were almost wiped out – they were reduced by almost 95% per unit of energy produced. Particulate emissions (soot) decreased 90% below 1970 levels, air quality expert Joel Schwartz points out. And during the next decade most remaining power plant emissions will be eliminated. Our factories also cut pollution by huge amounts.

That’s a lot of numbers. But don’t worry. The only thing you really need to remember is this. Total US air pollution is now so low that it poses no significant health risks, even for children, Schwartz emphasizes.

But what about mercury? you ask. Environmentalists talk about this pollutant all the time. They say coal-fired electricity generating plants are the primary source of US mercury emissions,

Technically there’re correct. But keep two things in mind. One, environmental activists always need a scary new issue for their endless media and fund-raising campaigns.

Two, power plants are now the biggest domestic source of manmade airborne mercury pollution for one simple reason. It’s not because their emissions are large or increasing. It’s because the real sources have been eliminated. The United States no longer incinerates wastes or processes ores that contain mercury. That means the US reduced its total mercury emissions by over 80% since the early 1980s.

Today, America accounts for only 2% of all global mercury emissions. In fact, mercury emissions from American power plants may account for as little as 0.002% of total annual worldwide mercury emissions, Schwartz says.

That’s like 2 cents out of $1000.

Two-thirds of mercury air pollution in America comes from other countries. Over 55% of global emissions come from volcanoes, oceans and forest fires. (Trees absorb natural mercury from the ground, when their roots take up water and minerals.) That means Americans’ mercury exposure is a tiny fraction of levels necessary to cause brain damage.

Nevertheless, new EPA rules require a further 70% reduction in mercury from power plants over the next decade. That’s an awful lot of money to spend for no measurable environmental or human health benefits. But the money will be spent, and the additional reductions will be made.

The alleged deaths that environmentalists blame on US coal-burning power plants are based on speculative links between pollution and disease – and unwarranted extrapolations from responsible estimates to levels that generate headlines, financial contributions and opportunities to appear before congressional committees.
The alleged risks also ignore the enormous benefits of burning coal. Wisconsin depends on coal for 60% of all the electricity it generates. Think about that a minute. Think about all the things you use electricity for – at home, school and work … and in stores, restaurants and especially hospitals.

Think about what your life – and health and living standards – would be like if we closed down those coal-fired power plants. Or regulated and taxed them so heavily (with cap-and-trade rules, for example) that the price of electricity doubled.

More about that in a future article.

Paul Driessen, APR, Esq.

Senior policy advisor: Congress of Racial Equality and Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow