Tell your Senator to say NO to tax credits for dirty waste coal!

Waste coal power plants claim to clean up environmental hazards left behind by bankrupt coal mining companies. However, theses processes of burning or digging up refuse, comes with its own set of environmental and public health hazards.

They are also uneconomic - the industry is currently asking for a whopping $765 million tax credit to stay afloat over the next 17 years.

Waste coal has less energy and more toxic heavy metals than conventional coal.
When burned, some of these toxins are released as air pollution, and the rest remain in coal ash that can leach into waterways.
Some waste coal piles have been overgrown by vegetation, and the process of digging them up can increase polluted runoff.
Burning waste coal creates about 50% more carbon dioxide per unit of energy than conventional coal.

There are better ways to deal with the problem of abandoned waste coal piles and we need our elected officials to say NO to paying polluters that put our health and climate at risk.

This is why we need you to take action today! Ask your Senators to oppose SB 618!

By clicking continue, you will also receive periodic communications from the Sierra Club. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Continue

Title

First Name

Last Name

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Phone

Your Message

Subject

Please Oppose SB 618!

Message

Some of the problems associated with burning waste coal include:

Toxic coal ash: Burning coal refuse only reduces its solid volume by about 15%. The remaining ash is usually deposited where the coal refuse was removed, with no liner, so it is prone to leaching into ground and surface water. Coal ash leachate has been documented at most unlined disposal areas in the country, and typically contains arsenic, lead, mercury, selenium, and other toxic substances.

Air toxics: Not all of the heavy metals in coal refuse end up in the ash. In 2015, the Northampton power plant received an air pollution permit revision to increase its allowable lead emissions rate by a factor of more than 20. Since coal refuse contains less heat content than standard coal, more toxic metals such as mercury and lead have to be fed into the boiler per unit of energy, and they end up either in the air or the ash – they don’t go away.

Runoff from site disturbance: Sierra Club members in Schuylkill County have documented serious problems with coal refuse re-mining operations where polluted runoff has increased as old refuse piles are disturbed. These piles have existed for decades and many are now covered with grass and trees, which stabilize them and reduce erosion and runoff. As the vegetation is removed and the coal refuse is dug up (often using grossly inadequate erosion controls) the surface water pollution is made much worse. These operations have also been cited by DEP for fugitive dust from coal ash when it is put back on the site.

Greenhouse gases: Coal is already the most intense emitter of greenhouse gases of any power source, and waste coal is even worse. Waste coal plants in Pennsylvania emit about 50% more carbon dioxide per unit of electricity than conventional coal.

Waste coal piles are a real problem for many communities, but there are cost-effective solutions that are safer than burning.  In many instances, coal refuse can be left in place and revegetated, which is less expensive than the tax credit proposed in SB 618. For piles which must be hauled away and disposed of, Sierra Club supports the federal RECLAIM Act which would provide an additional $330 million to Pennsylvania for reclamation projects at abandoned mine lands, and is expected to pass in the House this summer.

The cost of SB 618 to Pennsylvania taxpayers through 2036 would be up to $765 million over 17 years. We should not be spending this much money to support an industry that, in the process of addressing one environmental problem, simply replaces it with a suite of others.

I urge you to oppose this tax credit.

I am writing to urge you to oppose SB 618, “Extending the PA Coal Refuse Energy and Reclamation Tax Credit,” whether as a stand-alone bill or as part of a budget package. There are safer ways to deal with the problem of coal refuse than burning it. Some of the problems associated with burning waste coal include: Toxic coal ash: Burning coal refuse only reduces its solid volume by about 15%. The remaining ash is usually deposited where the coal refuse was removed, with no liner, so it is prone to leaching into ground and surface water. Coal ash leachate has been documented at most unlined disposal areas in the country, and typically contains arsenic, lead, mercury, selenium, and other toxic substances. Air toxics: Not all of the heavy metals in coal refuse end up in the ash. In 2015, the Northampton power plant received an air pollution permit revision to increase its allowable lead emissions rate by a factor of more than 20. Since coal refuse contains less heat content than standard coal, more toxic metals such as mercury and lead have to be fed into the boiler per unit of energy, and they end up either in the air or the ash – they don’t go away. Runoff from site disturbance: Sierra Club members in Schuylkill County have documented serious problems with coal refuse re-mining operations where polluted runoff has increased as old refuse piles are disturbed. These piles have existed for decades and many are now covered with grass and trees, which stabilize them and reduce erosion and runoff. As the vegetation is removed and the coal refuse is dug up (often using grossly inadequate erosion controls) the surface water pollution is made much worse. These operations have also been cited by DEP for fugitive dust from coal ash when it is put back on the site. Greenhouse gases: Coal is already the most intense emitter of greenhouse gases of any power source, and waste coal is even worse. Waste coal plants in Pennsylvania emit about 50% more carbon dioxide per unit of electricity than conventional coal. Waste coal piles are a real problem for many communities, but there are cost-effective solutions that are safer than burning. In many instances, coal refuse can be left in place and revegetated, which is less expensive than the tax credit proposed in SB 618. For piles which must be hauled away and disposed of, Sierra Club supports the federal RECLAIM Act which would provide an additional $330 million to Pennsylvania for reclamation projects at abandoned mine lands, and is expected to pass in the House this summer. The cost of SB 618 to Pennsylvania taxpayers through 2036 would be up to $765 million over 17 years. We should not be spending this much money to support an industry that, in the process of addressing one environmental problem, simply replaces it with a suite of others. I urge you to oppose this tax credit.

Add a Personal Message

Personal messages make a big impact on decision makers. Please add a note about why this issue matters to you!