When the Improved Air Quality/Electric Utilities legislation, better known as the “clean smokestacks” bill, was overwhelmingly approved by the General Assembly in June, most lawmakers said North Carolina needed to regulate its power plants’ emissions properly before it could tell neighboring states to clean up their act.
Empowered by the new law, the state is now telling the rest of the Southeast that it has taken the environmental high ground, and to jump on board — or else.
Attorney General Roy Cooper sent a letter to his counterparts in Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia, notifying them of the state’s new “law that will dramatically reduce air pollution without increasing electricity rates for consumers.” Cooper said, “North Carolina’s Clean Smokestacks legislation became a model for the nation when it was signed into law.”
What the law says
The Smokestacks law requires Progress Energy and Duke Energy to significantly reduce emissions of oxides of nitrogen, sulfur dioxide, and mercury on their 14 coal-fired power plants in the state. After passing the state Senate easily, the bill got stuck in the House because of concerns about higher electricity rates for industrial consumers. After much negotiation between the government, environmentalists, and the utilities, both companies agreed to freeze rates for five years despite a cost of more than $2 billion to comply with the law.
The law also authorizes the state to “use all available resources and means,” including interstate agreements and litigation, “to induce other states and entities… to achieve reductions in emissions… comparable to those required by [the Smokestacks law] on a comparable schedule.”
Critics of the plan said it would do little to improve North Carolina’s air quality, while preventing the utilities from reducing their power rates.
“It’s going to cost industry a tremendous amount of money,” said Rep. Don Davis, an Erwin Republican who also serves on the Environment and Natural Resources Committee. “I think we have enough regulations on business right now.”
Davis was one of only four House members to vote against the bill.
Easley’s, Cooper’s letters
The new law inspired Gov. Mike Easley to notify neighboring governors of North Carolina’s “creative and innovative” accomplishment. “We have passed a law that will clean our air without emptying our pocket books,” Easley wrote. “There is not another law in the country that goes this far toward cleaning harmful smokestack emissions from our air.”
Easley said that “cleaning our air will require multi-state cooperation; no individual state in a region can resolve air quality problems without assistance from neighboring states.”
If Easley’s braggadocio was a friendly nudge for states to take action, Cooper’s letter was a comparative shove.
“The (Smokestacks) law puts North Carolina at the forefront among states in combating harmful smokestacks emissions,” Cooper wrote. “We encourage our neighbors to pursue similar efforts.
“…North Carolinians do not want the benefits created by this new law to be lost because of emissions from other states. We will look at all options available to us to ensure that does not happen.”
An editorial by The Charlotte Observer characterized Cooper’s letter to the neighboring states’ attorneys general as “gentle saber-rattling.”
“The letter was cordial and polite,” said Cooper spokesman John Bason in an e-mail message to Carolina Journal, “but firm about NC’s intention to address the problem.”
Response from neighboring states
Most states that received Cooper’s letter acknowledged it, thanking him for information about the bill. However, the State of Tennessee responded in detail, including documentation showing that it has improved emissions controls for smokestacks owned by the Tennessee Valley Authority.
The reason for greater concern from Tennessee? The TVA is the only entity mentioned by name in the Smokestacks law as a potential target for litigation. The TVA is also run by the state of Tennessee.
“By and large, [TVA is] one of the largest generators of electricity using coal,” said Rep. Danny McComas, R-New Hanover, and vice chairman of the Environment and Natural Resources Committee. “They are a likely culprit.”
Justin Wilson, Tennessee’s deputy governor for policy, wrote in a response to Cooper: “North Carolina need not fear that the benefits created by its new law will be lost to increasing emissions from Tennessee.” He also wrote, “We believe we are on track to achieve deeper reductions and achieve them earlier than North Carolina, but the end result will be the same.”
In a telephone interview Wilson’s posture was less defensive, saying, “Mr. Cooper is doing his job. We did not consider it at all as inappropriate, and it gives us an opportunity to continue discussions.” Wilson mentioned regional meetings such as the Southern Governors’ Air Summit earlier this year as avenues for the states to work together to reduce air pollution.
At the same time, Wilson said Tennessee doesn’t feel compelled to meet the standards established by North Carolina’s Smokestacks law. “But that doesn’t mean that the state of Tennessee doesn’t intend to do what that law requires,” he said.
“The channels of (our) state government are open, and this is something they will be talking about,” said Tim Murtaugh, spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Jerry Kilgore. Asked whether his state leaders were concerned about being sued by North Carolina, Murtaugh said, “I’m sure that’s something they will be discussing.”
North Carolina’s Division of Air Quality is asking utilities in neighboring states to provide data about emissions from their coal-burning power plants. The information it gathers will help the state decide what to do next.
Asked by CJ what standards are expected from neighboring states, Bason said, “At this time we decline to discuss portions of our strategy beyond the point that they have already been made public by us in, for example, the letters that were sent.”
Rep. Davis questioned the wisdom of potential legal action against North Carolina’s neighbors. “I don’t think it would be appropriate,” he said, “because we’d be spending a whole lot of taxpayer money and nothing would come of it. I don’t think one state can dictate over another. Just because we had a bill passed, doesn’t mean we can tell other states to do that.”
Chesser is assistant editor of Carolina Journal.