LOADING

Type to search

Latest Reports

Coal ash proposal could add to $3.1 billion in additional clean-up costs Southern Co. cited in 2019 report

David Pendered
Plant McDonough-Atkinson Georgia Power is seeking vendors to reuse coal ash at its Plant McDonough-Atkinson, in Cobb County, which was shifted from coal-fired to natural gas in 2012. Credit: georgiapower.com

By David Pendered

As state lawmakers consider a new proposal to secure the ash of coal burnt to create electricity, one line jumps out of a financial report by the Southern Co. – “The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.”

Plant McDonough-Atkinson

Georgia Power is seeking vendors to reuse coal ash at its Plant McDonough-Atkinson, in Cobb County, which was shifted from coal-fired to natural gas in 2012. Credit: georgiapower.com

The language suggests that ongoing evolution in the regulatory landscape creates difficulties in devising accurate financial forecasts for handling the hazardous byproduct of coal-fired power plants.

Georgia Power recorded an increase of $3.1 billion in December 2018 for anticipated clean-up costs related to federal and state regulations on the management of coal ash, according to Southern’s comprehensive financial report, released Feb. 20, 2019. The 2020 edition of this annual financial report could be filed in the coming weeks.

Georgia Democrats seek to add an environmental regulation to the storage of coal ash through House Bill 756. The proposal would require landfills where coal ash is stored to be lined and have a system to collect fluids that leach out on the lined landfill.

The legislation would address concerns about waters that were cited in the 2019 Dirty Dozen report issued Nov. 14, 2019 by Georgia Water Coalition. The report contends coal ash ponds pollute drinking water in Monroe and Bibb counties; a coal ash disposal plan threatens the Coosa River; and rivers including the St. Marys are threatened by out-of-state coal ash that may be shipped into counties including Charlton.

HB 756 is sponsored by House Minority Leader Robert Trammell (D-Lutherville). The bill is pending before the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee. The committee isn’t slated to meet this week, as the week is to be dominated by joint meetings of House and Senate budget-writing committees to hear presentations of departmental budget.

Southern’s financial report highlights some of the regulations that now govern the management of coal ash, which the industry calls CCR, for coal combustion residuals. The list begins with a regulation enacted during President Obama’s administration:

  • “In 2015, the EPA finalized non-hazardous solid waste regulations for the disposal of CCR, including coal ash and gypsum, in landfills and surface impoundments (ash ponds) at active generating power plants. In addition to the EPA’s CCR Rule, the States of Alabama and Georgia have also finalized regulations regarding the handling of CCR within their respective states.
  • “The EPA’s CCR Rule requires landfills and ash ponds to be evaluated against a set of performance criteria and potentially closed if minimum criteria are not met. Closure of existing landfills and ash ponds could require installation of equipment and infrastructure to manage CCR in accordance with the CCR Rule. …

Georgia Power’s anticipated costs are included in this section:

  • “In December 2018, Georgia Power recorded an increase of approximately $3.1 billion to its AROs [asset retirement obligations] related to the CCR Rule and the related state rule. During the second half of 2018, Georgia Power completed a strategic assessment related to its plans to close the ash ponds at all of its generating plants in compliance with the CCR Rule and the related state rule. This assessment included engineering and constructability studies related to design assumptions for ash pond closures and advanced engineering methods.
  • “The results indicated that additional closure costs will be required to close these ash ponds, primarily due to changes in closure strategies, the estimated amount of ash to be excavated, and additional water management requirements necessary to support closure strategies. These factors also impact the estimated timing of future cash outlays.”

 

Tags:
David Pendered
David Pendered

David Pendered, Managing Editor, is an Atlanta journalist with more than 30 years experience reporting on the region’s urban affairs, from Atlanta City Hall to the state Capitol. Since 2008, he has written for print and digital publications, and advised on media and governmental affairs. Previously, he spent more than 26 years with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and won awards for his coverage of schools and urban development. David graduated from North Carolina State University and was a Western Knight Center Fellow.

    1

You Might also Like

2 Comments

  1. Avatar
    David Kyler January 21, 2020 9:29 am

    These considerable costs are the long-overdue result of finally facing just some of the many accumulating consequences caused by generating vast amounts of industrial waste. The by-products of many profitmaking activities are extremely hazardous to human health and the environment. We are now beginning to confront the disastrous impacts of reckless practices that have been neglected or woefully under-regulated for more than a century.

    It turns out that the relentless momentum of the industrial era, whatever its benefits, was not as advantageous as many claimed – producing astounding wealth for some while costing billions in damages and medical problems that have been unfairly shifted onto the unwary public. This has created a dubious trade-off for those who struggle to pay living expenses while incurring severe threats to their health and quality of life.

    Yet, as this is being written, America’s president is denying the need to resolve these problems, falsely claiming in Davos that those recognizing such impacts are “prophets of doom.” To the contrary, the proponents of inadequately restrained business activities, causing enormous health problems and the destruction of nature’s life-support systems, have long been unfairly thriving on the “profits of doom.”

    And, thanks to the 2010 Supreme Court decision, Citizens United, corporate influence over U.S. politics has further ensured that these costly injustices were willfully ignored in policies, many legal decisions, and environmental enforcement practices. Thus, when we should have been reining-in egregious corporate activities, the boosted power of the private sector has prolonged these injhustices.Report

    Reply
  2. Avatar
    David C. Kyler January 21, 2020 9:35 am

    These considerable costs are the long-overdue result of finally facing just some of the many accumulating consequences caused by generating vast amounts of industrial waste. The by-products of many profitmaking activities are extremely hazardous to human health and the environment. We are now beginning to confront the disastrous impacts of reckless practices that have been neglected or woefully under-regulated for more than a century.

    It turns out that the relentless momentum of the industrial era, whatever its benefits, was not as advantageous as many claimed – producing astounding wealth for some while costing billions in damages and medical problems that have been unfairly shifted onto the unwary public. This has created a dubious trade-off for those who struggle to pay living expenses while incurring severe threats to their health and quality of life.

    Yet, as this is being written, America’s president is denying the need to resolve these problems, falsely claiming in Davos that those recognizing such impacts are “prophets of doom.” To the contrary, the proponents of inadequately restrained business activities, causing enormous health problems and the destruction of nature’s life-support systems, have long been unfairly thriving on the “profits of doom.”

    And, thanks to the 2010 Supreme Court decision, Citizens United, corporate influence over U.S. politics has further ensured that these costly injustices were willfully ignored in policies, many legal decisions, and environmental enforcement practices. Thus, when we should have been reining-in egregious corporate activities, the boosted political power of the private sector has prolonged these injustices.Report

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.