A year ago a lagoon holding millions of cubic yards of coal ash – a toxic byproduct of coal-fired power plants – spilled in eastern Tennessee, flooding the surrounding region with toxic sludge, and poisoning surrounding rivers and underground aquifers with heavy metals. Since that time, the EPA has been working on guidelines for the storage of coal ash to prevent recurrence of such a catastrophe.

This month a bipartisan group of Illinois members of congress – four Democrats and four Republicans – warned that federal regulation of coal ash could devastate the Illinois economy. The legislators expressed concern that regulations would increase the cost of energy, while reducing jobs involved in recycling coal ash into construction materials.

I laud these congressmen – including my rival for the Illinois 6th district, Peter Roskam – for their concern for affordable energy and for preserving jobs. They note that coal-fired power plants provide about half the energy used by Illinois consumers, and fear that labeling the toxic by-products as hazardous waste would increase the cost of energy production, a cost that producers would only too readily pass on to consumers. They note also that up to 60% of the by-products are used in the manufacture of concrete and other building materials for local industries. I concur that in the current financial crisis, anything that can hold down expenses and safeguard jobs is welcome.

Or almost anything.

These are, after all, poisons, including arsenic, lead, and mercury. They cause cancer, birth defects, liver disease, and other health and environmental problems. Over 100 million tons are produced a year, stored in 1300 dumps across the nation. The toxins are leaching into our water supply. And they are regulated even less carefully than our household garbage.
Standing in the shadow of the economic meltdown precipitated by government deregulation of the finance industry, regulation is not nearly the boogey-man that it was previously claimed to be, nor is industry self-policing the reliable safeguard that we need.

The bottom-line?

I concur with the Illinois congressmen that regulation should aim to permit continued use of coal combustion by-products, at least those that have proven safe, and should aim to keep energy costs low. With them, I advocate reasonable regulation designed to protect and support the economy. Alongside those concerns, however, I add two others. For one, the total cost of these by-products should be factored in, including the heavy expense of waste-site contamination clean-up, and the heavy burden of both emotional and economic health-care costs. For another, the real avenue for job creation is in cleaner-coal technology, a field in which the United States lags behind Europe and China.

Note: I originally sent in similar letters to the editor on this issue but most papers in our area do not print letters from candidates on issues related to their race.