Regulations for Coal Ash resulting in elated utility corporations, yet raising human health concerns
In the state of Kentucky, a concerning trend has emerged: 86% of coal ash storage facilities are located in low-income communities, communities of color, or both [1]. This troubling fact highlights the potential health hazards associated with coal ash, a toxic byproduct of burning coal that contains harmful toxins such as lead, cadmium, chromium, arsenic, mercury, boron, molybdenum, thallium, and silica [2].
The health risks associated with coal ash exposure are significant due to the toxic chemicals it contains. Key risks include cancer, respiratory issues, neurological damage, organ damage, immunological reactions, and developmental and reproductive disorders [3]. Exposure to these toxins can cause various health problems, ranging from kidney disease and lung disease to high blood pressure, delays in development, and vision impairment [4].
Communities living near coal ash disposal sites are often exposed through dust and contaminated groundwater, amplifying these health risks. Notably, these exposures disproportionately impact communities of color, especially Black Americans living near coal plants [5].
In a recent development, a coalition of utility companies has sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requesting relief from the burden of cleaning up their coal ash deposits [6]. This move follows the EPA, under the leadership of Chris Wright, advocating for the fossil fuel sector, including coal, despite the harmful effects of coal ash [7].
Environmental advocates, however, remain optimistic. Christy Walsh, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, expressed optimism about fighting the rollback of coal ash rules and regulations [8]. Signing up for the website's Weekly Substack, daily newsletter, or following on Google News may provide updates on the fight against the rollback of coal ash rules.
As the world moves towards new forms of energy, such as wind, solar, and geothermal, which have nearly zero emissions and cost less than thermal generation using coal, oil, or methane [9], it is crucial to address the health and environmental concerns associated with coal ash. The health of our communities should not be compromised for the sake of outdated energy sources.
References:
- Coal ash storage in Kentucky
- Composition of coal ash
- Health risks associated with coal ash exposure
- Health effects of coal ash exposure
- NAACP Report: Black Americans and Coal-fired Power Plants
- Utility companies request relief from coal ash cleanup
- EPA advocates for fossil fuel sector
- Natural Resources Defense Council Blog Post
- New forms of energy cost less than coal
- The concerning trend of 86% of coal ash storage facilities in Kentucky being located in low-income communities and communities of color necessitates revisiting environmental policy, focusing on the health and wellness of impacted individuals.
- The disturbing health risks attributed to coal ash exposure, such as cancer, respiratory issues, and developmental disorders, underline the need for stricter regulations and legislation to protect communities living near coal ash disposal sites.
- In light of the potential medical-conditions and consequences associated with coal ash, a shift towards cleaner and safer energy sources like wind, solar, and geothermal is crucial for addressing climate change and ensuring a healthier environment.
- The Weekly Substack newsletter, daily updates on Google News, or following the general news can provide valuable insights into the policy-and-legislation efforts aimed at addressing the health and environmental issues related to coal ash.
- As the fight against the rollback of coal ash rules continues, supporters can find hope in the actions of organizations like the Natural Resources Defense Council, which is advocating for the enforcement of science-based environmental standards in the face of political opposition.
- Amidst the ongoing discourse on climate change and environmental science, it's important to acknowledge the disproportionate impact of coal ash on skin-conditions, especially for Black Americans living near coal plants, and to advocate for policies that prioritize health over politics.
