EPA rule on fish kills at plants angers environmentalists, pleases utilities


Environmentalists are angry at the Obama administration's scaled-back regulation meant to keep fish from being sucked into the water intakes of factories and power plants.

The EPA regulation issued yesterday specified a range of at least seven options facility operators can use to reduce the 2B fish, crab or shrimp that die each year in water intakes, but critics say the agency left too many decisions with state regulators and are threatening to sue to force tougher action.

Power companies operating large coal or nuclear plants such as Entergy (ETR), Exelon (EXC), Duke Energy (DUK) and Dominion (D) had urged the EPA to grant flexibility and time to meet the water-intake standards, and generally were satisfied with the outcome.

ETFs: XLU, IDU, VPU, UPW, RYU, FUTY, PUI, FXU, SDP, PSCU, UTLT

From other sites
Comments (39)
  • Joe Lunchbox
    , contributor
    Comments (702) | Send Message
     
    This is one of the silliest complaints the environmentalists have lodged. It really hurts any credibility they may have had. One of these days maybe they'll realize that every time a power plant has to accommodate a new environmental regulation, the price is going to go up. So environmentalists really hurt the poor people of this country.
    20 May 2014, 07:23 PM Reply Like
  • TGC004
    , contributor
    Comments (457) | Send Message
     
    The poorest people in the USA generally vote Democrat and therefore they deserve what they get, I hope they are savaged by the democrats they vote for, they deserve to be punished and starve.
    20 May 2014, 09:03 PM Reply Like
  • Fusefuse
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    There is a difference between poor now and poor forever. Environmentalists are concerned that we don't sacrifice the future for our present. We can argue about the cost to the current generation but it is very shortsighted to do so without comparing it to the cost to future generations.
    20 May 2014, 09:12 PM Reply Like
  • MWinMD
    , contributor
    Comments (3514) | Send Message
     
    Meh. One can just as easily "carp" (heh) about Joe's post:

     

    "This is one of the silliest complaints the knee jerk environmentalist-bashers have lodged. It really hurts any credibility Joe and his ilk may have had. One of these days maybe they'll realize that every time these power plants kill 2 billion fish, crab and shrimp the price of seafood is going to go up. So the knee jerk environmentalist-bashers really hurt the poor people of this country."

     

    Or do the laws of supply and demand suddenly get suspended whenever you want to go off an anti-environmentalist rant?
    20 May 2014, 09:24 PM Reply Like
  • MWinMD
    , contributor
    Comments (3514) | Send Message
     
    Case in point is the shortsighted, industry-sponsored political opposition to reining in manmade climate change. Many of these same knee jerk anti-environmentalists cry and moan that we might have to pay a few cents more for electricity if we act responsibly as a society.

     

    However they're perfectly fine having our grandchildren spend hundreds of trillions of dollars moving half of civilization away from the coastlines in a few decades. (That's ignoring all the massive costs that warming is already ringing up but in ways that this knee jerk anti-humanity crowd doesn't as easily see the bill for.)
    20 May 2014, 09:33 PM Reply Like
  • embryorambo
    , contributor
    Comments (282) | Send Message
     
    If the whole planet warms up won't that open up HUGE swaths of land in Canada/Russia and the Northern United States to farming, and population growth? Tons of fresh water, and tons of untouched possible farmland. Seems to me even if we warm not a huge deal. Had you just lived through this last Chicago winter you probably would pray for global warming every night, hoping that people burn as much firewood coal and fossil fuels as humanly possible. Just a thought. All change is not bad, planet has undergone changes throughout its history. It is the only constant..change
    20 May 2014, 10:24 PM Reply Like
  • anarchist
    , contributor
    Comments (1979) | Send Message
     
    That's great except for the tropical insects that move North to bring us Malaria, Dengue, yellow fever, West Nile and a variety of encephalitis diseases - and that's just mosquito born diseases.
    20 May 2014, 10:45 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4428) | Send Message
     
    The government may come to their senses and once again legalize the use of DDT, in that case.
    20 May 2014, 10:50 PM Reply Like
  • embryorambo
    , contributor
    Comments (282) | Send Message
     
    Anarchist you miss the point, Having a warmer planet then today is not 100% bad. No one knows the true outcome there will be winners and losers. Lot of uninhabitable landmass in the northern hemisphere that could prove even with its lower sunlight to be quite useful. It is to easy to jump to final conclusions. Even the most educated on the subject are abt to still get the variables wrong. Bottom line is the tragedy of the commons will insure that fossil fuels are burned until renewables can become more reliable and cost effective without the use of subsidies.
    20 May 2014, 11:16 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Lunchbox
    , contributor
    Comments (702) | Send Message
     
    Having worked in a powerhouse since 1980, I can attest that the fish caught in the intake structures, around here at least in freshwater, are mainly shad. There's more than enough shad in the river so that the few that accidentally get sucked into the intake won't be missed.

     

    The costs of adding new fish catching nets, troughs, pumps, etc., have to be paid for. This is just an unnecessary expense added to the price of producing power that is passed along to the consumer.

     

    I could understand it if the plants were dumping acid or mercury or something into the river. But shad? That's just ludicrous.
    20 May 2014, 11:50 PM Reply Like
  • caddy311
    , contributor
    Comments (155) | Send Message
     
    @embryo. sounds great, if you ignore the costs of coastal cities being underwater. Moving highways and coastal infrastructure...sounds a lot cheaper than a few extra cents for electricity. Based on your comment though, I'm not sure why I would both responding.
    20 May 2014, 11:53 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Lunchbox
    , contributor
    Comments (702) | Send Message
     
    Throughout Earth's history, there have been periods of tropical weather and ice ages. Yes, even before man was here. Who's to say that what is happening now is man-made. I don't believe it is. I think it is just the natural cycle of hot and cold.

     

    I think there are a lot of people making lots of money off of the global warming climate change scam. Follow the money.
    20 May 2014, 11:54 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Joe,

     

    Yup. Some like it hot, some like it cold.
    20 May 2014, 11:56 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Caddy,

     

    Underwater?

     

    Yes, the taxpayers are indeed underwater in Solyndra, Aone, Evergreen
    Solar Ener1, etc, etc.

     

    Prolly not coming back up either.
    21 May 2014, 12:00 AM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (1174) | Send Message
     
    Those diseases are more related to economic conditions in a country than its climate. The United States, Canada, even Northern Europe all had malaria until people came in and started spraying DDT and draining swamps and such.
    21 May 2014, 08:36 AM Reply Like
  • MWinMD
    , contributor
    Comments (3514) | Send Message
     
    "Yes, the taxpayers are indeed underwater in Solyndra, Aone, Evergreen
    Solar Ener1, etc, etc."

     

    Keep pounding that Solyndra squawking point. If you let up for even a minute, people will notice that 97% of the loans in that program were paid back, and the failures are about normal rate for any industry during normal times - let alone during an economic downturn.

     

    And if you let up squawking for too long, people may also notice that the solar industry is now exploding to the point that Barclays now cautions against investing in conventional energy utilities, as the number of states where solar has hit parity is rapidly growing:

     

    http://on.barrons.com/...

     

    But keep grinding away. So that people will know who you are.
    25 May 2014, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • MWinMD
    , contributor
    Comments (3514) | Send Message
     
    "Who's to say that what is happening now is man-made."

     

    Nobody important. Just every scientific organization on the face of the planet.

     

    "Follow the money."

     

    Sounds like a GREAT idea. Oh, look...

     

    http://bit.ly/1r718li

     

    $558 million over a six year period to mislead the public. Hmm, you think they might be trying to protect...

     

    this?

     

    http://bit.ly/1r718ll

     

    "The global fossil fuel industry faces a loss of $US 28 trillion ($A30.2 trillion) in revenues over the next two decades, if the world takes action to address climate change, cleans up pollution and moves to decarbonise the global energy system.

     

    The assessment, made by leading European broking house Kepler Chevreux, underlines what’s at stake for the fossil fuel industry from a push to cleaner fuels and concerted efforts to reduce emissions, and helps explain the enormous push back from the oil and coal industries in particular against such policies."
    25 May 2014, 06:47 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    LOL,

     

    I can't stop laughing re your comments

     

    please, make it stop, LOL
    26 May 2014, 12:20 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    LOL,

     

    I can't stop laughing re your comments

     

    please, make it stop, LOL.
    26 May 2014, 12:20 AM Reply Like
  • Khyber Pass
    , contributor
    Comments (372) | Send Message
     
    I can tell you two things that will happen…the ozone layer will be destroyed and skin cancer and cataracts will be the rule instead of the exception…and poison ivy will take over the world. It's growing larger now than ever….it likes CO2. If you are not afraid of poison ivy, plenty of us are.

     

    If you read enough about earth science, you will see that there will be no winners. And my expectation is that humanity will be extinct well before your grandchildren's children reach adulthood. But that's too far in the future to care about, isn't it? Let's let the next few generation worry about the problems they will face, since we will be dead already.
    27 May 2014, 12:32 PM Reply Like
  • Khyber Pass
    , contributor
    Comments (372) | Send Message
     
    None are so blind as those who WILL NOT see.
    27 May 2014, 12:34 PM Reply Like
  • Khyber Pass
    , contributor
    Comments (372) | Send Message
     
    Thanks for saying that.
    27 May 2014, 12:34 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    MwindMD,

     

    "If you let up for even a minute, people will notice that 97% of the loans in that program were paid back, "

     

    97%?

     

    Really since Ford took almost 50% of the entire green car program, ($5.9B for Ford alone) and has not yet paid it all back, please explain how 97% of the money has been paid back.

     

    Especially since AONE, Solyndra, Fisker, Ener1, have all defaulted.

     

    http://onforb.es/POf2oi

     

    Please feel free to post data showing 97% of the DOE green energy loans have been paid back.
    27 May 2014, 12:46 PM Reply Like
  • Bigfloridafish
    , contributor
    Comments (96) | Send Message
     
    I remember a old Charlie Chan movie where Charlie said " Just because you can look does not mean you can see " people who do not worry about pollution are just plain ignorant.
    27 May 2014, 09:33 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    I will take pollution, if I can make lots of money. Money is most important of all, hence "Seeking Alpha" is about making money. Hence the name.

     

    Nothing is more important than money, that's why I participate in this website.

     

    There are many other sites specializing in tree-hugging politics, that's why I play here. This site is about money. Money is cool. Tree huggers are not.

     

    http://bit.ly/1mnBIJJ
    27 May 2014, 10:10 PM Reply Like
  • Khyber Pass
    , contributor
    Comments (372) | Send Message
     
    But it's the methane being released from the melting tundra that worries me. Then, of course, it's kinda hard to grow corn in a northern area of glacial moraine, warmer or not…...
    2 Jun 2014, 12:08 AM Reply Like
  • anarchist
    , contributor
    Comments (1979) | Send Message
     
    I guess the environmentalist could just wait until the crab, shrimp and fish that get sucked into those pipes are on the endangered species list and then the EPA could shut the plants down for good - that would work.
    20 May 2014, 07:34 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4428) | Send Message
     
    They should get ahead of the curve and shut them down now.
    20 May 2014, 08:03 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Lunchbox
    , contributor
    Comments (702) | Send Message
     
    So we could all live like the Amish?
    20 May 2014, 08:15 PM Reply Like
  • MWinMD
    , contributor
    Comments (3514) | Send Message
     
    Whichever route they take, you can count on the anti-environmental crowd to blame the adults for doing the heavy lifting and keeping these species we depend on around. Just like the meanie adults who make their kids eat their vegetables and go to bed at a decent hour, these horrible people who keep us from spoiling our air and water are regularly demonized by a certain proudly irresponsible segment of our society.
    20 May 2014, 09:35 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    Not Amish, like Cavemen
    20 May 2014, 11:51 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (16388) | Send Message
     
    All those outraged should get free aquariums, but no heat or electricity.
    20 May 2014, 08:12 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
     
    But the electricity to produce the glass for the aquariums would kill the fish.
    20 May 2014, 11:53 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4428) | Send Message
     
    Don't people kill more fish than that for food every year? Maybe we should not be allowed to eat seafood.

     

    We should also outlaw windows, cars and wind farms - they are killing all the birds.
    20 May 2014, 09:12 PM Reply Like
  • Khyber Pass
    , contributor
    Comments (372) | Send Message
     
    Killing all the birds….I think that's the job of Monsanto. Doing well at it too….have you noticed how many more insects there are this year than last? Now the restaurant that figures out how to use them for a meat source..that's a company I can buy stock in and will sleep well at night.
    27 May 2014, 12:37 PM Reply Like
  • Bigfloridafish
    , contributor
    Comments (96) | Send Message
     
    Using antiquated technology, power plants often suck up the entire fresh water volume of large rivers, killing obscene numbers of fish. Just one facility, the Salem nuclear plant in New Jersey, kills more than 3 billion Delaware River fish each year, according to Martin Marietta, the plant's own consultant. These fish kills are illegal, and in 2001 we finally won our case. A federal judge ordered the EPA to issue regulations restricting power-plant fish kills. But soon after President Bush's inauguration, the administration replaced the proposed new rule with clever regulations designed to allow the slaughter to continue unabated.
    20 May 2014, 09:43 PM Reply Like
  • TopHill4
    , contributor
    Comments (42) | Send Message
     
    Enough politics!
    Go to CNN or Fox News.
    This is supposed to be market comment.
    20 May 2014, 09:53 PM Reply Like
  • anarchist
    , contributor
    Comments (1979) | Send Message
     
    TopHill, so the environment is not a Market mover? Lots of environmental related stocks so I think these comments are "market comments".
    20 May 2014, 10:16 PM Reply Like
  • Uain53
    , contributor
    Comments (1808) | Send Message
     
    "but critics say the agency left too many decisions with state regulators ....."

     

    Exactly>
    Why have the locals who live there, make informed decisions, when you can have some twit in DC (who went to.... like a really good school), make those decisions in a vacuum?

     

    "Enough politics!"
    If you aren't aware how crony - regulation based capitalism affects your stocks, you should not be trying DYI. Thats what Mutual Funds are for.
    20 May 2014, 11:08 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs