• Originally published August 12, 2010 at 7:08 a.m., updated August 12, 2010 at 7:08 a.m.

Dear Editor:

I was delighted to read recent letters addressing major reservations about the proposed White Stallion coal and pet-coke fired power plant. The potential impact of White Stallion on pushing our county into non-attainment for ozone which has negative consequences for health of local residents was addressed by Mr. Raul Bustillo (Bay CityTribune, July 28, 2010). The letter signed by the majority of physicians in Matagorda County is a clear local affirmation of major concerns about the negative health consequences of the proposed coal and pet coke fired power plant for our population, especially children and the elderly. I encourage you to read the letter which appeared in all local papers (Matagorda Advocate, Bay City Tribune, Palacios Beacon, August 4 and 5, 2010)and also the report of Physicians for Social Responsibility, COAL’S ASSAULT ON HUMAN HEALTH (November 2009), which is available on line free of charge ( www.psr.org/coalreport). The bottom line is that combustion of coal, and also pet coke, has short and long term health effects on the population and the environment.

The letter signed by local physicians is in stark contrast to the glitter and cash of White Stallion. This is especially apparent in radio commercials, glossy flyers mailed to local residents and extensive newspaper inserts highlighting the benefits (?) of the proposed coal and pet coke plant for the county. The donation to the local boys’ and girls’ club, which attracted front page coverage, was an attempt to portray White Stallion as a “good local citizen.” How local is the White Stallion organization? These are in reality standard methods of big money aimed at buying support and trying to undermine the efforts of concerned citizens who are legitimately opposed to the proposed plant.

During the White Stallion show and tell at Bay City High School in June, we were told that White Stallion will not harm the health and safety of people, crops and the environment, and would not have adverse health effects. No data were provided to support these claims. On the other hand, our local medical community and Physicians for Social Responsibility have the exact opposite view. Why? What does Mr. Bird and his minions know about the effects of coal combustion on health that our local physicians do not?

At the high school session, Mr. Bird offered the caveat that everything has some amount of toxicity in it, but his so-called expert staff did not offer specific details, i.e., actual numbers. Rather, they offered to share their modeling results. Note, two Texas administrative law judges recently questioned several parts of the White Stallion permit application, “including the quality of the data used to make conclusions about air quality in the area” (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/7098447.html, Houston Chronicle, July 7, 2010).

The proposed White Stallion coal and pet coke-fired power plant also anticipates dumping 3-5 million gallons of hot water per day into the Colorado River - waste from the power generating and cooling units and in all likelihood other components of the plant (coal and pet coke storage piles and ash, etc.). The composition of the waste water as described in the permit includes many elements that are potential contaminants for animal and plant life in the river and also for ground water (which lies relatively close to the surface on the coastal plain that defines Matagorda County). Although all are of concern, two are especially relevant to the health of humans and wild life - mercury and lead. There is no safe level of mercury or lead when it comes to the health of developing fetuses, infants and children.

Waste water from the proposed White Stallion coal- and pet coke-fired power plant will be returned to the Colorado River at temperatures well above those ordinarily characteristic of the river. This is of major concern to the relatively delicate balance of organic life in the river and bay. How will the wastewater discharge affect the quality river water, and life of aquatic and other organisms dependent on the water? How will the wastewater discharge affect fishing (recreational and otherwise) and the wetlands? White Stallion has followed the letter of the law in preparing the permit application. It is filled with technical jargon and, of course, blind dependence upon technology (as was British Petroleum). The application is devoid of any sensitivity to local concerns for the health of the population and environment.

Why am I writing once again? The potentially negative effects of White Stallion over the short and long term far outweigh the potentially positive effects. In all likelihood, the proposed plant will not economically rejuvenate the county. The number of permanent jobs associated with the plant is small. The proposed plant will likely have the opposite effect. Who will want to settle near a coal-fired power plant that will emit pollutants 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, 365 days per year? What clean industry would want to locate within the sight and pollutants of a coal-fired power plant? Moreover, as noted by our local physicians last week, “…20 to 25 years down the road, when this plant becomes obsolete or no longer used, will Matagorda County be stuck with a large amount of contaminated land and a toxic waste site?”

I encourage readers to get involved. Please contact our local leaders. Judge Nate McDonald is open to hearing your views. He can be reached at the court house, at cojudge@co.matagorda.tx.us or at 979 244-7605. At a session of the Palacios Chamber of Commerce which featured comments from several members of the No Coal Coalition, Judge McDonald invited comments from his constituents on their concerns about White Stallion. Please let him know your concerns about the proposed plant for the local population and environment.

Please contact the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and demand that they require White Stallion to perform a detailed Environmental Impact Study of the proposed coal and pet coke-fired power plant. Both entities have the power to do so:

TCEQ: Mr. Richard Hyde (Deputy Director, Office of Permitting and Registration, TCEQ, PO Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711-3087, 512 239-5500)

EPA: Dr. Al Armendariz , Regional Administrator, US EPA Region 6 (1445 Ross Ave. Suite 1200, Mail Code: 6RA-D, Dallas, TX 75202-2733, 800 887-6063).

Robert M. Malina, PhD, FAAAS, FACSM

Local Resident

• Print
• •
• Share
  • Share this item

    Send this to a friend

  • Grab the link

    Copy and paste the link:

  • Blog about it

    Blog about this page.

  • Close
• •
• Favorite