Power plants are the largest industrial source of toxic air pollution in the US, accounting for 49% of emissions in 2009. Several states have power sectors that rank among the top toxic air polluters, including Ohio (1st), Pennsylvania (2nd), Florida (3rd), Kentucky (4th), and others. Power plants are also major sources of mercury pollution, with Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Alabama ranking among the top states for mercury emissions from power plants.
Originally Aired: June 28, 2013
Presenters:
David R. Celebrezze, Director of Air & Water Special Projects, Ohio Environmental Council
Shelly Kiser, ALA
Agenda for Part 2
10:30 a.m. -10:40 p.m. Welcome & Introduction (OEC)
10:40 a.m. -11:00 p.m. Air Quality impact on the environment (OEC)
11:00 a.m. -11:45 p.m. Air Quality and the federal government (American Lung Association of the Midland States)
11:45 a.m. -12:15 p.m. What you can do to reduce pollution (OEC)
12:15 p.m. - 12:30 p.m. Q&A
Originally Aired: June 28, 2013
Presenters:
David R. Celebrezze, Director of Air & Water Special Projects, Ohio Environmental Council
Shelly Kiser, ALA
Agenda for Part 2
10:30 a.m. -10:40 p.m. Welcome & Introduction (OEC)
10:40 a.m. -11:00 p.m. Air Quality impact on the environment (OEC)
11:00 a.m. -11:45 p.m. Air Quality and the federal government (American Lung Association of the Midland States)
11:45 a.m. -12:15 p.m. What you can do to reduce pollution (OEC)
12:15 p.m. - 12:30 p.m. Q&A
Cannabis Cultivation in New England: Policy for Energy EfficiencySam Milton
Talk for the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association BuildingEnergy18 conference in Boston in which I discuss commercial cannabis cultivation in New England, and market and policy developments that may be ushering in an era of more energy efficiency cultivation practices.
Cointegration relationship betweeCOINTEGRATION RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC ...aeijjournal
Energy dependent small developing island states are besieged to sustain potential rate of growth. This is
due to increase in energy prices and lack of evidence based policy on long term sustainable energy use.
This paper examines the long run relationship between economic growth, export and electricity
consumption in Fiji over the period 1981-2011. Employing Granger causality test it is found that there is
cointegrating relationship between economic growth, export and electricity consumption. The casual
relationship between the variables was investigated within the error correction model framework. We
found that in the long run causality runs from electricity consumption and export to economic growth.
Based on this empirical analysis some important policy implications are suggested.
This workshop will explore state-level Green Chemistry initiatives and chemicals policy reform efforts, which aim to protect public health and the ecosystems in the Great Lakes basin. Participants will learn how chemicals policy is an integral aspect of Great Lakes restoration, and how green chemistry fits into this discussion.
This report provides information on policies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Vermont.1 It considers both carbon pricing policies, such as carbon taxes or cap-and-trade programs, and nonpricing policies, such as electric vehicle (EV) and energy efficiency incentives, weatherization programs and investments in low-carbon agriculture. This study aims to inform the policy dialogue but is not intended to address the complete universe of policy options. The key findings are presented below.
U.S. Congress is currently developing major energy legislation aimed a reducing greenhouse gas emissions though a Cap & Trade regime for the first time in history. In the summer of 2009, the House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, also known as the Waxman-Markey Bill. Action now has move to the Senate. If enacted, this sweeping energy reform could significantly affect both the cost and sources of energy that fuel the U.S. economy as well as the international competitiveness of U.S. industry. This session will address some of the key issues currently being debated in the Senate concerning the design of a clean energy and climate bill, such as the potential role of low- and no-carbon technologies, the use of domestic and international offsets, and other cost containment measures. The potential economic impacts of climate change policy on the future of the U.S. economy will also be discussed.
SmartestEnergy: Introduction to the Electricity MarketSmartestEnergyLtd
At the Scottish Renewables, Continued Professional Development Event on 6th July 2016, Iain Robertson, Generation Sales Manager presented an Introduction to the Electricity Market which covered: What is a PPA, How is power traded and the role of ELEXON.
4.1. INTRODUCTION[ http://www.pmintpc.com/interface/research_activities_published_paper_ICPS04.pdf]
Electricity is a non-storable commodity, which indicates the electricity generated should be consumed timely. In competitive environment, the price is determined by stochastic supply and demand functions. The price can change at any time.As a consequence of increased volatility, a market participant could make trading contracts with other parties to hedge possible risks and get better returns.
Open access is the key to a free and fair electricity market. Power producers (sellers) and dealers/customers (buyers) have to share a common transmission network for wheeling the power from the point of generation to the point of consumption. Thus, interconnected transmission system is considered to be a natural monopoly so as to avoid the duplicity, the problem of right-of-the-way, huge investment for new infrastructure and to take the advantage of the interconnected network viz. reduced installed capacity,increased system reliability and improved system performance.
4.2. POWER TRADING
According to the Electricity Act 2003,
“Power trading is an activity in which the utility having surplus power transfers electricity to the utility having deficit of power, at some price (mostly Rs/Kwh)”
According to Section 2(Definitions), Sub-section 71 of the Act,
„Trading‟ means purchase of electricity for resale thereof.
According to Section 2(Definitions), Sub-section 47 of the Act,
„Open access‟ means the non-discriminatory provision for the use of transmission lines or distribution system or associated facilities with such lines or system by any licensee or consumer or a person engaged in generation in accordance with the regulations specified by the appropriate commission.
The technicians at Caddell Electric (http://dallaselectricrepair.com/) provide the best and most comprehensive commercial electrical services in the DFW Metroplex.
Cannabis Cultivation in New England: Policy for Energy EfficiencySam Milton
Talk for the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association BuildingEnergy18 conference in Boston in which I discuss commercial cannabis cultivation in New England, and market and policy developments that may be ushering in an era of more energy efficiency cultivation practices.
Cointegration relationship betweeCOINTEGRATION RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC ...aeijjournal
Energy dependent small developing island states are besieged to sustain potential rate of growth. This is
due to increase in energy prices and lack of evidence based policy on long term sustainable energy use.
This paper examines the long run relationship between economic growth, export and electricity
consumption in Fiji over the period 1981-2011. Employing Granger causality test it is found that there is
cointegrating relationship between economic growth, export and electricity consumption. The casual
relationship between the variables was investigated within the error correction model framework. We
found that in the long run causality runs from electricity consumption and export to economic growth.
Based on this empirical analysis some important policy implications are suggested.
This workshop will explore state-level Green Chemistry initiatives and chemicals policy reform efforts, which aim to protect public health and the ecosystems in the Great Lakes basin. Participants will learn how chemicals policy is an integral aspect of Great Lakes restoration, and how green chemistry fits into this discussion.
This report provides information on policies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Vermont.1 It considers both carbon pricing policies, such as carbon taxes or cap-and-trade programs, and nonpricing policies, such as electric vehicle (EV) and energy efficiency incentives, weatherization programs and investments in low-carbon agriculture. This study aims to inform the policy dialogue but is not intended to address the complete universe of policy options. The key findings are presented below.
U.S. Congress is currently developing major energy legislation aimed a reducing greenhouse gas emissions though a Cap & Trade regime for the first time in history. In the summer of 2009, the House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, also known as the Waxman-Markey Bill. Action now has move to the Senate. If enacted, this sweeping energy reform could significantly affect both the cost and sources of energy that fuel the U.S. economy as well as the international competitiveness of U.S. industry. This session will address some of the key issues currently being debated in the Senate concerning the design of a clean energy and climate bill, such as the potential role of low- and no-carbon technologies, the use of domestic and international offsets, and other cost containment measures. The potential economic impacts of climate change policy on the future of the U.S. economy will also be discussed.
SmartestEnergy: Introduction to the Electricity MarketSmartestEnergyLtd
At the Scottish Renewables, Continued Professional Development Event on 6th July 2016, Iain Robertson, Generation Sales Manager presented an Introduction to the Electricity Market which covered: What is a PPA, How is power traded and the role of ELEXON.
4.1. INTRODUCTION[ http://www.pmintpc.com/interface/research_activities_published_paper_ICPS04.pdf]
Electricity is a non-storable commodity, which indicates the electricity generated should be consumed timely. In competitive environment, the price is determined by stochastic supply and demand functions. The price can change at any time.As a consequence of increased volatility, a market participant could make trading contracts with other parties to hedge possible risks and get better returns.
Open access is the key to a free and fair electricity market. Power producers (sellers) and dealers/customers (buyers) have to share a common transmission network for wheeling the power from the point of generation to the point of consumption. Thus, interconnected transmission system is considered to be a natural monopoly so as to avoid the duplicity, the problem of right-of-the-way, huge investment for new infrastructure and to take the advantage of the interconnected network viz. reduced installed capacity,increased system reliability and improved system performance.
4.2. POWER TRADING
According to the Electricity Act 2003,
“Power trading is an activity in which the utility having surplus power transfers electricity to the utility having deficit of power, at some price (mostly Rs/Kwh)”
According to Section 2(Definitions), Sub-section 71 of the Act,
„Trading‟ means purchase of electricity for resale thereof.
According to Section 2(Definitions), Sub-section 47 of the Act,
„Open access‟ means the non-discriminatory provision for the use of transmission lines or distribution system or associated facilities with such lines or system by any licensee or consumer or a person engaged in generation in accordance with the regulations specified by the appropriate commission.
The technicians at Caddell Electric (http://dallaselectricrepair.com/) provide the best and most comprehensive commercial electrical services in the DFW Metroplex.
Regards, Mr. SYED HAIDER ABBAS
MOB. +92-300-2893683 MBA in progress,NEBOSH IGC, IOSH, HSRLI, NBCS,GI,FST,FOHSW,ISO 9001, 14001,
'BS OHSAS 18001, SAI 8000, Qualified .
Robert Alvarez, a former senior advisor in the DOE under President Clinton, outlines the department's FY 2010 budget requests and their implications for U.S. energy policy.
Factors Affecting the Rise of Renewable Energy in the U.S. .docxmydrynan
Factors Affecting the Rise of Renewable Energy in the U.S.:
Concern over Environmental Quality or Rising Unemployment?
Adrienne M. Ohler*
A B S T R A C T
This paper studies the development of renewable energy (RE) in the U.S. by
examining the capacity to generate electricity from renewable sources. RE ca
pacity exhibits a U-shaped relationship with per capita income, similar to other
metrics for environmental quality (EQ). To explain this phenomenon, I consider
several of the environmental Kuznets curve theories that describe the relationship
between income and environmental quality (Y-EQ), including evolving property
rights, increased demand for improved EQ, and changing economic composition.
The results fail to provide support for the Y-EQ theories. I further consider the
alternative hypothesis that increases in unemployment lead to increases in relative
RE capacity, suggesting that promoting RE projects as a potential job creator is
one of the main drivers of RE projects. The results imply that lagged unemploy
ment is a significant predictor of relative RE capacity, particularly for states with
a large manufacturing share of GDR
Keywords: Renewable energy, Environmental quality, Environmental Kuznets
curve, Electricity mix, Transition, Unemployment
http://dx.doi.Org/10.5547/01956574.36.2.5
1. INTRODUCTION
This paper analyzes the transition between renewable and nonrenewable energy sources
by empirically examining the relationship between per capita income and the relative use of RE
sources. Schmalensee, Stoker, and Judson (1998) stress that examining this relationship is important
to understanding whether energy transitions are due to fundamental economic trends or environ
mental policy. Using 1990-2008 state level panel data from the U.S. electricity market, I examine
two measures of relative RE use: the percent of capacity that utilizes RE sources and the devel
opment of RE capacity, defined as the change in the percent of RE capacity. The basic regression
results report a U-shaped relationship between income and RE capacity.
Literature on the empirical relationship between renewable energy (RE) and income typ
ically finds a positive relationship. Research on an individual’s willingness-to-pay (WTP) for RE
suggests that demand for RE increases with income. Bollino (2009) shows that high income indi
viduals are willing to pay more for electricity from RE, and Long (1993) presents results that suggest
high-income individuals spend more on RE investments. Oliver, Volschenk, and Smit (2011) study
the developing country of South Africa and also find a positive link between household income
and WTP for green electricity. On a more aggregate level, Carley (2009) finds evidence that the
percentage of RE generation increases with a state’s Gross State Product, and Burke (2010) finds
that the share of electricity generation from wind, and biomass electricity increases with per capita
* Illinois State University ...
Growing Consumption of Natural Gas to Fuel California’s Green EconomyZakia Chan
This report aims to examine how California has publicly committed to reducing emissions, and how it has failed to achieve real progress in this initiative in its generation of electricity.
Supply Trends- What are the Impacts on Transmission? ScottMadden, Inc.
Todd Williams, director at ScottMadden, presented, “Supply Trends – What Are The Impacts on Transmission?” at Infocast’s 15th Annual Transmission Summit. This presentation focused on important developments in generation and how they will impact transmission.
Supply uncertainty is at unprecedented levels, primarily driven by EPA regulations, decreasing natural gas prices and renewable energy portfolio requirements. The impacts of a shift in electric generation moves from coal to natural gas needs to be examined closely, such as the the unknowns associated with growing interdependency of gas and electric industries. The impact of new generation, extended outages for retrofits, and required transmission must be understood by transmission planners and operators to ensure continued grid reliability. The mismatch in planning cycles between generation and transmission makes this even more problematic.
Environmental Science 1401
Lab 2 – Scientific Method
Procedure
Part II – Answer the following questions. Be sure to validate your answers with research, readings and in text citations (APA format).
In which scientific journal was this article published? Do a quick internet search to locate the full name of the scientific journal.
South African Journal of Science
Published bimonthly by the Academy of Science of South Africa.
In which year was the paper published?
2012
What was the problem or the question the researchers are trying to solve through experimentation?
Why are electric vehicles being considered as a more viable option of transportation in S. Africa?
What are the major advantages to commercializing electric vehicles?
What is the main hypothesis proposed by the researchers in the article
What past research did the authors cite to support their initial hypothesis in the Introduction? Explain how this research support the authors’ hypothesis.
What are some ways in which the authors Huo et al. suggested that CO2 emissions can be reduced in their 2010 study of the environmental implications of using electric vehicles in China?
In Huo et al. (2010) study, what type of GHG were electric vehicles indirectly responsible for and why?
List the types of energy sources used in majority by S. Africans? What is the projected rate of growth for demand in energy by the year 2030?
In Table 1, which energy source is forecast to be used mainly to generate energy for S. Africans? Which two sources are anticipated to show the greatest growth forecast?
These units are used frequently in the article, what do they stand for and what do they measure?GWkWh
MJ
L
In S. Africa power industry, explain what the authors believe are the main causes of concerns.
What do the authors consider to be a viable energy alternative to the current energy source in S. Africa ?
Identify which type of data was not available and not included in the researchers’ study and assessments.
Why did the authors chose to exclude this energy source from the study ?
Explain the various assumptions made by the study.
What model serves as the standard to evaluate fuel efficiency in cars in S. Africa?
Are there dependent variables in the study? What are they?
What is the control group in this experiment?
What are the constants used in the experiment?
In Table IV, which type of vehicle perform the best when it comes to releasing fewer CO2 emission in 2010. Explain why this is so.
In Table V, which type of vehicle perform the best when it comes to releasing fewer CO2, SOx, NOx, and particulate matter in 2030? Explain why this is so.
What are the environmental issues associated with the release of excess SOx into the atmosphere in S. Africa?
Describe the authors’ predictions about the use of electric vehicles in 2030 with regards to SOx, NOx, CO2, particulate matter emissions.
What are the conclusions the researchers determined f ...
Presentation prepared for the Kansas Sierra Club Chapter, Southwinds Group in Wichita, Kansas. Focus on the Beyond Coal Campaign, with some additional information specific to the proposed Holcomb Station coal-fired power plant.
Carbon monoxide Content of Exhaust Emissions from Agricultural Tractor Engine...IJAEMSJORNAL
This study aims at contributing to the information buildup required for advocating the need for urgent reduction of environmental pollution by exhaust emissions from fossil fuel powered Engines in Nigeria. It was, concluded from the results obtained from the study that carbon monoxide content of the exhaust emissions of agricultural tractors are approximately forty nine(49) times higher than the recommended maximum level of 0.5 % vol CO (v/v) by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FIAT 70-666 contributed the largest content of 2.9 % vol of CO (v/v) while MASSEY FERGUSSON MF 375 contributed the least amount of 1.7 % vol of CO(v/v). Only the engine capacity had significant effect on the carbon monoxide content of the exhaust emissions of the agricultural tractors; the model/make selection did not significantly affect the CO content of their exhaust emissions.
Energy Sources and the Production of Electricity in the United StatesDavid Manukjan
A 48 page paper that forecasts the total costs of energy sources used in the production of electricity in the United States, based on calculations of externality costs and market price per kWh. The paper also explores realistic energy distributions for electricity production that would lower carbon emissions, while taking into consideration economic, geographical, and political feasibility.
Encryption in Microsoft 365 - ExpertsLive Netherlands 2024Albert Hoitingh
In this session I delve into the encryption technology used in Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Purview. Including the concepts of Customer Key and Double Key Encryption.
Securing your Kubernetes cluster_ a step-by-step guide to success !KatiaHIMEUR1
Today, after several years of existence, an extremely active community and an ultra-dynamic ecosystem, Kubernetes has established itself as the de facto standard in container orchestration. Thanks to a wide range of managed services, it has never been so easy to set up a ready-to-use Kubernetes cluster.
However, this ease of use means that the subject of security in Kubernetes is often left for later, or even neglected. This exposes companies to significant risks.
In this talk, I'll show you step-by-step how to secure your Kubernetes cluster for greater peace of mind and reliability.
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesLaura Byrne
Clients don’t know what they don’t know. What web solutions are right for them? How does WordPress come into the picture? How do you make sure you understand scope and timeline? What do you do if sometime changes?
All these questions and more will be explored as we talk about matching clients’ needs with what your agency offers without pulling teeth or pulling your hair out. Practical tips, and strategies for successful relationship building that leads to closing the deal.
Essentials of Automations: Optimizing FME Workflows with ParametersSafe Software
Are you looking to streamline your workflows and boost your projects’ efficiency? Do you find yourself searching for ways to add flexibility and control over your FME workflows? If so, you’re in the right place.
Join us for an insightful dive into the world of FME parameters, a critical element in optimizing workflow efficiency. This webinar marks the beginning of our three-part “Essentials of Automation” series. This first webinar is designed to equip you with the knowledge and skills to utilize parameters effectively: enhancing the flexibility, maintainability, and user control of your FME projects.
Here’s what you’ll gain:
- Essentials of FME Parameters: Understand the pivotal role of parameters, including Reader/Writer, Transformer, User, and FME Flow categories. Discover how they are the key to unlocking automation and optimization within your workflows.
- Practical Applications in FME Form: Delve into key user parameter types including choice, connections, and file URLs. Allow users to control how a workflow runs, making your workflows more reusable. Learn to import values and deliver the best user experience for your workflows while enhancing accuracy.
- Optimization Strategies in FME Flow: Explore the creation and strategic deployment of parameters in FME Flow, including the use of deployment and geometry parameters, to maximize workflow efficiency.
- Pro Tips for Success: Gain insights on parameterizing connections and leveraging new features like Conditional Visibility for clarity and simplicity.
We’ll wrap up with a glimpse into future webinars, followed by a Q&A session to address your specific questions surrounding this topic.
Don’t miss this opportunity to elevate your FME expertise and drive your projects to new heights of efficiency.
LF Energy Webinar: Electrical Grid Modelling and Simulation Through PowSyBl -...DanBrown980551
Do you want to learn how to model and simulate an electrical network from scratch in under an hour?
Then welcome to this PowSyBl workshop, hosted by Rte, the French Transmission System Operator (TSO)!
During the webinar, you will discover the PowSyBl ecosystem as well as handle and study an electrical network through an interactive Python notebook.
PowSyBl is an open source project hosted by LF Energy, which offers a comprehensive set of features for electrical grid modelling and simulation. Among other advanced features, PowSyBl provides:
- A fully editable and extendable library for grid component modelling;
- Visualization tools to display your network;
- Grid simulation tools, such as power flows, security analyses (with or without remedial actions) and sensitivity analyses;
The framework is mostly written in Java, with a Python binding so that Python developers can access PowSyBl functionalities as well.
What you will learn during the webinar:
- For beginners: discover PowSyBl's functionalities through a quick general presentation and the notebook, without needing any expert coding skills;
- For advanced developers: master the skills to efficiently apply PowSyBl functionalities to your real-world scenarios.
Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey 2024 by 91mobiles.pdf91mobiles
91mobiles recently conducted a Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey in which we asked over 3,000 respondents about the TV they own, aspects they look at on a new TV, and their TV buying preferences.
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectKari Kakkonen
My and Rik Marselis slides at 30.5.2024 DASA Connect conference. We discuss about what is testing, then what is agile testing and finally what is Testing in DevOps. Finally we had lovely workshop with the participants trying to find out different ways to think about quality and testing in different parts of the DevOps infinity loop.
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 4DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 4. In this session, we will cover Test Manager overview along with SAP heatmap.
The UiPath Test Manager overview with SAP heatmap webinar offers a concise yet comprehensive exploration of the role of a Test Manager within SAP environments, coupled with the utilization of heatmaps for effective testing strategies.
Participants will gain insights into the responsibilities, challenges, and best practices associated with test management in SAP projects. Additionally, the webinar delves into the significance of heatmaps as a visual aid for identifying testing priorities, areas of risk, and resource allocation within SAP landscapes. Through this session, attendees can expect to enhance their understanding of test management principles while learning practical approaches to optimize testing processes in SAP environments using heatmap visualization techniques
What will you get from this session?
1. Insights into SAP testing best practices
2. Heatmap utilization for testing
3. Optimization of testing processes
4. Demo
Topics covered:
Execution from the test manager
Orchestrator execution result
Defect reporting
SAP heatmap example with demo
Speaker:
Deepak Rai, Automation Practice Lead, Boundaryless Group and UiPath MVP
Epistemic Interaction - tuning interfaces to provide information for AI supportAlan Dix
Paper presented at SYNERGY workshop at AVI 2024, Genoa, Italy. 3rd June 2024
https://alandix.com/academic/papers/synergy2024-epistemic/
As machine learning integrates deeper into human-computer interactions, the concept of epistemic interaction emerges, aiming to refine these interactions to enhance system adaptability. This approach encourages minor, intentional adjustments in user behaviour to enrich the data available for system learning. This paper introduces epistemic interaction within the context of human-system communication, illustrating how deliberate interaction design can improve system understanding and adaptation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate the potential of epistemic interaction to significantly advance human-computer interaction by leveraging intuitive human communication strategies to inform system design and functionality, offering a novel pathway for enriching user-system engagements.
7. Premature mortality. This report analyzes publicly available data from Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). Facilities that release significant quantities of a wide variety of toxic chemicals must report these releases, including industrial air emissions, to TRI annually. These self-reported data reveal that power plants are largely responsible for contaminating our air with toxic chemicals. Sources: EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
8. The Toxic Twenty Power plants are the leading sources of toxic air pollution in all but four of the top 20 states by electric sector emissions. State has electric sector mercury regulations that are at least as stringent as EPA’s proposed utility air toxics rule. State has electric sector mercury regulation that are less stringent than EPA’s proposed utility air toxics rule. Note: A table summarizing the emissions from all states is available in the appendix. Sources: EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; State environmental departments.
9. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in the U.S. Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Chemicals Paper Products Food & Beverages Primary Metals Other U.S. Electric Sector Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution The U.S. electric sector was responsible for 49% of all industrial toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 382 million pounds. Mercury Pollution Electricity generation in the U.S. accounted for about 75% of all mercury air pollution, emitting nearly 71,000 pounds in 2009. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
10. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Ohio Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Chemicals Fabricated Metals Paper Products Plastics & Rubber Other Ohio Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Ohio’s electric sector ranked FIRST in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting more than 44.5 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 65% of state pollution and 12% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Ohio ranked THIRD among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 3,980 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 76% of state mercury air pollution and 6% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
11. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Pennsylvania Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Paper Products Primary Metals Petroleum Products Chemicals Other Pennsylvania Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Pennsylvania’s electric sector ranked SECOND in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 41.5 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 82% of state pollution and 11% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Pennsylvania ranked SECOND among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with over 4,500 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 71% of state mercury air pollution and 6% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
12. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Florida Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Paper Products Chemicals Food & Beverages Transportation Equipment Other Florida Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Florida’s electric sector ranked THIRD in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting over 33.4 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 68% of state pollution and 9% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Florida ranked 18th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 1,610 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 78% of state mercury air pollution and 2% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
13. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Kentucky Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Chemicals Paper Products Printing & Publishing Primary Metals Other Kentucky Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Kentucky’s electric sector ranked FOURTH in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting over 31.9 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 77% of state pollution and about 8% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Kentucky ranked 14th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 1,760 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 89% of state mercury air pollution and about 2% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
14. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Maryland Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Paper Products Chemicals Fabricated Metals Plastics & Rubber Other Maryland Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Maryland’s electric sector ranked FIFTH in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 27.1 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 91% of state pollution and about 7% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Maryland ranked 26th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 820 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 55% of state mercury air pollution and about 1% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. * State has enacted stringent mercury control regulations for the electric sector. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
15. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Indiana Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Primary Metals Transportation Equipment Plastics & Rubber Food & Beverages Other Indiana Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Indiana’s electric sector ranked SIXTH in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 26.8 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 68% of state pollution and 7% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Indiana ranked FOURTH among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with nearly 3,670 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 81% of state mercury air pollution and 5% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
16. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Michigan Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Paper Products Transportation Equipment Chemicals Cement Other Michigan Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Michigan’s electric sector ranked SEVENTH in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting over 22.7 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 73% of state pollution and 6% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Michigan ranked SEVENTH among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about2,790 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 87% of state mercury air pollution and 4% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. * State has enacted stringent mercury control regulations for the electric sector. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
17. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in West Virginia Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Chemicals Primary Metals Furniture Fabricated Metals Other West Virginia Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution West Virginia’s electric sector ranked EIGHTH in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 21.5 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 84% of state pollution and 6% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution West Virginia ranked 10th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 2,520 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 94% of state mercury air pollution and 4% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
18. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Georgia Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Paper Products Chemicals Stone, Clay, & Glass Food & Beverages Other Georgia Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Georgia’s electric sector ranked NINTH in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting over 18.2 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 44% of state pollution and 5% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Georgia ranked 13th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with 1,950 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 82% of state mercury air pollution and 3% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
19. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in North Carolina Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Paper Products Chemicals Food & Beverages Wood Products Other North Carolina Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution North Carolina’s electric sector ranked 10th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting about 14.9 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 49% of state pollution and 4% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution North Carolina ranked 23rd among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 1,220 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 68% of state mercury air pollution and 2% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
20. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in South Carolina Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Paper Products Chemicals Plastics & Rubber Primary Metals Other South Carolina Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution South Carolina’s electric sector ranked 11th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting about 11.5 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 43% of state pollution and 3% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution South Carolina ranked 31st among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with nearly 560 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 44% of state mercury air pollution and 1% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
21. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Alabama Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Paper Products Electricity Generation Chemicals Stone, Clay, & Glass Primary Metals Other Alabama Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Alabama’s electric sector ranked 12th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting over 11.4 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 40% of state pollution and 3% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Alabama ranked SIXTH among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with over 3,170 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 79% of state mercury air pollution and about 4% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
22. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Texas Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Chemicals Electricity Generation Petroleum Products Paper Products Plastics & Rubber Other Texas Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Texas’s electric sector ranked 13th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 10.2 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 26% of state pollution and about 3% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Texas ranked FIRST among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with nearly 10,820 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 85% of state mercury air pollution and 15% of U.S. electric sector mercury pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
23. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Virginia Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Paper Products Chemicals Primary Metals Plastics & Rubber Other Virginia Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Virginia’s electric sector ranked 14th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting over 9.6 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 38% of state pollution and 3% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Virginia ranked 28th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 700 pounds emitted in 2009, which accounted for 66% of state mercury air pollution and 1% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
24. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Tennessee Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Chemicals Paper Products Plastics & Rubber Food & Beverages Other Tennessee Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Tennessee’s electric sector ranked 15th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 8.9 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 35% of state pollution and 2% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Tennessee ranked 24th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 1,170 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 70% of state mercury air pollution and 2% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
25. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Missouri Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Plastics & Rubber Transportation Equipment Chemicals Food & Beverages Other Missouri Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Missouri’s electric sector ranked 16th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 6.4 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 53% of state pollution and 2% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Missouri ranked FIFTH among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with nearly 3,640 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 87% of state mercury air pollution and 5% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
26. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Illinois Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Chemicals Plastics & Rubber Food & Beverages Petroleum Products Other Illinois Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Illinois’s electric sector ranked 17th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 5.6 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 23% of state pollution and 1% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Illinois ranked EIGHTH among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 2,680 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 79% of state mercury air pollution and 4% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. * State has enacted stringent mercury control regulations for the electric sector. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
27. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Wisconsin Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Paper Products Electricity Generation Chemicals Fabricated Metals Plastics & Rubber Other Wisconsin Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Wisconsin’s electric sector ranked 18th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 3.5 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 27% of state pollution and about 1% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Wisconsin ranked 12th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with nearly 2,000 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 91% of state mercury air pollution and 3% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. * State has enacted stringent mercury control regulations for the electric sector. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
28. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in New Hampshire Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Electricity Generation Paper Products Textiles Plastics & Rubber Primary Metals Other New Hampshire Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution New Hampshire’s electric sector ranked 19th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting over 2.5 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 96% of state pollution and about 1% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution New Hampshire ranked 38th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with 175 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 99% of state mercury air pollution and less than 1% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
29. Toxic Industrial Air Pollution in Iowa Toxic Air Pollution by Sector Food & Beverages Chemicals Primary Metals Electricity Generation Plastics & Rubber Other Iowa Key Facts Top Power Plant Polluters Toxic Air Pollution Iowa’s electric sector ranked 20th in toxic air pollution in 2009, emitting nearly 2.5 million pounds of harmful chemicals,which accounted for 16% of state pollution and less than 1% of toxic pollution from all U.S. power plants. Mercury Pollution Iowa ranked 11th among all states in mercury air pollution from power plants with about 2,220 poundsemitted in 2009, which accounted for 83% of state mercury air pollution and about 3% of U.S. electric sector pollution. Pollution controls have been installed since 2009 or are currently under construction. These investments should reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants in future years. Note: The possibility of already planned retirements or pollution controls at the listed plants may also reduce emissions in future years. Sources: EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; EPA’s National Electric Energy Data System Database v.4.10 (2010).
30. Appendix: State Summary Table State has an electric sector mercury regulation that is at least as stringent as EPA’s proposed utility air toxics rule. State has an electric sector mercury regulation that is less stringent than EPA’s proposed utility air toxics rule. Sources: EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; State environmental departments.
31. Appendix: State Summary Table (Continued) State has electric sector mercury regulations that are at least as stringent as EPA’s proposed utility air toxics rule. State has electric sector mercury regulation that are less stringent than EPA’s proposed utility air toxics rule. Sources: EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011; State environmental departments.
32. Appendix: Electric Sector Toxic Air Pollution by State Sources: EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (2009 data), accessed June 2011
33.
34. Industry Classifications Covered sources report the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes that apply to them and are classified by their primary sector in the TRI database. For simplicity, the industry sector names used in EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory were adjusted in accordance with the table below. For each state, industries beyond the top five emitting sectors were grouped together and categorized as “Other.” Methodology
35. U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, TOXICS RELEASE INVENTORY (TRI): Description & Use: Certain electric generating facilities, along with facilities from other industries, report to the TRI. Electric generating facilities that combust coal or oil are required to report releases of designated pollutants to the TRI if the quantity of each pollutant released meets or exceeds specific thresholds. Releases include point source air emissions. Generally, the reporting threshold for electric generating facilities is 25,000 pounds or more of an individual pollutant. However, the threshold for certain persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals, such as mercury and mercury compounds, is significantly lower. The reporting threshold for mercury and mercury compounds is 10 pounds. Reporting thresholds are applied to each pollutant individually. Facilities that combust only natural gas are exempt from the TRI reporting requirements. The TRI data are self-reported by covered sources, and EPA does not require specific methodologies for measuring or estimating releases. Therefore, methodologies vary from source to source. The TRI served as the source for all emissions data referenced in this report. While the TRI may not reflect total U.S. or sector-level emissions, it covers most large stationary sources of toxic air pollutants and provides useful information on emissions trends. Citation: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2009 Inventory Updated Dataset – Point Source Air Emissions. URL: http://www.epa.gov/tri/tridata/index.html. (Accessed June 2011 through TRI.NET application: http://www.epa.gov/tri/tridotnet/index.html). U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, NATIONAL ELECTRIC ENERGY DATA SYSTEM v.4.10 (NEEDS): Description & Use: EPA uses NEEDS as the basis for its IPM modeling efforts to project the impact of proposed policy changes. NEEDS contains information on the operating and emissions characteristics of most generating units in the U.S. NEEDS served as the basis for information on recently installed pollution controls included in this report. This information was checked against independent sources to verify the validity of NEEDS. Citation: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. NEEDS v.4.10 database. URL: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-ipm/BaseCasev410.html. (Accessed June 2011). U.S. ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, FORM-860 ANNUAL ELECTRIC GENERATOR REPORT (EIA-860): Description & Use: The database includes generator-level data for electric generating facilities, including ownership information and site addresses. This database served as the primary source for the ownership information included in this report, although additional sources were used to confirm this information when necessary. Citation: U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2010. Form EIA-860 Annual Electric Generator Report, 2009. URL: http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia860.html. Accessed June 2011. VARIOUS SOURCES: Description: A variety of additional sources were consulted to confirm the status of state mercury regulations and the installation of pollution control equipment at individual plants since the 2009 TRI data were collected. Additional sources were used to confirm ownership data in some instances. For a full list of additional sources, please contact NRDC. Sources