Toxic Release Inventory Frequently Asked Questions
How did TRI get started?
Why does Ameren participate in TRI?
What's Ameren's position on TRI?
How risky are your emissions?
How do you account for the numbers on the EPA site?
Why burn coal at all—aren't there other ways to produce electricity?
What are you doing to reduce your emissions?
What else are you doing for the environment?
How did TRI get started?
After 2,000 people died in a disastrous chemical accident in Bhopal, India, in December 1984, Congress passed a bill called the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, or EPCRA. The 1986 law was designed to inform the public of the presence of chemicals that are manufactured and "otherwise used" by industry. EPCRA was designed to preempt not only catastrophes like Bhopal, but also to provide information to the public about routine releases of a long list of other chemicals.
Top
Why does Ameren participate in TRI?
Before 1997, only certain manufacturing companies—like chemical, petroleum, paper and metal companies—were required to report their emissions under EPCRA. But in 1997, the government expanded the scope of the program to include seven new industries and increased the number of covered chemicals to 630. The industries now covered by the program include electric utilities, like Ameren, that use coal and/or oil to generate electricity in their power plants.
To comply with the new standards, in the summer of 1999 Ameren reported to the federal government its 1998 emissions of certain substances from its power plants. These emissions figures are now reported annually.
Top
What's Ameren's position on TRI?
Ameren believes that the public has a right to accurate and meaningful information about the release of chemicals to the environment. However, TRI data alone cannot indicate whether a chemical may pose a risk to human health or the environment. To determine risk, scientists must take into account the toxicity of the chemical, the extent of exposure, the measures for containing the chemical and the surrounding environmental conditions.
Top
How risky are your emissions?
Compounds that leave power plants through the stacks are in extremely low concentrations and are even more widely dispersed before they reach the public. What’s more, the EPA and other researchers have studied the chemicals reported under TRI for more than twenty years and not found any risks that warrant regulation.
However, some emissions, like sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx) and particulate matter, do have stringent limits, which Ameren plants meet or exceed. Information on these substances has been publicly available for years.
Precipitators and other equipment remove 99.5 percent of the coal ash before it can leave the plant. Chemicals present in ash are typically contained on plant property in specially designed ash ponds, though it is often recycled as building material or structural fill. The EPA has carefully studied coal ash and does not consider it to be hazardous.
Top
How do you account for the numbers on the EPA site?
Simply put, we burn a great deal of coal. It takes millions of tons of coal each year to produce electricity for our 1.5 million electric customers in Missouri and Illinois—emissions have to be understood in that context.
When coal is burned, some chemicals are released that exist in trace quantities naturally in the coal. Other chemicals are formed in the combustion process. Ameren’s power plants have done an outstanding job of containing these substances, either by trapping them before they exit the plant through the stacks, or by containing them in specially designed ash ponds on plant property. In fact, 99% of the ash created when coal burns at our plants never makes it up the stack—it’s pulled out by equipment called "precipitators."
Top
Why burn coal at all—aren't there other ways to produce electricity?
In fact, Ameren does produce electricity in other ways—three hydroelectric plants contribute to the company’s generating capacity, and we also have one of the safest nuclear plants in the nation and several natural gas plants.
Other options you may have heard about aren’t yet economically feasible. Solar energy, for example, is still extremely costly for utilities to produce and for consumers to purchase. What’s more, it’s only available consistently in sunny areas. Other ways of producing energy, like wind power, require certain geographic characteristics (large areas of flat land, strong prevailing winds) that our region simply doesn’t offer. That’s why coal remains the fuel of choice for most of the U.S. electric industry.
Top
What are you doing to reduce your emissions?
You can read more about what some of our specific plants are doing to reduce emissions on this Web page. Here are the results of their efforts:
- Together, AmerenUE and AmerenEnergy Generating Company (AEG) have spent more than $300 million to reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from their power plants.
- Since the 1970s, AmerenUE has reduced emissions of SO2 by more than 65 percent; AmerenEnergy Generating Company (AEG) has cut its sulfur dioxide emissions by 60 percent in that time period.
- AmerenUE has reduced its NOx emissions rate by more than 50 percent below 1990 levels, while increasing the amount of coal burned by nearly a third. AmerenEnergy Generating Company (AEG) has cut its plants’ nitrogen oxide emission rate by more than 25 percent, while burning 30 percent more coal.
Top
What else are you doing for the environment?
From exploring new energy sources to conserving wildlife, Ameren’s employees and power plants are committed to protecting our environment while providing clean, low-cost energy. Click here to request a brochure describing our environmental initiatives.
Top
|
