Duke Energy Promised to Limit Emissions at Four New Gas Plants. It’s Already Back-Tracking

Environmental advocates in North Carolina are angry after 10 utilities and power companies, including Duke Energy, sent a letter Jan. 15 to Lee Zeldin, confirmed on Wednesday as EPA administrator, asking him to weaken environmental regulations over coal ash and natural gas.

These regulations help protect air and water from toxic chemicals as well as reduce greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change.

The Senate confirmed Zeldin on a largely party line, 56-42 vote, with three Democrats voting in favor. Zeldin has in recent years advocated unleashing fossil fuel production. 

Canary Media first reported the existence of the letter.

The power companies alleged, without citing evidence, that stronger EPA rules for the fossil fuel industry, enacted under previous administrator Michael Regan, “individually and collectively threaten the reliability of the power grid, jeopardize national security, are a drag on economic growth, increase inflation and hinder the expansion of electric power generation to support the critical development and deployment of artificial intelligence and related technologies.”

A Duke Energy spokesman declined to comment, saying the letter summarizes the utility’s stance.

Coal ash contains several harmful chemicals, including arsenic, cadmium, mercury and lead. Nationwide, chemicals from unlined ash ponds have leaked into the groundwater, which in some instances have contaminated private drinking water wells. Current EPA regulations have attempted to close some loopholes that allowed the contamination to continue unchecked.

“Families of all walks of life depend on these protections for their clean water. The executives who wrote this letter are out of touch if they think anyone voted for arsenic, lead, and mercury from coal ash in their water,” said Nick Torrey, a senior attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center.

Last year, some of these same utilities challenged EPA’s enforcement of these protections and lost in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, according to the SELC, “which confirmed that the protective standards in EPA’s coal ash rule prohibit leaving coal ash in water and leaking pollutants into the surrounding waterways.” 

If Zeldin honors the request, the rollback would not affect Duke’s excavation plans for its 31 unlined coal ash ponds in North Carolina. The utility is legally required under a consent order to excavate all of those ponds, accounting for roughly 126 million tons of ash. It can move the material to lined landfills or process it for reuse, such as in concrete. 

Duke has excavated 11 of the basins; deadlines for the remaining sites range from 2028 to 2037.

However, Duke and the other utilities could benefit from weaker rules governing the use of coal ash for “beneficial use.” The utilities asked Zeldin to allow ash that is used on-site at the plants, such as landfill cover for new basins, to qualify as a beneficial use and to be exempt from federal coal ash regulations. “The EPA should apply the same exemption to all beneficial uses, whether off-site or on-site,” the utilities wrote.

Aside from on-site fills or landfills, Duke encapsulates its ash, such as in concrete. The utility used to provide ash for structural fill in North Carolina, but no longer does so, as that use has become unpopular. In several instances ash provided to private developers from Duke and other utilities has become exposed after pavement eroded or sinkholes formed in parking lots.

“They’re taking the first available opportunity to try to push back protections,” said Mikaela Curry, the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign manager. “To me, it just confirms the worst fears in these communities that given any opportunity, Duke will just do whatever they can to advance their own interests, regardless of what the cost is to us on the ground.”

As for natural gas, the power companies asked Zeldin to rescind the EPA’s greenhouse gas rule, enacted last year. The GHG rule directly affects Duke’s natural gas buildout by requiring the utlity to limit ermissions or install carbon capture technology at two new gas plants it is building at Hyco Lake in Person County. The utility is also constructing two new plants at the Marshall Steam Station in Catawba County. Duke currently burns coal at both locations.t It could continue to do so at Hyco Lake while it transitions to natural gas.

Even after the transition to natural gas the Hyco and Marshall plants would emit thousands of tons of nitrogen oxide, very fine particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds and methane into the air each year.

Duke Energy has received approval from the North Carolina Utilities Commission for the projects. The utility has also received state air permits for the Hyco and Marshall natural gas plants, but construction is not expected to be completed until 2028 or 2029.

“The risks and costs of building these plants without regard to climate impacts will only further burden North Carolina which is still recovering from $53 billion in damages from Hurricane Helene.”

— Ridge Graham, Appalachian Voices

Under the current GHG rule, Duke would have to dial down its Hyco Lake plants to no more than 40 percent of generating capacity by 2032. To avoid that limitation, Duke would have to install carbon capture sequestration technology to capture 90 percent of its GHG emissions. However, that technology is not yet commercially viable and isn’t likely to be by the deadline. 

Several energy interests have sued the EPA over the GHG rule; the D.C. Circuit could soon rule on the case. In the letter to Zeldin, the power companies asked him to direct the Department of Justice to file a motion with the court to suspend the deliberations and send the rule back to the EPA. “Deadlines are approaching, and States and regulated entities will be forced soon to make choices that may be difficult, if not impossible, to reverse,” the letter reads.

This stance is a reversal from what Duke officials told the Utilities Commission during proceedings about the carbon plan, said Ridge Graham, North Carolina program manager for Appalachian Voices. “Duke said they could comply with the changes,” which are in Section 111 of the Clean Air Act. “The risks and costs of building these plants without regard to climate impacts will only further burden North Carolina which is still recovering from $53 billion in damages from Hurricane Helene.” 

The power companies also asked Zeldin to postpone GHG rule deadlines and to begin formally repealing most of its provisions. 

Jim Warren is the executive director of NC WARN, which is paying for a lawsuit filed by the Town of Carrboro against Duke Energy over the impacts of climate change. “Such corporate behavior is both reckless and tragic,” Warren said of the letter to Zeldin. “Duke Energy is again leading a campaign to extend and expand the use of fossil fuels despite the devastating impacts on communities and the climate crisis.”

Curry, of the Sierra Club, said if she were to write Zeldin a letter, she would try to appeal to his sense of duty to protect human health and the environment:

“Americans across this country are counting on you to ensure they have the clean air and water they deserve,” she said. “EPA is supposed to work on behalf of the people, not massive energy companies pushing their dirty agenda. We already know that the toxic heavy metals and other pollutants found in coal ash are linked to cancer, heart and thyroid disease, reproductive failure, and can inflict permanent brain damage on children. I would urge Zeldin to consider whether he wants the legacy of his work to be serving the interests of polluters at the cost of life and health to people across our country.”