But as one of our tour guides reminded me, “It’s what you can’t see that will hurt you.”

The Portland Harbor may be the city’s least understood environmental problem. No one sees the river sediments that are contaminated with PCBs, heavy metals and pesticides. Nor can we spot the toxic groundwater that leaches into the river, carrying pollutants like DDT and dioxin.

This week, I was part of a group that toured the Superfund area on a boat trip sponsored by the Portland Harbor Community Advisory Group. I’m just beginning to understand the issue and I’m no expert by any stretch of the imagination.

So with that in mind, here are some impressions from the trip.

The former Arkema site, described as "ground zero" of the lower Willamette River. In the 1940s and 1950s, the company manufactured pesticides. The groundwater is contaminated with DDT, hexavalent chromium and benzene. A hidden plume leaches the pollutants into the river.

This Is Taking A Long Time

The lower Willamette River was declared a Superfund site in 2000. Ten years later and we’re still waiting for the clean up to start. About $75 million has been spent just studying the problem. Judy Smith with EPA says that’s because – even by Superfund standards – this is an unusually complex mess.

First, it’s a big site, more than 11-miles long from downtown Portland to Sauvie Island.

There’s also a lot of blame to go around. The EPA has identified more than 100 parties it says are responsible for the pollution and need to pay for the clean up.  Getting them to work together isn’t simple, but Smith says the level of cooperation in Portland is pretty good.

The clean up won’t be simple either. It helps to think of this as a collection of toxic hot spots, each requiring a different kind of clean up plan. What works in one spot may not work at another. Some toxins, such as PCBs, are widespread through the lower river. Other chemicals, like DDT, are in one or two isolated locations.

Smith says a clean up plan should be completed in the next year or two. That will be followed by a period of public comment and then EPA makes a final decision. So we’re still a few years away until the work begins. But early clean up is underway at a few locations.

There’s Lots Of Room For Improvement

This trip changed my mind about what we can do to improve wildlife habitat along the lower Willamette.

Beforehand, it seemed to me this was a hopeless cause, that there was little habitat left worth trying to save or restore.

That’s still true along the river near downtown. But as you go further downstream, I saw lots of riverbank that hadn’t been developed. In some spots there was only 50 or 100 feet between docks. Elsewhere there were long stretches of empty waterfront.

Some of the bigger empty areas could be restored as marshes and wetlands – safe havens for salmon, otters, beaver, herons and other wildlife. In the smaller sections, we could replant the riverbank with native trees and bushes. Even a strip ten feet wide along the river can help. Sand and gravel can be placed along the water’s edge, providing salmon friendly habitat. That’s already happening in some places.

At the federal level, a group of agencies and tribes will lead efforts to restore the lower Willamette once the clean up work is completed. Portland has its North River Reach plan, which would require companies that develop the riverfront, to also pay for habitat restoration. But businesses are fighting it in court.

It’s naive to think that the lower Willamette River can return to the way it was 100-years ago. No one expects that. But I’m now convinced there are plenty of opportunities for improvement, and that this working section of the river can support both industry and more wildlife.

For More Information:

EPA Portland Harbor Superfund

Portland Harbor Community Advisory Group

Portland Harbor Natural Resource Damage Assessment

PGE's coal fired Boardman Power Plant. Photo from Ted Timmons

The news must have landed at PGE like a ton of coal.

Oregon DEQ says its looking at three options for an early closure of PGE’s coal-fired power plant at Boardman. They call on the utility to spend millions more to keep the plant running, or shutting it down a lot earlier than PGE wants.

The Big Picture

To see where this is going, let’s back up for a moment. There’s only one approved plan – so far – that allows PGE to continue operating the Boardman power plant. It allows the plant to generate electricity by burning coal until 2040. But PGE would have to install about $500 million in new pollution controls to bring down emissions of nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide.

This doesn’t include any controls on greenhouse gases. None are required for now, but pretty much everyone expects they will be required in the near future. Since Boardman is the state’s biggest single source of greenhouse gas, the costs of new controls could be substantial.

PGE, no surprise, would like to avoid having to pay for all that. So earlier this year it proposed a plan where it would shut down Boardman by 2020, and only have to spend about $40 million on pollution controls. That proposal was rejected by DEQ a couple of weeks ago.

DEQ’s Options

The 2020 Plan: Boardman shuts down by the end of 2020, and PGE spends $320 million on reducing pollution.

The 2018 Plan: The plant closes by the end of 2018, and PGE pays about $100 million for new controls.

The 2015-2016 Plan: Boardman shuts down in late 2015 or early 2016. The cost of pollution controls drops to $35 million

DEQ says it chose these options because it thinks they can be approved by the EPA. It’s now taking comments from the public, plans on holding hearings in September, with a goal of approving a final plan before the end of the year.

Environmental Reaction

Oregon Sierra Club, which has been leading the campaign to shut down Boardman, is praising DEQ for the new proposals. The group wants Boardman closed in 2014. While DEQ doesn’t go that far, it does get us closer.

In a statement, Cesia Kearns of the Coal Free Oregon Campaign writes:

“The options DEQ has proposed demonstrate clearly that PGE can and should phase-out their dirty and dangerous Boardman coal-fired power plant earlier than the 2020 they are currently proposing. We already know that it is better for public health and the environment in Oregon if Boardman is phased out soon. The options offered by DEQ today further detail how it will also be cheaper to phase the plant out sooner than PGE is currently considering.”

PGE Reaction

The utility is not happy with the DEQ options. It wants to keep Boardman running until 2020, but at a lower cost. It says it needs the extra time to plan and develop cleaner sources of electricity to replace the plant.

According to PGE President and CEO Jim Piro:

“We put forward a plan for Boardman that we believe reached a good balance between cost, risk and environmental benefits. We’ll do a complete analysis, but we’re disappointed that DEQ didn’t allow that plan to proceed. On the face of it we believe the new options DEQ put forward today may reflect an extreme interpretation of federal rules that won’t make sense for our customers or our state. We want to work with DEQ to find a better way to transition this resource around the 2020 timeframe.”

The Next Steps:

DEQ sets up an advisory committee to do further study, which starts meeting in July. An updated version of this plan would be ready for public hearings in September. But the agency is taking comments now and they can be emailed to, deqoptionspge@deq.state.or.us.

For More Information:

Draft DEQ Proposal for Early Shutdown of the PGE Boardman Plant

PGE Reaction

Sierra Club Reaction

PGE's coal fired Boardman Power Plant. Photo from Ted Timmons

Hearings before the Public Utility Commission are usually pretty dull events. But Wednesday’s hearing in Portland promises to be very, very different.

That’s because environmental groups are rallying the troops, urging them to show up in huge numbers.

Their message to the PUC? Shut down the Boardman coal-fired power plant by 2014.

The hearing could be a climatic moment in the campaign to close Oregon’s only coal-fired power plant. Boardman’s reputation as a source of dirty power is well deserved. It’s the biggest single source of carbon emissions in the state, a major contributor to the haze you see in the Columbia River Gorge and elsewhere, and spews 15,000 tons of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide and over 200 pounds of mercury annually.

So What Do We Do About It?

There are three options before the PUC. Here’s a brief look at all of them.

Closing Boardman by 2014: This is the option favored by environmental groups. Under this scenario, PGE (which owns most of Boardman and operates the plant) would have to spend about $40 million in 2011 to reduce emissions of mercury and nitrogen oxide. But Boardman would have to be completely shut down three years later, and PGE would have to find other sources of electricity.

Arguments in favor: Best results for the environment by taking the state’s only coal-fired power plant off line. Robin Everett of the Oregon Sierra Club says Boardman has been allowed to operate for too long. “It’s the biggest polluter in the state. It’s time for them to clean it up. And the best way to do that is to shut it down.”

Arguments against: Steve Corson of PGE says a 2014 closure doesn’t give the utility enough time to find other sources of power. One possibility is replacing Boardman with a natural gas fired plant. But Corson says the utility also wants to explore other ideas such as converting Boardman into a plant that runs on biomass. A few more years, says Corson, also lowers the costs of shutting down the plant and finding those other sources.

Allowing Boardman to operate until 2040: If PGE were continue operating the plant for another 30-years, it would have to install more than $520 million in new pollution controls.

Arguments in favor: No one is enthusiastic about this option. It’s PGE’s second choice and environmental groups are appalled by the idea.

Arguments against: There’s a lot of uncertainty in a 30-year plan. New carbon controls under consideration by the EPA – or if Congress acts on climate change legislation – both could significantly raise the costs of operating Boardman. PGE customers could be on the hook for higher electricity bills to pay for pollution controls way beyond the $520 million already in the works.

Closing Boardman by 2020: PGE’s favorite option. The utility would still have to reduce emissions of mercury, nitrogen oxide and sulfur. But it would avoid paying the $520 million costs of new controls needed to keep the plant running until 2040. This option, also requires approval by Oregon DEQ. The agency recently rejected PGE’s 2020 plan, but says it’s studying other options.

Arguments in favor: Corson says this gives PGE enough time to explore a variety of replacement sources of power, keeps down the costs of shutting the plant and finding those new sources, and avoids an unknown future of new carbon controls.

Arguments against: The Sierra Club says PGE is working off flawed information. It says the utility overestimates the future costs of natural gas, and underestimates the savings from investments in efficiency. They say it’s wrong to keep putting money into coal generated electricity.

Details On The Hearing:

The hearing starts at 6:30pm in the auditorium of the Portland Building, 1120 SW 5th Ave. But environmental groups are holding briefing on the issues for the public starting at 5:30pm, and a press conference at 6:00pm. They’re also hoping people will show up early to sign up to testify.

I’ve written about these toxic chemicals before. They’re called “persistent pollutants” because it takes years or even decades before they break down in the environment. Over time they get into the food chain and become a threat to the health of people, animals and fish.

The latest news is that DEQ says it now has a better idea of where these chemicals come from and how they get into Oregon’s waterways. It’s also suggesting ways to reduce the level of these chemicals in the environment, so they pose less of a danger.

What’s the best way to control them? DEQ says the answer is prevention.

Some ideas under consideration:

• Banning some of the pollutants.
• Requiring businesses to design products that use less of the chemicals.
• Phasing out some of the chemicals when safer alternatives become available.
• Educating the public on the risks of these chemicals, and the best way to dispose of products that contain them.

Where do they come from?

• Household products such as medications, disinfectants, perfumes and the non-stick coating used in cookware.
• Flame retardants, known as PBDEs are used in electronics and furniture. Oregon and Washington have banned the most common types of PBDEs.
• Pesticides, whether they’re used on the farm, in forests, or on the lawns and gardens of our homes.
• Legacy pollutants, such as DDT, are still a problem even though they may have been banned decades ago.

What’s next?

In the coming year, DEQ will set “trigger levels” for these pollutants in our wastewater. 52 of Oregon’s largest wastewater systems will have to monitor how much of these chemicals are being discharged into our rivers and streams. If a chemical goes above the “trigger level”, officials will have to design a plan to reduce it in the wastewater. These plans are due by July of 2011.

Today, DEQ released a report on persistent pollutants to the Legislature. This worked is mandated under Senate Bill 737, approved by lawmakers in 2007.

The prevention measures outlined in the report may require new rules, or new laws, to make sure they’re carried out.

For More Information:

Oregon DEQ: Addressing Priority Persistent Pollutants in Oregon’s Water

Related Story:

Oregon’s Dirty Dozens

But Mary Peveto of Neighbors for Clean Air tells me there’s a lot of frustration after what people heard at last night’s meeting put on by Oregon DEQ.

DEQ is proposing new benchmarks for acceptable levels of three air pollutants – lead, manganese and ethyl benzene. New studies show these toxins are more dangerous than we thought. DEQ now says the levels of these pollutants that are considered okay need to be lowered.

Peveto and other critics say DEQ’s approach fails to look at pollution hot spots, places where toxins in our air can spike to high levels over short periods. Instead, DEQ looks at regional and statewide averages. But air quality can vary widely within a county. For example, people who live near freeways or industrial sites may worse air quality that people living in the suburbs.

In an e-mail to supporters, Peveto says concerns raised at the meeting were answered by comments that were more about process than substance.

She writes:

Last night, we saw that we still have work to do.

Specifically, we need to demand that our state take action to protect public health by addressing the short term exposures to dangerous pollution experienced by those who live in toxic hot spots.  In a city which reveres its beloved “urban growth boundary” this is not an isolated issue of one neighborhood.  In fact 63 schools rank in the top 10% of schools in the nation with the most dangerous air quality due to proximity to sources of dangerous industrial air pollution.

Peveto has posted a fuller version of what happened on her blog, PDXAIR.

Related Story:

A NW Portlander’s Fight For Clean Air

EO, Sierra Club and Climate Solutions put this together at a gas station that sells BP petroleum products.

The message, in case you’re still not sure, is to stop offshore drilling for oil and gas and move the country faster to renewable energy. Talking about the Gulf Spill, protester Leslie March says, “You don’t see these kind of disasters at wind farms.”

The organizers say this is one of 50 similar events taking place around the country this week.

The NW Portland resident had just typed the name of her daughter’s school into a national database on toxic air quality. Much to her surprise – and horror – the school was ranked as one of the worst in the country.

That “eye opening” moment was about a year ago. Since then Peveto has become something of a self taught expert on air quality, started up the PDXAIR blog where she writes about the issue, and co-founded Neighbors For Clean Air to raise awareness of problems.

Her newest mission? To convince Oregonians to get involved in making the air we breathe cleaner and healthier.

I spoke with Peveto because next week, DEQ will hold an important public meeting on setting new statewide benchmarks for three air toxins – lead, manganese and ethyl benzene. Based on new information about the health dangers of these chemicals, DEQ is proposing tougher benchmarks for all of them.

While supportive of tougher standards, Peveto is critical of the state’s overall approach. There’s only one air monitoring station in all of Portland that measures these kinds of toxins. Samples are taken every six days and averaged out over a year.

“This won’t help people at the highest risk of exposure,” says Peveto. “Let’s look who’s at greatest risk and alleviate their risk.”

Peveto wants to see the state do a better job of monitoring hot spots, places where toxic pollution can spike to unhealthy levels even though the region-wide quality still looks okay.  In her part of NW Portland, neighbors are worried about emissions from the ESCO refinery and petroleum storage tanks. Elsewhere, the problem might be high levels of toxins from traffic on nearby freeways.

She also wants benchmarks that do a better job of protecting the health of children. Dozens of Portland schools are located next or near industrial areas where students may be exposed to short term spikes in air toxins.

Neighbors For Clean Air has a online petition drive to get support for the changes Peveto is advocating.

Gregg Lande with DEQ says industrial sources of toxic air is just one of the issues under consideration. “It’s not just about one business or sector,” says Lande. “It’s about a lot of things that are contributing.”

“Industry is just a piece of the problem,” he adds.

The DEQ meeting on the new benchmarks will be held Tuesday, May 18 starting at 6:00pm. The location is ODOT offices at 123 NW Flanders, Portland.

For more information about the proposed benchmarks see:

Oregon Air Toxics Program

To see the original USA Today coverage on air quality near schools see:

Toxic Air and America’s Schools

PGE's coal fired Boardman Power Plant. Photo from Ted Timmons

Environmental groups hope they’ve found another way to force an early closure of Oregon’s only coal fired power plant, the PGE facility near Boardman.

The idea is to make PGE to spend so much money on pollution controls, the utility will decide that shutting down Boardman will be cheaper than cleaning it up.

This new battle over Boardman’s future starts Tuesday evening at a public meeting in Portland. Oregon’s Department of Environmental Quality will take comments on PGE’s application for a Title V permit. The permit tells PGE how much pollution is allowed at Boardman – if the plant is to continue operating.

DEQ is calling for big cuts in pollution. They include:

• 46% reductions in nitrogen oxide by 2011, and an 84% reduction by 2017.
• 80% reductions in sulfur dioxide by 2014.
• 90% reductions in mercury by 2011.

But Cescia Kearns of the Oregon Sierra Club says DEQ could, and should, insist on further cuts. For example, instead of an 80% reduction in sulfur dioxide she wants DEQ to require a 90% reduction. She and other environmentalists hope that if DEQ gets tougher on Boardman, the costs of the new controls will be so expensive that PGE will agree to shut down Boardman by 2014.

“We feel they’ve been allowed to pollute for too long,” says Kearns. “Now things are coming home to roost. Now it’s time to clean up or shut down, and shutting down is a better solution.”

In some ways, the anti-Boardman campaign has already scored a major victory. Early this year, PGE said that because of the projected high cost of new pollution controls, it’s willing to close Boardman by 2020. That’s two decades ahead of schedule. But in return, PGE is asking DEQ to relax some of those proposed rules.

Kearns is hoping it’s an offer that DEQ can refuse. The Sierra Club and the Coal Free Oregon campaign are working hard to get supporters to turn out for Tuesday’s hearing. They’re also organizing a rally before the hearing begins.

DEQ can’t order PGE to close Boardman. That’s a decision that belongs to the state’s Public Utility Commission. The PUC will hold hearings this summer on PGE’s operating plan for the future, known as the Integrated Resource Plan. Sierra Club will continue to pressure the PUC to order a 2014 closure of Boardman, if DEQ can’t – or won’t – apply enough pressure to make it happen.

Details:

• When: Rally and briefing for supporters begins at 6:00pm. Hearing begins at 6:30pm.
• Where: DEQ Portland Headquarters, Room EQC-A (10th floor), 811 SW 6th Ave, Portland.

Related Stories:

Oregonian: PGE plan suggests shorter time frame to close Boardman coal-fired power plant
Natural Oregon: Sierra Club: PGE Still Needs To Shut Down Boardman By 2014
Natural Oregon: More Views On PGE’s Early Shut Down Of Boardman

A biomass plant burns wood to generate electricity. The pollution from burning wood can be high in particulates – small specks of dust and soot. And guess why Klamath County got that “F”. That’s right, because of too many “unhealthy air” days with high levels of particulates. You can see where this is headed. Environmental officials are trying to figure out if the plant will help, or hurt, air quality.

See Klamath Falls Herald And News: Bad air could impact biomass plant

Lane, Jackson and Klamath counties get at least one flunking grade. Eugene-Springfield earns a spot on one of the group’s “Most Polluted Cities” lists.

The problem for all these areas is particulate pollution, fine specks of dust and soot that can hang in the air and get into our lungs when we breathe. Common sources include power plants and diesel vehicles. But these areas in Oregon are also where we see heavy use of wood stoves for heating. Older wood stoves are a big contributor to particulate pollution in the state.

While the report gives Lane, Jackson and Klamath counties passing grades for year round air quality, they all get an “F” for short-term particulate pollution. That means the Lung Association thinks these areas see too many days when particulate pollution spikes to unhealthy levels. Cold winter air can trap particulate pollution near the surface. And since that’s the time of year when we’re most likely to heat with wood, that’s when we’re most likely to get those nasty spikes.

The Lung Association says these kinds of conditions are especially troublesome for people with Asthma, Bronchitis, Emphysema and Cardiovascular disease.

Lane County officials have disputed these findings in previous years. They say the Lung Association data is based on a single air quality monitoring station located in one of the dirtiest parts of the county. The Lane County Regional Air Protection Agency has its own system of monitoring stations.

Eugene-Springfield was ranked 21st in the nation on the report’s “Most Polluted Cities” list – again for short-term particle pollution. But the report says the area is also doing a lot better than it was just a few year ago. The number of days with unhealthy air has dropped by almost two-thirds since the 2003 – 2005 study period.

What Oregon counties earn high grades? Columbia County got an “A” for low levels of ozone and Josephine and Umatilla counties got the same grade for low levels of particle pollution.

For more information:

American Lung Association: State Of The Air