Connect with Us:

The Power of Information

Facebook Page Twitter @enviroblog Youtube Channel Our RSS Feeds

At EWG,
our team of scientists, engineers, policy experts, lawyers and computer programmers pores over government data, legal documents, scientific studies and our own laboratory tests to expose threats to your health and the environment, and to find solutions. Our research brings to light unsettling facts that you have a right to know.

Privacy Policy
(Updated Sept. 19, 2011)
Terms & Conditions
Reprint Permission Information

Charity Navigator 4 Star

sign up
Optional Member Code

support ewg

Don't back off on mercury rules


Published July 5, 2004

During the last six months, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency asked the American public for comment on its controversial proposals for regulating power plants that emit mercury, a powerful toxin that can seriously impair fetal brain development and cause other health problems.

The agency logged a staggering 540,000 letters, e-mails and faxes on the subject, setting a record. Granted, those aren't exactly "American Idol" numbers, but the unexpected public outpouring proves that an advanced chemistry degree wasn't necessary to comprehend what's at stake.

According to an EPA advisory committee, more than 15 percent of American children may experience learning disabilities because their mothers ingested mercury-laden fish, almost twice the number suspected. Those exposed to elevated levels of mercury in the womb may have difficulty walking and talking, and suffer higher rates of cerebral palsy.

But young children aren't the only ones at risk; local health agencies regularly issue mercury advisories alerting anglers and fish lovers to avoid varieties caught in tainted waterways. In 2002, more than 100 such warnings were issued in Georgia.

Despite those alarming figures, EPA chief Mike Leavitt announced an industry-friendly regulatory scheme that would reduce mercury emissions considerably more slowly than other proposed programs. That has drawn an enormous protest from environmental groups, state and local governments and public health experts, and embarrassing revelations that many of the EPA's insipid mercury proposals were taken word for word from memos written by industry lobbyists certainly didn't help Leavitt's case.

After howls of protest by environmental advocacy groups and private citizens, Leavitt has wisely agreed to reconsider the agency's original position. Although the official period for public comment on the issue ended last month, public pressure on the EPA to draft tough but realistic mercury regulations for the energy industry should continue.