The Bay and Human Health at Stake
They stand exposed to the effects of a new and longer-term outfall lease for the Morro Bay Power Plant, which the outgoing Morro Bay City Council enacted before the new Council could be seated and assume responsibility for the highly-controversial lease, which is expected to bring the city more income but expose it to the potential for negative consequences for the Morro Bay National Estuary and the health of people living in the area.
When the old Morro Bay City Council (the one whose majority was replaced in the June 5 primary election by Jamie Irons, Christine Johnson and Noah Smukler) took up the Morro Bay outfall lease at a special Council meeting on December 5 — just five days before they were unseated — the question was whether to extend or terminate the lease that serves the Morro Bay Power Plant. And the overriding issue on the table at the meeting was money.
The Council, composed of two members who were unseated in the primary election last June 5 but serving until December 10, the city staff and a few residents making public comment argued that the city needed the money (without citing how much was at stake) that an extended lease would bring into the city. A staff report at Morro Bay CA says a new outfall lease with Dynegy will run through December 31, 2017, with a "fiscal impact of over $800,000 per year to the city," adding to an apparent total of $4 million. The financial benefits to the city as stated in that report are unclear to some.
Even Noah Smukler, a member of the new majority of the Council, said, "If this were a close vote, I would be voting yes. We need the money, which is better than nothing." He did make an important point: "I have strong concerns about the haste (with which the lease extension is being acted upon). We will work to bring the public in" to the lease debate. He seemingly referred to upcoming action by the new Council.
Some hope Smukler, as well as Irons and Johnson, will advocate a series of workshops to help the community to better understand the outfall lease and what is at stake (much more than money).
Former mayor Bill Yates added that "I support the lease. We have been working on this for two years." Council member Nancy Johnson agreed.
Most of those from the small audience spoke out against extending he lease.
Henriette Groot, former president of the Coastal Alliance on Plant Expansion (CAPE), pointed out that the "outfall kills a lot of fish." Mandy Davis said "all we know the impacts of once-through cooling."
Prominent author Hershel Parker said, "The people elected a new Council. Let them review this issue. We need time. Please don't rush this through. You are rushing this through. Why?"
Nancy Johnson responded that it "would be unfair to saddle a new Council with this." Even though the new Council will be saddled with monitoring and living with the effects of a new lease, they will have had no say in extending it.
Long-time Morro Bay resident Dorothy Cutter said, "You are rushing this through. Why? Many citizens were not aware of the impacts until a few days ago."
Except for these residents, not one word was expressed about the impacts of the new outfall lease, either by the Council members, the staff, or lease-supporting residents.
But it's a safe bet that very, very few residents are aware of the real destructive effects — and the compounded ruinous consequences — of what the outfall lease creates. It is potentially devastating — not just to fish, but to people living in the area surrounding the plant within a wide distance (to Los Osos, for instance). How far away from the plant? No one can be sure. That's because only two of the plant's generators are operating, producing much less smokestack emissions and using much less water to cool its generators.
What Exactly is an Outfall Lease?
The city has jurisdiction over a strip of land along the coast over which pipes carry water from the plant to where it is discharged into the ocean. In this case, the water is discharged into Estero Bay at the north end of Morro Rock. The discharged water has been used by the plant to cool its generators. It has been drawn from the Morro Bay National Estuary. The estuary water contains fish and other aquatic life. Mainly fish and crab larvae are in the water drawn into the plant in the process called once-through cooling. They are killed when they are swept into the power plant.
In a major California Energy Commission report on the Duke Energy proposal to replace the current plant with a much larger one, dated 2002, the Commission staff wrote:
The Morro Bay ecosystem supports one of the most important wetland systems on California's coast (MBNEP 2000). The natural communities of Morro Bay and the associated estuary were designated as California's first State Estuary in 1994. The following year, Congress designated Morro Bay a "National Estuary," in order to acknowledge and protect the bay's natural diversity. Morro Bay was one of 28 estuaries in the United States to be classified as a National Estuary. Morro Rock, the base of which is adjacent to the thermal discharge from the once-through cooling process, is part of the Morro Rock Natural Preserve within Morro Bay State Park. Morro Bay is also part of the Pacific Flyway, which provides critical habitat for migrating shorebirds and waterfowl. (Garret and Dun 1981; Gerdes et al. 1974; Helmers 1992; Page et al. 1999; Stenzel et al. 1994) (MORRO BAY POWER PLANT PROJECT Final Staff Assessment - Part 3).
How Many Fish are Entrained?
The bay is characterized by tidal marshes, mudflats, open water, and rocky intertidal zones, which provide highly productive, diverse, and dynamic habitats (Duke 2000, pages 6.6A-17 to 21). The ocean shore, dunes, and undeveloped upland areas, as well as wetlands in the region, support many sensitive and listed species, including invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, passerines, raptors, shore birds, waterfowl, and small to medium-sized mammals.
No population level studies have been done in Morro Bay, and population level impacts are nearly impossible to detect (typically, we can only detect major events like population crashes). The adult population sizes for many of the fish taxa entrained are unknown.
It was agreed that fish PM data would be most useful for evaluating impacts, and would be used as a proxy for all other "silent partners" — the small, entrainable life stages of clams, worms, etc., and the phytoplankton and zooplankton of the bay/estuary for which entrainment impacts were not determined in the 316(b) conducted by a Duke Energy study. The fish PMs would thus be a proxy for all planktonic organisms in the estuary that are small enough to be entrained.
Thus, regular fish, as we know them, are representative of the uncounted silent partners, aquatics like clams, worms and phytoplankton that are too small to be counted. Therefore, there are many more of these silent partners that are swept into the power plant than the larger fish that are counted. Thus, we do not know what the "take" is of this power plant in terms of sea life. Scientists are convinced it is likely to be far beyond the taxa large enough to be assessed in terms of numbers taken into the plant.
"In fact, even when definite population crashes occur in conjunction with power plant operations, cause and effect is still vigorously debated. This is the case at Brayton Point Power Plant in Massachusetts, where a fishery collapse occurred following the start-up of a once-through cooling water system. The utility company and its scientists insist that the power plant is not the cause of the population crashes (but nevertheless have agreed (with EPA) to install a closed cooling system).
So not knowing more precisely how much aquatic life — large enough to count and too small to assess in numbers — is in the water sources, the Morro Bay National Estuary in this case, we do not know effectively how much of that life is being drawn into the plant and left in the estuary. Certainly, the data being evaluated and discussed in the Morro Bay Power Plant Project report was that of the proposed new Duke plant and was significantly larger than that of the present Morro Bay Power Plant. But proportionately, it conceivably could impact the estuary now as significantly as it might have from a new Duke plant — or as much as the Brayton Point Power Plant collapsed that ocean water source.
It's the unknown (of the estuary's fish stock and the well-being of its estuary, the source of economic prosperity in the Bay area) that is the risk for the Morro Bay National Estuary — and the risk for he surrounding communities.
That's the threat to the estuary and, in turn, to the surrounding communities, whose economies and property values depend on a healthy water body, which means abundant fish life. But there also is a potential threat to people living in and visiting the local and down-wind area from the content of the emissions from the power plant's smokestacks.
Here is what the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency warns about the threat of particulate matter in smokestack emissions:
Fast Facts
- Particles that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter are known as "fine" particles; those larger than 2.5 micrometers, but less than 10 micrometers, are known as "coarse" particles.
- Fine particles are easily inhaled deep into the lungs where they may accumulate, react, be cleared or absorbed.
- Scientific studies have linked particle pollution, especially fine particles, with a series of significant health problems, including:
- premature death in people with heart or lung disease,
- nonfatal heart attacks,
- irregular heartbeat,
- aggravated asthma,
- decreased lung function, and
- increased respiratory symptoms, such as irritation of the airways, coughing or difficulty breathing.
- Particle pollution can cause coughing, wheezing, and decreased lung function even in otherwise healthy children and adults.
- Studies estimate that thousands of elderly people die prematurely each year from exposure to fine particles.
- The average adult breathes 3,000 gallons of air per day.
- According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, children and infants are among the most susceptible to many air pollutants. Children have increased exposure compared with adults because of higher minute ventilation and higher levels of physical activity.
- Fine particles can remain suspended in the air and travel long distances. For example, a puff of exhaust from a diesel truck in Los Angeles can end up over the Grand Canyon.
- Some of the pollutants which form haze have also been linked to serious health problems and environmental damage.
- Particle pollution settles on soil and water and harms the environment by changing the nutrient and chemical balance.
- Particle pollution, unlike ozone, can occur year-round.
- People can reduce their exposure to air pollution by checking their daily air quality forecast and adjusting strenuous outdoor activities when an unhealthy AQI is forecast.
So is this real and potential deleterious effects of once-through cooling and the exposure of people to particulate matter worth $4 million to the city over the next five years?
