NOTE TO EDITORS & PUBLIC OFFICIALS Contact: Jim Warren
February 18, 2008 919-416-5077
Duke Energy Deception Worsens Regarding New Plant’s Emissions
Media, public officials must also be skeptical of State claims about Cliffside
If Duke Energy and the Easley Administration could justify the Cliffside project, they would do so with clear, direct information – not the barrage of clever public relations tactics used so far:
1. DUKE’S ADS IMPLYING ELIMINATION OF GREENHOUSE GASES: Following state approval, Duke Energy ran an open letter from CEO Rogers in full-page ads across its service area, and probably costing ratepayers a half-million dollars. Included are nine references to “global warming” and related terms, plus a statement that Cliffside will “eliminate 90 percent of regulated emissions.” Since no other pollutant is mentioned, readers are led to believe the reduction refers to greenhouse gases. According to state documents, the new unit would discharge 6 million tons of uncontrolled carbon dioxide each year – 12 times more than the small units to be retired.
See the ad: https://www.ncwarn.org/Programs/NewCoalPlants/DukeAd%202-1-08.pdf
2. GREENSCAM ALERT – A MYTH/FACT SHEET: This is a slightly updated version of our piece distributed at last week’s Emerging Issues Forum. There will be much more to say about mercury emissions, but the state is playing a shell game based on paper changes in the final permit that did not require Duke to change any pollution controls. Note also that to the extent Rogers’ ad technically refers to “regulated” emissions, the new Cliffside unit won’t remove 90% of mercury either. Although some mercury is removed from the smokestacks, as an element it cannot be destroyed; the highly toxic ash is being deposited on-site in a 10 acre waste slurry pond right next to the Broad River.
3. OPINION COLUMN BY NC WARN: Several editors have run our oped pointing out multiple deceptions by Duke and state officials. It’s troubling that several other papers have run the power company’s ads and numerous opinion pieces, but won’t run our oped countering their veracity.