CFE agenda 011215 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

http: / /www.wraI.com/ fact - check -is- duke - telling- the - truth - about - toxicity - /14288028/ We should note that Duke Energy views Vengosh as "aligned with anti -coal groups," pointing to work he has done with the Appalachian Voices website and similar advocacy groups. He is a frequent source for North Carolina due to his expertise in the subject and his studies of the TVA spill. We started by asking LeBlanc whether he would hand Duke Energy's fact sheet to an undergraduate college student as a good primer on environmental risk. "No," he said. "This was written to convey a one -sided story, that there's no problem with coal ash. I appreciate the fact they support their facts with sources of information. The bad news is that most of those sources are coal trade organizations." Because of Duke Energy's reliance on industry trade groups rather than peer- reviewed research, he said, "you have to take everything they say here with a grain of salt." Vengosh was similarly critical of the overall impression the company's fact sheet might leave with a less - informed reader. "The literature and the scientific evidence clearly shows that coal ash is a dangerous material," Vengosh said. Both Vengosh and LeBlanc cautioned that, just because there were risks associated with coal ash, does not mean that ash ponds or other storage facilities were necessarily harmful to their immediate environments. Rather, they said, each case needs to be carefully examined. However, both said Duke Energy's fact sheet goes too far in downplaying the risks. Sheehan said Duke Energy wasn't trying to have people overlook the risks associated with coal combustion residuals but rather offer an answer to a frequently asked question about how the toxicity of coal compares with other substances. "The chart in the fact sheet helps the public understand which constituents are in ash and how it compares to soil and solid waste to help inform the discussion about the best approach to continue to manage it safely," she said. One of LeBlanc's strongest critiques of Duke's fact sheet is it addresses things that aren't really a concern with coal ash. "There are a few issues that we're very concerned about, and then there are a wealth of things that we're not concerned about," LeBlanc said. "They're sort of expounding on this wealth of things that are not problematic. We don't eat coal ash. You could say a lot of things about how much coal ash you would need to eat to get sick ... but that's just not relevant to the issue." Sheehan said the company regularly gets questions about direct exposure, particularly from people living in the area of the Dan River spill. It's one reason why, she said, the company makes the comparison between the toxins in coal ash and in the soil.