AMNA NAWAZ: The Environmental# Protection Agency is scaling## back limits on toxic emissions# from coal-burning power plants,## clearing the way for them to emit more# hazardous pollutants like mercury.

Stephanie Sy has more on these changes.

STEPHANIE SY: That's right, Amna.

In a statement today, the EPA said the# deregulato.. dependable energy for American families# and restore American energy dominance.## Public health advocates are warning that# rolling back limits on mercury and other## hazardous air pollutants would harm human health# and ultimately drive up health care costs too.

To get more on that and the# environmental perspective,## I'm joined by John Walke from the Natural# Resources Defense Counsel, or NRDC.

John, thank you for taking the# time to join the "News Hour."

As you know, the administration can't really# roll back all the mercury restrictions,## which courts have upheld under the# Clean Air Act since 2012, right?

So,## what is the Trump administration doing exactly# and what do you think is the ultimate goal?

JOHN WALKE, Natural Resources Defense Council:# The Trump EPA today rolled back safer limits## on mercury pollution by 70 percent.

They# rolled back safer limits on toxic soot## pollution by two-thirds, and they rolled back# any need for continuous emissions monitors.

They claim affordability, but in the# fine print of their own document,## they admit that this repeal will# have no impact on electricity prices,## and indeed the safer limits and better monitoring# would have had no impact on electricity prices.

STEPHANIE SY: Now, we did ask a representative# with the Trump administration's EPA to join us.## They declined, at least for today,# but they pretty much share the power## industry's perspective on this, which is# that the additional regulations Biden's## EPA put forth were harmful to the# coal industry and energy security.

The head of America's Power# issued a statement today that## stated that -- quote -- "Repealing the 2024# rule helps prevent premature retirements of## coal plants and strengthens grid# reliability at a critical moment."

John, how much of a lifeline does this# rule change give to the coal industry,## which has been on the wane for many years?

And# what are the greater repercussions of that?

JOHN WALKE: No lifeline at all, actually.

EPA, again, in the fine print, found that# this would have no impact on coal plant## retirements.

And the Biden EPA, when it# strengthened the standards, also found it## would have no impact on retirements.

The truth# is that the coal industry has faced headwinds## from competition with cleaner renewable# energy from plants that burn methane gas.

And there has been a steady downward# spiral of electricity generated from## coal over the past decade.

And that will continue## notwithstanding this attack on health# safeguards and clean air protections.

STEPHANIE SY: We have seen the# Trump administration strip away## greenhouse gas emission limits as well.# But what makes this EPA rule different,## from what I understand, John, is,# this directly impacts human health?

Remind us what the science tells us about exposure# to mercury, its impacts on the human body,## particularly babies and developing fetuses,# and what you see as truly at stake here.

JOHN WALKE: What's at stake is more mercury# emissions that are a brain poison.

And they## poison and harm the developing brains# of the fetus, of young children,## babies, children all the way# up to 12 or later, actually.

So it is causing learning deficiencies.# It is causing I.Q.

lost.

And that's in## addition to all the other health hazards from# rolling back the toxic soot pollution limit,## which contributes to cancer and birth defects# and infertility, miscarriages and much more.

STEPHANIE SY: You mentioned that the amendments# put forth by the Biden administration included## a requirement for so-called continuous# emissions monitoring at power plants.## That goes away with this rule change under# Trump.

Talk about the significance of that.

JOHN WALKE: I was even floored by this# when I read EPA's documents today.

They admit in the fine print that# eliminating a continuous emissions## monitor at a coal plant -- and there are# about 200 in the United States -- will## save that coal plant $14,000.

Now,# coal plants and coal companies in## this country have revenues of tens# to hundreds of billions of dollars.

And they are saving coal plants# $14,000 per year for each monitor.## The truth is that Americans would have# gotten far more benefit and transparency## from requiring continuous monitors that# show hourly emissions of toxic pollution,## which in turn drives better reductions# in pollution and better compliance.

The Trump administration wanted to eliminate# all of those goods in order to save $14,000.

STEPHANIE SY: That is John Walke with the NRDC.

John, thank you for joining us.

JOHN WALKE: Thank you, Stephanie.