We Cannot Repeat These Health Transgressions

• Author: By John Walke
• Position: Director, Clean Air Programs, at the Natural Resources Defense Council
• Pages: 48-48

Page 48 ❧ THE ENVIRONMENTAL FORUM Copyright © 2008, Environmental Law Institute®, Washington, D.C. www.eli.org.

Reprinted by permission from The Environmental Forum®, Nov./Dec. 2008

Th e fo r u m

at lower ef‌f‌iciency.

Furthermore, states are unclear

as to how to meet several Clean Air

Act obligations which relied on the

reductions achieved through CAIR.

Also, since the promulgation of

CAIR, states are now facing tighter

air quality standards for ozone and

f‌ine particles.

As of this writing, we are uncer-

tain of the Court’s response, uncer-

tain of congressional action, and

concerned about the future of cap-

and-trade programs to help solve air

pollution problems in this country.

Absent a reversal of the vacatur or

a legislative quick f‌ix, the environ-

mental benef‌its of new rulemaking

would take at least f‌ive to seven

years to be realized. Nevertheless,

EPA is committed to working expe-

ditiously with states to reduce emis-

sions, redo state plans for ozone,

f‌ine particles, and regional haze, and

achieve the health and environmen-

tal goals of the Clean Air Act.

Brian J. McLean is Director, Ofce of

Atmospheric Programs, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency.

We Cannot Repeat

ese Health

Transgressions

B J W

With the Clean Air

Interstate Rule

overturned in court,

we face two public

health imperatives:

we must re-instate the f‌irst phase of

CAIR legislatively and expeditiously

to avert near-term harms and we

must achieve far deeper reductions

in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide

emissions from power plants than

CAIR would have accomplished.

EPA projects that between 2009–

11 an additional 10,000 early deaths

will result from failure to codify

phase I of CAIR in Congress, and

35,000 additional premature deaths

would result from failure to take

any legislative action, both relative

to full CAIR implementation. And

while EPA’s projections suf‌fer from

an indefensible agency assumption

that the federal-state regulatory

system does nothing to reduce that

health toll, the projections are direc-

tionally sound — and alarming.

Under White House instruc-

tion, EPA crafted CAIR by working

backwards from the administration’s

failed Clear Skies legislation to des-

ignate the two-phase cap levels for

SO2 and NOx — a dirty little secret

noted wryly in the f‌irst footnote of

the court’s decision. is led EPA

to establish SO2 and NOx control

measures under CAIR at an annual

cost per ton (in 1999 dollars) of

$500 and $700 in 2009 and 2015,

respectively. In sharp contrast, EPA’s

NOx SIP Call rule seven years

earlier had deemed average annual

costs of NOx emissions reductions

at $2,500 per ton (in 1999 dollars)

to be “highly cost-ef‌fective” for pur-

poses of controlling ozone pollution

transport.

e administration’s political

decision to abandon available highly

cost-ef‌fective pollution reductions

in CAIR came at great cost to the

public. By 2009 and then by 2015,

EPA estimated CAIR would have

delivered annual benef‌its between

$63–103 billion compared to annu-

al implementation costs of $2.3–3.5

billion, conf‌irming one unmistak-

able point: rather than protect the

American people against health haz-

ards costing tens of billions of dol-

lars, the Bush administration chose

to subject the public to these far

greater costs to save the power sector

far more modest costs.

is agenda produced two ob-

jectionable outcomes: by 2015, 60

percent of the nation’s power plant

units, covering 40 to 50 percent of

the country’s electricity capacity,

were projected to lack modern pol-

lution controls for SO2, NOx or

both under CAIR. Second, nearly

two-thirds of CAIR’s SO2 reduc-

tions were to come from switching

to lower sulfur coals, itself a sear-

ing indictment of CAIR’s failure to

require broader pollution control

adoption — especially since lower

sulfur coal contracts are of short

duration (three to six months), al-

lowing SO2 emissions to rise quickly

following CAIR’s vacatur.

We cannot af‌ford to repeat these

serious political and public health

transgressions.

We should expect the follow-

ing, simultaneous steps to address

power plant pollution after CAIR’s

demise. EPA must issue a Federal

Implementation Plan rulemaking

to address interstate transport in the

CAIR region. is rule should ad-

dress not just attainment with the

1997 health standards, but the 2006

and 2008 standards for PM2.5 and

ozone, respectively. is of‌fers the

fastest, best regulatory opportunity

to achieve needed reductions from

the power sector.

EPA should grant North Caro-

lina’s Section 126 petition, and

other states are likely to follow suit

with additional petitions. e new

PM2.5 and ozone standards will drive

state action as well, leading states to

control power plant emissions as the

most cost-ef‌fective recourse to meet

upcoming attainment demonstra-

tions.

Finally, we can expect the push

for strong legislation to continue,

with Senator omas Carper (D-

Delaware)’s Clean Air Planning Act

currently the most prominent ve-

hicle among congressional options.

We may not know which step(s)

will best protect the health of the

American people against dangerous

power plant emissions, but there can

be no doubt that this must be the

goal.

John Walke is Director, Clean Air Programs,

at the Natural Resources Defense Council.