One would expect that the benefits of clean air would be easy to appreciate, but difficult to quantify. After all, how can one realistically estimate how many persons would have died if air pollution were somewhat worse, in some places, some of the time? That has not stopped EPA from making extraordinary claims for the benefits of the Clean Air Act.
A report released today by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that the benefits of reducing fine particle and ground level ozone pollution under the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments will reach approximately $2 trillion in 2020 while saving 230,000 people from early death in that year alone. The report studied the effects of the Clean Air Act updates on the economy, public health and the environment between 1990 and 2020.
In 2010 alone, the reductions in fine particle and ozone pollution from the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments prevented more than:
· 160,000 cases of premature mortality
· 130,000 heart attacks
· 13 million lost work days
· 1.7 million asthma attacks
JunkScience.com has developed a stinging rebuttal to EPA's claims that deserves a look. They analyze EPA's assertions and calculations, and challenge some of their central premises. At the conclusion, the authors ask a pertinent question - at what point do the marginal returns of cleaner air begin to diminish, such that large sums of money are being spent to chase ever smaller benefits? At some juncture, much more human health and environmental benefit could be achieved by spending the money elsewhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment