The past year has proven to be a challenging time for defenders of clean air regulation, as opponents on the national level have stepped up their efforts to roll back or weaken existing U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards while fighting to block or delay new rules that are set to go into effect.
The past year has proven to be a challenging time for defenders of
clean air regulation, as opponents on the national level have stepped up
their efforts to roll back or weaken existing U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency standards while fighting to block or delay new rules
that are set to go into effect.
Few regulations highlight the
current fight more clearly than the battle that has taken place over the
EPA’s new Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, which would require power
plants in 27 states to comply with new guidelines intended to reduce
emissions.
Set to go into effect January 1 of this year, opponents
of the rule were successful in staging a legal challenge at the end of
2011 that delayed its implementation, which experts estimate could roll
back is compliance date to sometime in 2013 if a federal court upholds
the regulation at all.
CSAPR has seen strong opposition from
members of Congress, where a number of legislators, such as Kentucky
Republican Senator Rand Paul, have introduced bills designed to stop the
new guidelines, claiming spikes in utility rates and a loss of jobs
would occur as a result of compliance.
More recently, legislative
efforts were taken to nullify the Mercury Air Toxics
Standards rule, which would set regulations for mercury pollution
emitted from the nation’s power plants.
Though the rule was
published in the federal register on February 16 – meaning the deadline
officially began for power plants to comply with rules by April 2015 –
it did not stop some legislators, led by Oklahoma republican Senator
James Inhofe to try to use obscure procedural measures in order to force
a simple majority vote that could have blocked the regulation if
passed.
“This is the time where we’ve seen attacks that have been
placing the Act at its greatest risk in its 40-year history,” said
Peter Iwanowicz, assistant vice president of the American Lung
Association. “In the past there have been attempts to sort of try and
repeal certain sections or completely block EPA rules, but we’re seeing
from our perspective a full-on attack against the Clean Air Act and what
the EPA has been trying to do for years, clean up pollution. It’s
been relentless.”
In response to the attacks, the ALA recently
announced the launch of a new campaign designed to build coalitions
among environmental and health advocates, as well as educate the public
on the importance of protecting the Clean Air Act.
“If we lose
the Clean Air Act, people are going to get sick and die,” Iwanowicz
said. “If we save the Clean Air Act and push EPA to implement it, fewer
people will die and fewer people will get sick.”
The ALA
estimates in 2010 the Clean Air Act helped prevent 160,000 premature
deaths and more than 80,000 hospital admission due to respiratory and
cardiovascular complications related to exposure to ozone and harmful
pollutants.
In Illinois, where the state’s own stringent
set of regulations established during the Blagojevich administration
have been heralded by environmental groups for being at the forefront in
efforts to reduce mercury emissions from power plants, the fight in
Washington is of particular interest, since new federal standards could
force other Midwestern states to comply to those already enforced in
Illinois.
“The new federal regulation just does what Illinois
regulations already did,” said Rob Kelter, senior attorney at the
Environmental Law and Policy Center. “So essentially what it means is
Illinois is going to benefit from the coal plants in Michigan and
surrounding Midwest states that pollute the Great Lakes, Lake Michigan
is going to be cleaner because of those regulations, because the other
states are going to have to stop emitting mercury the way Illinois
already did.”
Despite state legislative measures, the ALA
estimated pollution that comes into Illinois from neighboring states —
along with emissions coming from its 23 coal-fired power plants — help
contribute to the Chicago area being ranked 17th in the nation for
particle pollutants, while Cook County was ranked the 21st most
polluted county in the U.S. In its 2011 State of the Air Report, the
organization gave Cook and Madison counties a grade of “F” for ozone
pollution, while Lake, Peoria and Randolph counties each received a
grade of “D”.
Kelter felt the fact that Illinois already passed
its own mercury regulations has contributed to the lack of opposition
seen in other states and in Washington over the implementation of the
federal standards.
“I think most of our state representatives
recognize the fact that Illinois already passed tough legislation [and] that
our state legislature was on the forefront of protecting its citizens,”
Kelter said. “Now, the rest of the Midwest and the rest of the
country need to catch up.”
The congressional fight over the preservation of clean air rules prompted legislators in the Illinois House to pass a resolution
last May supporting the EPA’s regulations, and opposing, “…any efforts
in Congress to weaken the U.S. EPA’s ability to set standards to protect
our health and cut dangerous air pollution from power plants and other
large pollution sources.” Currently the measure is still being
considered within the state Senate.
Earlier this month, Crain’s Chicago Business reported that
efforts by Gov. Pat Quinn and other elected officials led to a reversal by federal regulators, who initially ruled that the Chicago
area was in compliance with the Clean Air Act between 2008 and 2010 but have since changed their minds with the addition of
2011 data. The reversal preserves some $80 million in federal funding each
year allocated toward easing congestion through the establishment of
bike trails and mass transit projects.
Comments
Login or register to post comments