E.P.A. to Stop Considering Lives Saved When Setting Rules on Air Pollution
Source: New York TImes
E.P.A. to Stop Considering Lives Saved When Setting Rules on Air Pollution
In a reversal, the agency plans to calculate only the cost to industry when setting pollution limits, and not the monetary value of saving human lives, documents show.
The change could make it easier to repeal limits on pollutants from coal-burning power plants, oil refineries, steel mills and other industrial facilities. Alyssa Schukar for The New York Times
By Maxine Joselow
Reporting from Washington
Jan. 12, 2026 Updated 12:02 p.m. ET
For decades, the Environmental Protection Agency has calculated the health benefits of reducing air pollution, using the cost estimates of avoided asthma attacks and premature deaths to justify clean-air rules. ...Not anymore. ... Under President Trump, the E.P.A. plans to stop tallying gains from the health benefits caused by curbing two of the most widespread deadly air pollutants, fine particulate matter and ozone, when regulating industry, according to internal agency emails and documents reviewed by The New York Times.
It's a seismic shift that runs counter to the E.P.A.'s mission statement, which says the agency's core responsibility is to protect human health and the environment, environmental law experts said. ... The change could make it easier to repeal limits on these pollutants from coal-burning power plants, oil refineries, steel mills and other industrial facilities across the country, the emails and documents show. That would most likely lower costs for companies while resulting in dirtier air.
Fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, refers to particles less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, small enough to penetrate deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream. Ozone is a smog-causing gas that forms when nitrogen dioxide and volatile organic compounds are emitted from power plants, factories and vehicles and mix in the air on hot, sunny days. ... Long-term exposure to both pollutants is linked to asthma, heart and lung disease, and premature death. Even moderate exposure to PM2.5 can damage the lungs about as much as smoking.
Under the Biden administration, the E.P.A. tightened the amount of PM2.5 that could be emitted by industrial facilities. It estimated that the rule would prevent up to 4,500 premature deaths and 290,000 lost workdays in 2032 alone. For every $1 spent on reducing PM2.5, the agency said, there could be as much as $77 in health benefits. ... But the Trump administration contends that these estimates are doubtful and said the E.P.A. would no longer take health effects into account in the cost-benefit analyses necessary for clean-air regulations, according to the documents. Instead, the agency would estimate only the costs to businesses of complying with the rules.
{snip}
Maxine Joselow covers climate change and the environment for The Times from Washington.
https://www.nytimes.com/by/maxine-joselow
Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/12/climate/trump-epa-air-pollution.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
