Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Air Pollution Denial Could Become EPA Policy
From https://newrepublic.com/article/150548/air-pollution-denial-become-epa-policy
Air Pollution Denial Could Become EPA Policy
For decades, the agency has said that inhaling soot in any amount is unsafe. The Trump administration might change that.
By EMILY ATKIN
August 8, 2018
Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images
Much of the Republican Party has long denied the science of climate changethat humans are causing the planet to warm. Theyve been less willing, historically, to deny the science of air pollution, which states that breathing in soot is bad for humans. But norms have changed since Donald Trump became president. For the last year and a half, fringe theories once promoted only by tobacco lobbyists and the very far-right have seeped into the offices of the Environmental Protection Agency. Now, those theories could soon be reflected in official EPA regulations intended to protect the publics health.
A story published Monday in environmental policy outlet E&E News details the evidence. After decades of increasingly strong assertions that there is no known safe level of fine particle exposure for the American public, [the] EPA under the Trump administration is now considering taking a new position, reporter Niina Heikkinen wrote. The agency is floating the idea of changing its rulemaking process and setting a threshold level of fine particles that it would consider safe. (Shes referring to particulate matter that is 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter, small enough to penetrate deep into the circulatory system and potentially infiltrate the central nervous system. PM2.5 is the main component of soot.)
Under these changes, which are being considered by EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler, PM 2.5 would no longer be considered a non-threshold pollutantone that causes harm at any level of exposure. Instead, it would become a threshold pollutant, or one that causes harm only above a certain exposure level. Wheeler is considering this change most likely because it would help him to legally justify repealing the Clean Power Plan, a set of Obama-era climate regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from coal plants.
Wheeler must prove that Obamas policy would do more harm than good. Obamas EPA had argued that the Clean Power Plan would reduce PM2.5 pollution, thus creating from $13 billion to $30.3 billion in public health benefits. This figure made up about half of the Clean Power Plans stated benefits. If Wheeler changes the official designation of PM2.5, the EPAs position would be that breathing in small amounts of soot has the same impact as breathing in none. Thus, many of Obamas predicted benefits would be erased.
...
For decades, the agency has said that inhaling soot in any amount is unsafe. The Trump administration might change that.
By EMILY ATKIN
August 8, 2018
Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images
Much of the Republican Party has long denied the science of climate changethat humans are causing the planet to warm. Theyve been less willing, historically, to deny the science of air pollution, which states that breathing in soot is bad for humans. But norms have changed since Donald Trump became president. For the last year and a half, fringe theories once promoted only by tobacco lobbyists and the very far-right have seeped into the offices of the Environmental Protection Agency. Now, those theories could soon be reflected in official EPA regulations intended to protect the publics health.
A story published Monday in environmental policy outlet E&E News details the evidence. After decades of increasingly strong assertions that there is no known safe level of fine particle exposure for the American public, [the] EPA under the Trump administration is now considering taking a new position, reporter Niina Heikkinen wrote. The agency is floating the idea of changing its rulemaking process and setting a threshold level of fine particles that it would consider safe. (Shes referring to particulate matter that is 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter, small enough to penetrate deep into the circulatory system and potentially infiltrate the central nervous system. PM2.5 is the main component of soot.)
Under these changes, which are being considered by EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler, PM 2.5 would no longer be considered a non-threshold pollutantone that causes harm at any level of exposure. Instead, it would become a threshold pollutant, or one that causes harm only above a certain exposure level. Wheeler is considering this change most likely because it would help him to legally justify repealing the Clean Power Plan, a set of Obama-era climate regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from coal plants.
Wheeler must prove that Obamas policy would do more harm than good. Obamas EPA had argued that the Clean Power Plan would reduce PM2.5 pollution, thus creating from $13 billion to $30.3 billion in public health benefits. This figure made up about half of the Clean Power Plans stated benefits. If Wheeler changes the official designation of PM2.5, the EPAs position would be that breathing in small amounts of soot has the same impact as breathing in none. Thus, many of Obamas predicted benefits would be erased.
...
More at link.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
1 replies, 759 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Air Pollution Denial Could Become EPA Policy (Original Post)
sl8
Aug 2018
OP
Haggis for Breakfast
(6,831 posts)1. How in Hell
Can you deny something that you can see, smell, taste, touch and hear (as in the form of interference) ?
When five of your primary senses can detect something, how in the Hell can you deny it ???
EPA, now the Environmental Perfidy Agency.