• Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Climate Change Dispatch
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
Climate Change Dispatch
No Result
View All Result

Gov. Inslee Wants To Sue Trump For Air Pollution Deaths That May Or May Not Occur

by Michael Bastasch
August 23, 2018, 3:00 PM
in News and Opinion
A A
11
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

washington wildfire forestWashington Gov. Jay Inslee threatened to sue the Trump administration for rolling back Obama-era regulations on coal plants, going so far as to label President Donald Trump as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in air pollution deaths that haven’t, and may not, happen.

“Even under the rosiest assumptions by his own agencies, would conclude that this would cause the premature death of 1,400 people a year, every year,” Inslee, a Democrat, said at a press conference Wednesday. “That’s the population of Kittitas, Washington, suffering premature death every year.”

“I think it is fair to say that Donald Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator in the premature death of 1,400 people every year if this misbegotten plan went into place,” Inslee said. “We find this unacceptable.”

Inslee is riding a wave of liberal criticism of the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule popularized by The New York Times — keeping coal plants open longer would result in 1,400 more deaths from air pollution every year.

It’s also not true EPA’s “rosiest assumptions” predict 1,400 premature deaths a year from fine particulate matter or PM2.5. It’s actually the upper range of estimated PM2.5-induced deaths based on a 2012 study — only one of a range of estimates based on different assumptions.

The Times’ report, though, only presented one upper estimate of future air pollution deaths, not giving readers the full context of EPA’s figures. The Times’ reported figure is also based on public health modeling that’s come under increased scrutiny in recent years.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed to put ACE in place of the Clean Power Plan, which was imposed by the Obama administration in 2015. The Clean Power Plan never went into effect, however, because the U.S. Supreme Court blocked its implementation in early 2016.

EPA’s regulatory analysis showed billions of dollars would be saved, but it also gave a range of public health costs, including premature deaths in 2030 from coal plant pollution.

Estimates of premature deaths, however, are based on two studies for which the underlying data was never made public, which Republicans have labeled “secret science.”

Estimates of premature deaths from air pollution are also just that, estimates based on epidemiological studies looking for strong statistical relationships between PM2.5 levels and reported deaths.

EPA says PM2.5 can cause lung disease and premature death, which is certainly what most studies claim, but new research has called into question that relationship.

EPA is also looking 15 years into the future, and cannot take into account future innovations or technologies that could reduce premature deaths from air pollution.

There’s also a lot of uncertainty around estimated deaths at low levels of PM2.5, but EPA’s estimate of 1,400 deaths assumes there’s no safe level of fine particulates.

Democrats and environmentalists opposed ACE, saying the Clean Power Plan was necessary to fight global warming and improve air quality. Virtually all opponents of ACE cited the NYTimes’ report of increased air pollution deaths.

Inslee promised legal action against the Trump administration if they finalize the ACE rule. Other Democratic states and environmentalists are likely to follow suit.

“And if you want to know why this is a terrible idea take a look out your window because we are choking on dirty air, and he would give us dirtier air to breathe,” Inslee said.

However, the “dirty air” hovering over Washington is the product of wildfires raging along the West Coast. More than one million acres have been consumed by wildfires in California, Oregon, and Washington this year.

So, far from being the product of coal-burning or Trump, it’s the years of poor forest management by federal and state officials that allowed dead trees and debris to pile up.

Todd Myers, the director of the Center for Environment at the Washington Policy Center, pointed out Inslee’s administration has not met its own “forest treatment” targets. In fact, they’ve failed so badly, the administration hasn’t updated its efforts since 2015.

A reminder that @GovInslee missed his own "forest treatment" targets and has not updated the data since 2015. – https://t.co/RWCPbFTj7p #waleg https://t.co/M1bugK84NT

— Todd Myers 🐟🌲🐝 (@WAPolicyGreen) August 22, 2018

Read more at Daily Caller

  • Truth
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Gettr
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
Share via
  • Facebook
  • Like
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Skype
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky

Join our list

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.

We respect your privacy and take protecting it seriously

Related Posts

Energy

Newsom’s War On Oil Could Send California Gas Prices To $9, Analyst Warns

May 9, 2025
Energy

The Climate Scaremongers: More Lies From The UK’s Crackpot Climate Change Committee

May 9, 2025
Energy

UK’s Green Agenda Blows Up As Ørsted Kills Massive Offshore Wind Project

May 9, 2025

Comments 11

  1. Spurwing Plover says:
    7 years ago

    Wildlife cant live in a area after its been burned by fire and the dead or dying trees are soon the target of wood boring insects and disease as i read in one of those little books put out WE and the WILD ANIMALS can run from a fire trees can not its best to salvage log the area and plant trees small seedling trees to take their place

  2. Sonnyhill says:
    7 years ago

    What happens after a forest fire? Where there were trees, there’s now a black scar. No shade. No trees converting carbon dioxide into oxygen. Hot as a parking lot. Mudslides for Christmas. This is what the Sierra Club calls natural regeneration. Preferable to logging.

  3. Spurwing Plover says:
    7 years ago

    Just a year ago we here in Siskiyou County in Scott Valley in the town of ETNA we had a fire the came within 5 miles east of our community our air was contaminated for weeks there was health warnings issued it would be unhealthy for days we had fight fighters in all the way from the L.A. area they brought in a 747 and DC-10 bombers to drop borate on the fires there was helicopters including one of those Skycrane Helicopters and the chinook copters it took thema month to contain the blaze which started out as two seperate fires that joined up into one realy large blaze there was even a fire camp with in a mile west of our townMaybe Moonbeam owes us for all this blowing millions on his bullet train and brining in illegal aliens

  4. David Lewis says:
    7 years ago

    The concept of suing over future damage is ludicrous and a sure signature of political motivation. As I have posted before, it is like suing beer companies for the future deaths caused by drunk drivers.

    The fact that the New York Times and Gov. Inslee shopped for the worst prediction out of many shows that they are not interested in the truth but only their political agenda.

    From the article, “Estimates of premature deaths, however, are based on two studies for which the underlying data was never made public, which Republicans have labeled “secret science.”” The reason secret science is secret is the studies could never stand up to an honest review. In other words, they are politically motivated junk science.

    Other than its politics, the state of Washington isn’t the right one to file such suits. The state only has one coal power plant and that has been modified to use natural gas as a supplement.

  5. 4TimesAYear says:
    7 years ago

    Well, since the only thing that was essentially rolled back was CO2 regulation, he’s not a “co-conspirator” in anything. Gina McCarthy, on the other hand, was. Calling the “Clean Power Plan” was fraudulent and they admitted as much (“This is not about pollution control” – EPA Director Gina McCarthy)
    If Washington State sues, Washington State will be wasting more taxpayer dollars on both sides of the aisle – and they will lose.
    Those regulations dealt with CO2. Again, Gina McCarthy herself said regarding the #CleanPowerPlan #CPP:

    “this is not about pollution control”

    Atmospheric CO2 kills NO ONE. It’s not a pollutant. The EPA clearly overstepped its boundaries. It was commissioned to regulate pollutants. Again, atmospheric CO2 is not harmful to anything. The EPA under Obama neglected 6 superfund sites that had real pollution that needed cleaning up and chased the CO2 ghost which isn’t pollution. What a waste of tax dollars. Gina jetted all over the place, going to the Winter Xgames in CO all under the guise of regulating the climate, something they were not commissioned to do. Again, atmospheric CO2 kills NO ONE. It’s not a pollutant – and the CPP wasn’t about pollution control. https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/epa-chief-not-about-pollution-controlits-investment-strategy

    • David Lewis says:
      7 years ago

      Technically the CCP intent was to reduce particular matter. The article was on this web site but I don’t have time to find it. However, the real purpose of the CCP was to lower carbon dioxide emissions, and you are absolutely right. Gina McCarthy actually said that the CCP wasn’t about pollution (which to her included CO2). She said the purpose of the CCP was to put the US in a world leadership position in climate change.

      • Hivemind says:
        7 years ago

        The intent of the CPP was actually to force coal fired power plants to shut down.

  6. David Lewis says:
    7 years ago

    While in Klamath Falls last week and back home in Snohomish this week I have been subjected to heavy levels of smoke from wild fires, sometimes at the unhealthy levels even for people in good health. Poor forest management is obviously a factor in these fires. Perhaps I should sue California and Washington for my exposure to such high smoke levels due to their forest management policies. This is something that has happened, not that might happen in the future.

    • 4TimesAYear says:
      7 years ago

      It’s nothing new, and it’s not due to increased levels of CO2 or climate change. The West has two seasons. Wet….and fire.

      • 4TimesAYear says:
        7 years ago

        I’m sure the left would have us believe it’s due to climate change. I wish he’d have listened to Gina McCarthy who gave the game away when she said “it’s not about pollution control”.
        Suing them for their forest management policies seems like a good idea – that one could be a winner.

  7. Spurwing Plover says:
    7 years ago

    Inslee just another member of the Stupid Jackass Party(Liberal Democrat)always turning to one of their biggist supporters the TRIAL LAWYERS yes the VULTURE the SHARK and the DONKEY are PARTNERS in CRIME

Stay Connected On Social Media

gab-logo

Donate Today

Beating back the alarmist narrative takes time and money. Please donate today to help!

Recent Posts

  • newsom presser gas pricesNewsom’s War On Oil Could Send California Gas Prices To $9, Analyst Warns
    May 9, 2025
    Refinery closures and Newsom’s hostility to energy companies could push California gas prices from $6 to $9 a gallon, analyst warns. […]
  • protest time is upThe Climate Scaremongers: More Lies From The UK’s Crackpot Climate Change Committee
    May 9, 2025
    The UK’s Climate Change Committee is ramping up the panic, but real-world data shows no rise in floods, heat deaths, or costs—just more failed predictions. […]
  • yorkshire offshore windUK’s Green Agenda Blows Up As Ørsted Kills Massive Offshore Wind Project
    May 9, 2025
    Orsted scrapped the Hornsea 4 offshore wind project, dealing a massive blow to Ed Miliband’s green vision and raising questions about UK net zero targets. […]
  • ev charging station16 States, DC Sue Trump Admin Over EV Charger Funds, Most Have Built None
    May 9, 2025
    17 states sue the Trump administration for access to $5 billion in EV charger funding, despite most failing to build a single charger. […]
  • weather montageNOAA Quietly Kills Its Billion-Dollar Disaster Database And Report After Years Of Criticism
    May 9, 2025
    NOAA has quietly retired its Billion-Dollar Disaster list after years of criticism over transparency, accuracy, and scientific integrity. […]
  • german wind farmHow Wind And Solar Sent Energy Prices Sky-High in ‘Green’ Countries
    May 8, 2025
    Adding more green energy makes power more expensive, not cheaper—due to unreliable output, required fossil fuel backup, and taxpayer subsidies. […]
  • bernie sanders fox newsBernie Sanders Defends Private Jet Use, Says ‘He’s Too Important’ To Fly Coach
    May 8, 2025
    Bernie Sanders and AOC are facing criticism for using private jets while promoting their climate-focused “Fighting Oligarchy” tour. […]
  • blackout stationGreen Energy Suicide: The West Pays The Price For Its Net-Zero Delusions
    May 8, 2025
    Green energy policies clash with reality as Europe and the U.S. face blackouts, soaring costs, and a collapsing power grid. […]
  • wright trump exec orderDOE Scraps $4.5M Website And Logo Project Meant To Showcase Green Agenda
    May 8, 2025
    The DOE canceled a $4.5 million contract the Biden admin awarded for a new agency website and logo that highlighted the green energy transition. […]
  • desantis bill signing‘Dead On Arrival’: DeSantis Signs Law Banning Geoengineering And Weather Modification In Florida
    May 7, 2025
    DeSantis has signed legislation shutting down geoengineering and weather modification projects in Florida amid rising voter concerns. […]

Get Instant Email Notifications

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts by email either instantly or daily. Check your Junk folder for any verification emails upon subscribing.

Submit a tip

Please enter your email, so we know you're human.

Books We Like

very convenient warming

exposing great lie

Have a suggestion? Let us know! We swap out books based on your input. We participate in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. See here.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us

© Portions copyright Climate Change Dispatch

Share via
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us

© 2025 Climate Change Dispatch