The New York Times sparked a social media ruckus when it reported the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposal to replace Obama-era coal plant regulations could lead to as many as 1,400 premature deaths a year from air pollution.
Liberal journalists went wild.
“EPA admits Trump would sacrifice thousands of American lives to save a few coal plants,” ThinkProgress claimed.
The New Republic warned: “Trump’s EPA admits the dire human impact of its own climate rule.”
So could EPA’s plan to replace the Clean Power Plan end up causing 1,400 more premature deaths a year from air pollution?
Well, it depends on what part of EPA’s regulatory analysis is used. At the end of the day, EPA is just estimating premature deaths based on current epidemiological studies that are still the subject of debate.
EPA’s regulatory analysis for the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule lays out three scenarios for how they expect coal-fired power plants to comply with more lenient regulations.
In contrast to the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP), new rules allow coal plants to increase heat-rate efficiency to cut emissions.
The NYTimes reported the scenario EPA “pegged as the most likely to occur, the health effects would be significant.” EPA “predicts its plan will see between 470 and 1,400 premature deaths annually by 2030 because of increased rates of microscopic airborne particulates known as PM 2.5,” according to the NYTimes.
However, the NYTime’s figure comes from EPA’s estimates of premature deaths in 2030 based on one 2012 study. The NYTimes seemed to ignore the other 2009 study EPA used to estimate PM2.5 deaths and the alternate methodologies.
Most of the benefits of reducing air pollution come from estimated avoided deaths from less PM2.5, which EPA says can cause lung disease and even premature death. So, this figure is key to determining the financial benefits of air quality rules.
When it comes to ACE, EPA laid out different methods of estimating premature deaths from PM2.5 in 2030. The NYTimes based its reporting on just one of those estimates based on a 2012 study and using a linear no-threshold model.
The linear no-threshold model is used by EPA and other regulatory agencies to set air-quality standards, but it’s long been challenged by some scientists that say it’s not accurate, especially for use in radiation regulations.
However, EPA also estimated mortality from a 2009 study. Using the 2009 study, the estimated PM2.5 deaths is more than halved, from between 470 and 1,400 to between 280 and 550.
Agency officials also estimated mortality based on the assumption of no deaths below the “lowest measured levels” (LML) in the 2012 and 2009 studies.
Estimated mortality from PM2.5 plummeted from 240 to 460 based on the LML observed in the 2009 study. EPA estimated just 110 to 330 premature deaths based on the LML used in the 2012 study.
Here’s the full range of EPA estimates:
Read more at Daily Caller
The NYT does not deal with facts.
Of course, the NYT has no interest in looking deeper into the situation. These predictions of deaths from coal-fired air pollution are unfounded attributions, just like the idea of second-hand smoke about which there have been no cogent studies, just unsupported assumptions.
Obama’s plan was to force coal-fired plants to close because the regulations were insanely strict and demanding. The mercury concentration limit makes sea air in violation of the regulations. Also, the ozone regulation makes National Parks on a sunny day involution, as plants give off ozone at illegal concentrations.
Trump and his EPA have very good reason to roll back these intentionally damaging regulations.
However, the reason the EPA “admits” to the danger of 1400 deaths is that there are still many Obama-Era employees in the EPA who are glad to perpetuate these bad policies and regulations. They are not working for the people but are working for their former leader’s agenda.
“1400 premature deaths ” estimated , lordy lordy that pales in comparison to the tens of thousands of premature fuel poverty deaths each year caused by stupid government policies designed to pay off fat cat ‘s lobbying for uneconomic and largely intermittent power .
The “green ” agenda see’s population elimination as a core objective with the poor and elderly victims in a position least likely to defend themselves . Not to mention the bird bleeder killing machines .
The USA didn’t get to being the country it is by shooting itself in the foot like they are now .
Just who dose the New York Pravda think their kidding with this load of B.S. This liberal rag has covered up for Stalin and Castro and probibly Mao as well those liberal rag needs to be boycotted their LIARS the Old Grey Hag
The New York Pravda nothing but lies its a waste of Freedom of the Press ink and paper to print this liberal liars THE ONLY GOOD USES FOR THE NYT’s is Birdcage Lining or fish wrap