The war against soot

  • Article by: EDITORIAL , Los Angeles Times
  • Updated: January 3, 2013 - 12:34 PM

New standards will save thousands of lives and reduce the nation's healthcare costs.

hide

Smog covering downtown Los Angeles.

Photo: Nick Ut, Associated Press

CameraStar Tribune photo galleries

Cameraview larger

Lisa Jackson, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, did not produce the record some had hoped for, as she was continually held back from her ambitious regulatory plans by business and political opponents. And even her last major action - she announced last week that she is leaving her post - is overdue but still welcome.

The EPA is demanding of local governments a 20 percent reduction in soot emissions. If it is successful in producing those results, the new standards will save thousands of lives and reduce the nation's healthcare costs by billions of dollars.

The public is used to thinking of soot as the ashy, dirty smoke seen wafting from old diesel vehicles and industrial smokestacks. But what causes more pressing health concerns are the microscopic particles we can't see amid the smoke.

Soot can cause heart and lung problems and trigger asthma attacks. Strict enforcement of the new rules will begin in 2020, with some regions given extensions to 2025. By the year 2030, the stricter standards are expected to prevent a total of 32,000 hospital admissions and 4.7 million lost work days from illness.

National restrictions on soot emissions were originally issued in 1997, but that was seen as a temporary step, with more stringent rules to come in following years. The George W. Bush administration rejected stricter standards in 2006.

In 2009, a federal court ordered the EPA to devise tighter rules. The Obama administration dragged its feet, and last year 11 states, including California, successfully sued, leading to the regulations that Jackson announced in December.

Industry and conservative Republicans have fought against tighter soot restrictions for years, arguing that the EPA would be killing jobs. But industry doesn't have the right to kill or sicken people in order to keep expenses low.

The EPA estimates the cost to industry at somewhere between $53 million and $350 million a year; the estimated savings by preventing illness, hospitalization and work loss is estimated at a minimum of $3.7 billion a year. The public should not subsidize industry's indifference.

Existing programs affecting diesel engines and coal plants have begun the work of reducing soot. At this point, all but 66 counties nationwide already meet the EPA standards. By 2020, only seven are expected to be in violation of the new rules.


  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

question of the day

Poll: Should Roger Goodell lose his job as NFL commissioner over Rice case?

Weekly Question
 
Close