The Environmental Protection Agency s new National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants would only minimally benefit public health, while costing many millions of dollars, write Dr. Willie Soon and Paul Driessen in a Washington Times op-ed. The new standards target emissions of mercury and other airborne toxics from coal- and oil-fired power plants and electric generating units. But to what purpose, Soon and Driessen ask?
The op-ed looks specifically at the disconnect between the new, more stringent emissions standards for mercury and the fact that U.S. power plants contribute only 3 percent of the total mercury deposited in American watersheds and, subsequently, in fish tissue. And while Soon and Driessen don t address the EPA s assertion that the new standards will substantially affect pollutants that exacerbate respiratory conditions, they offer a close examination of why the new mercury emission standards don t add up.
Read the piece in its entirety here. For more background, you can take a look at ACSH's publication on regulating mercury emissions.
EPA's mercurial standards
The Environmental Protection Agency s new National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants would only minimally benefit public health, while costing many millions of dollars, write Dr. Willie Soon and Paul Driessen in a Washington Times op-ed. The new standards target emissions of mercury and other airborne toxics from coal- and oil-fired power plants and electric generating units. But to what purpose, Soon and Driessen ask?
ACSH relies on donors like you. If you enjoy our work, please contribute.
Make your tax-deductible gift today!
Popular articles
ACSH Podcasts
