home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- NATION, Page 33Forecast: Clearer Skies
-
-
- The revised Clean Air Act is costly but well worth the price
-
-
- No sensible American wants to breathe pollution, but that
- has not made it easy to figure out how to pay to clear the
- nation's air. It took more than a decade of often bitter debate
- among environmentalists, industry representatives, scientists
- and economists before House and Senate conferees finally agreed
- last week on sweeping changes in the Clean Air Act, the first
- major revision in the landmark law since 1977. After all the
- lobbying and deal making, the bill that emerged is surprisingly
- strong. Expected to be approved by President Bush early in
- November, it offers no quick fix for the nation's filthy air,
- but it does promise real progress in the years ahead.
-
- While recognizing the legislation's imperfections,
- environmentalists feel triumphant. Says Daniel Weiss, director
- of the environmental-quality program for the Sierra Club:
- "There is no question that 10 years from now our air will be
- significantly cleaner. Our work isn't finished, but this is a
- bill of historical proportions." It also carries a price tag
- of historical heft: as much as $25 billion to $35 billion a
- year when the law goes fully into effect. Complains William Fay,
- administrator of the Clean Air Working Group, an industrial
- lobby: "Americans will pay the price through job losses and
- dislocations, higher consumer-product prices, increased
- electricity bills, reduced competitiveness, changed life-styles
- and slower economic growth."
-
- The revised law will limit the output of industrial
- pollutants that cause acid rain and will eliminate chemicals
- that threaten the atmosphere's protective ozone layer. It aims
- for a major reduction in the release of toxic and
- cancer-causing chemicals from businesses and factories. In
- addition, emissions from motor vehicles will have to be reduced
- and cleaner-burning gasoline sold in the nine smoggiest U.S.
- cities.* In a pilot program in Southern California that could
- eventually be expanded, automobile manufacturers will have to
- build thousands of cars that operate on alternative fuels such
- as electricity, natural gas or methanol.
-
- To protect industries and especially jobs, many of the
- antipollution rules will be phased in over 15 years. Among the
- companies most affected by the legislation are utilities that
- burn high-sulfur coal, which are concentrated in the Midwest.
- These utilities are by far the worst emitters of sulfur dioxide
- and nitrogen oxides, the prime causes of the acid rain that has
- harmed forests, lakes and streams in the northeastern U.S. and
- Canada. To meet the law's emission limits, power plants will
- have to either switch to more expensive low-sulfur coal or
- install costly scrubbers to clean the smoke chemically as it
- goes up from chimneys.
-
- Giant corporations will not be the only ones bearing the
- burden of the cleanup. For the first time small businesses,
- from dry cleaners to auto-repair shops, will be required to
- invest in pollution-control equipment. Much of the impact will
- work its way through to consumers. Higher utility costs will
- boost household electricity bills, antipollution devices could
- add hundreds of dollars to the price of a new car, and
- cleaner-burning gasolines and alternative fuels could end up
- being more expensive than conventional gas.
-
- The environmentalists did not win every battle. By pleading
- financial hardship, steelmakers got until the year 2020 to
- eliminate cancer-causing emissions from their coke ovens, as
- long as they take interim steps to reduce that pollution.
- Electric utilities in the Great Lakes region -- many of them
- affected by the new acid-rain rules -- fought off a proposal
- to require them to reduce their release of mercury and other
- toxic chemicals from coal-burning plants.
-
- The added clean-air costs of $25 billion a year or more may
- be hard to swallow at a time when politicians are proposing
- higher taxes and cutbacks in social services. Environmentalists
- point out that the cost of doing nothing could have been
- higher, perhaps $50 billion a year. It is not clear, though,
- exactly how one calculates the price of forests ruined by acid
- rain or the suffering caused by pollution-related lung diseases
- and birth defects.
-
- In the end, Congress decided that money is a secondary
- consideration. The fact that legislators found their political
- courage when it came to human health, even as they have avoided
- making hard choices on the country's financial health,
- underscores just how dangerous America's dirty air has become.
-
-
- * Baltimore, Chicago, Hartford, Houston, Los An geles,
- Milwaukee, New York, Philadelphia and San Diego.
-
-
- By Michael D. Lemonick. Reported by Ann Blackman/Washington.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-