Skip to main content
  • Home
  • About
  • Faculty Experts
  • For The Media
  • Videos
  • Topics
    • Alumni
    • Events
    • Faculty
    • Library
    • Research
    • Students
    • All Topics
  • Contact
  • Submit
Health & Society
  • All News
  • Arts & Culture
  • Business & Economy
  • Campus & Community
  • Health & Society
  • Media, Law & Policy
  • STEM
  • Veterans
  • |
  • Alumni
  • The Peel
  • Athletics
Sections
  • All News
  • Arts & Culture
  • Business & Economy
  • Campus & Community
  • Health & Society
  • Media, Law & Policy
  • STEM
  • Veterans
  • |
  • Alumni
  • The Peel
  • Athletics
  • Home
  • About
  • Faculty Experts
  • For The Media
  • Videos
  • Topics
    • Alumni
    • Events
    • Faculty
    • Library
    • Research
    • Students
    • All Topics
  • Contact
  • Submit
Health & Society

Study: Clean Power Plan Replacement Worse than Nothing, Costs More than 3,500 Lives and $33B Yearly

Tuesday, October 10, 2017, By News Staff
Share
College of Engineering and Computer Sciencefacultyresearch

cleanairmap
A new map released today by scientists at Syracuse and Harvard universities shows that, compared to doing nothing, replacing the Clean Power Plan with a narrower option would make air quality worse and endanger more lives, on top of the 3,500 premature deaths and $33 billion in health costs already estimated.

(Click here for full sized version of map)

If EPA replaces the Clean Power Plan with a narrower “inside the fence line” alternative, it will drive up fine particle pollution, according to a new map drawn from a study by scientists at Syracuse University and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

“The surprising finding from our previous study is that an ‘inside the fence line’ approach is not only worse than the Clean Power Plan, it is worse than doing nothing at all,” says Charles Driscoll, University Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering in the College of Engineering and Computer Science Syracuse University. “We also found that the ‘inside the fence line’ approach would do little to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.” The “inside the fence” line approach would limit power plant carbon standards to improvements that can be made within a facility rather than a broad suite of options that include new renewable energy.

The new map shows that an “inside the fence line” approach would cause new air pollution hotspots in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Texas and other states due to increased fine particle pollution. This increase in air pollution would lead to an increase in premature deaths in 17 states compared to no new policy, according to the study. Fine particle pollution is associated with increases in premature deaths, hospitalizations from respiratory and heart disease, and worsening asthma attacks in people with asthma.

The impacts depicted in the new map of increased air pollution stand in sharp contrast to the benefits that the authors estimated for carbon standards like the Clean Power Plan.

“Carbon standards like the Clean Power Plan would prevent approximately 3,500 premature deaths from air pollution every year, according to our study,” says Jonathan Buonocore, a research associate at the Center for Health and the Global Environment at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The study found that Pennsylvania, Ohio and Texas have the most to lose from the repeal of the Clean Power Plan with an estimated 230 to 330 extra premature deaths per year without flexible carbon standards like those originally proposed.

“The current EPA has the cost-benefit science wrong. There is no credible evidence that there is a safe level of fine particulate pollution that does not harm health. Our study showed that the value of the health benefits would outweigh costs by $33 billion a year,” adds Buonocore.

Charles Driscoll

Charles Driscoll

The new map and related findings are based on two peer-reviewed studies published in independent journals. The 2015 paper in Nature Climate Change, “US power plant carbon standards and clean air and health co-benefits,” quantified the air quality and public health benefits of power plant carbon standards like the Clean Power Plan and an inside the fence line approach. A 2016 paper in PLOS One, “An Analysis of Costs and Health Co-benefits for a U.S. Power Plant Carbon Standard,” calculated the costs and benefits of carbon standards like the Clean Power Plan.

The deterioration in air quality under an “inside the fence line” approach would be caused by emissions rebound at coal-fired power plants, according to the study. Emission rebound refers to the increase in emissions that occurs when facilities undergo efficiency improvements and then operate more frequently and for longer periods of time, leading to increased emissions.

“The bottom line is that the ‘inside the fence line’ approach would do more harm than good. Not only would it cause thousands of extra deaths and cost billions every year compared to the Clean Power Plan, it would inflict more harm than doing nothing at all,” concludes Driscoll.

  • Author

News Staff

  • Recent
  • From ‘Breaking Bad’ to Equality and Diversity Activism
    Thursday, February 25, 2021, By Gabrielle Lake
  • Jill Biden Asks Student Veterans to Take Active Roles in Their Communities at 2021 Student Veterans of America National Conference
    Thursday, February 25, 2021, By Brandon Dyer
  • State Experiencing Surge of Fraudulent Unemployment Claims; Please Stay Vigilant
    Thursday, February 25, 2021, By News Staff
  • Provost Search Underway
    Thursday, February 25, 2021, By News Staff
  • Missy Mathis-Hanlon Offers an Empathetic Ear, Helps Connect Families With Resources
    Thursday, February 25, 2021, By Brandon Dyer

More In Health & Society

Boost Your Immune System With These Expert Tips (and Recipes!)

A healthy immune system is important throughout the year, but even more so during cold and flu season and while we remain at-risk of contracting COVID-19. In honor of National Nutrition Month, celebrated in March, we tapped into campus experts…

Application Deadline Approaching: Five Reasons to Be a Barnes Center at The Arch Peer Educator

The deadline to apply to be a Barnes Center at The Arch Peer Educator for the 2021-22 academic year is Sunday, Feb. 28, 2021, and all students are encouraged to submit an application. Students who are interested in applying for…

CRS Professor’s New Book Focuses on the Rhetoric of Antisemitism

Amos Kiewe, a professor in the College of Visual and Performing Arts’ Department of Communication and Rhetorical Studies (CRS), has authored the new book, “The Rhetoric of Antisemitism: From the Origins of Christianity and Islam to the Present” (Lexington Books). It…

Spring 2021: Barnes Center at The Arch Services and Hours; Virtual Recreation Jan. 30–Feb. 4   

As the Spring 2021 semester begins, the Barnes Center at The Arch announces hours, services and more surrounding holistic health and well-being. Visit the Stay Safe: Barnes Center at The Arch webpage for information surrounding how to access services, resources…

Health Promotion Advocate and Alumnus Sidney Lerner ’53 Remembered

Sidney “Sid” Lerner ‘53, alumnus of Syracuse University and benefactor of the Maxwell School’s Lerner Center for Public Health Promotion, has passed away. During his career, the legendary advertising executive represented such well-known brands as Maxwell House and Texaco, and…

Subscribe to SU Today

If you need help with your subscription, contact sunews@syr.edu.

Connect With Us

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
Social Media Directory

For the Media

Find an Expert Follow @SyracuseUNews
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • @SyracuseU
  • @SyracuseUNews
  • @SUCampus
  • Social Media Directory
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy
  • Campus Status
  • Syracuse.edu
© 2021 Syracuse University News. All Rights Reserved.