Smog in the Manhattan borough of New York on Thanksgiving Day, Nov. 24, 1966. (Neal Boenzi / The New York Times)

Smog in the Manhattan borough of New York on Thanksgiving Day, Nov. 24, 1966. (Neal Boenzi / The New York Times)

Comment: What a loss of clean air rules could cost us

For more than 50 years, the rules have been a benefit to the economy as much as Americans’ health.

By Richard E. Peltier / For The Conversation

The Trump administration announced on March 12, that it is “reconsidering” more than 30 air pollution regulations in a series of moves that could affect air quality across the United States.

“Reconsideration” is a term used to review or modify a government regulation. While Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin provided few details, the breadth of the regulations being reconsidered affects all Americans. They include rules that set limits for pollutants that can harm human health, such as ozone, particulate matter and volatile organic carbon.

Zeldin wrote that his deregulation moves would “roll back trillions in regulatory costs and hidden ‘taxes’ on U.S. families.” But that’s only part of the story.

What Zeldin didn’t say is that the economic and health benefits from decades of federal clean air regulations have far outweighed their costs. Some estimates suggest every $1 spent meeting clean air rules has returned $10 in health and economic benefits.

How far America has come, because of regulations: In the early 1970s, thick smog blanketed American cities and acid rain stripped forests bare from the Northeast to the Midwest.

Air pollution wasn’t just a nuisance; it was a public health emergency. But in the decades since, the United States has engineered one of the most successful environmental turnarounds in history.

Thanks to stronger air quality regulations, pollution levels have plummeted, preventing hundreds of thousands of deaths annually. And despite early predictions that these regulations would cripple the economy, the opposite has proven true: The U.S. economy more than doubled in size while pollution fell, showing that clean air and economic growth can – and do – go hand in hand.

The numbers are eye-popping.

An Environmental Protection Agency analysis of the first 20 years of the Clean Air Act, from 1970 to 1990, found the economic benefits of the regulations were about 42 times greater than the costs.

The EPA later estimated that the cost of air quality regulations in the U.S. would be about $65 billion in 2020, and the benefits, primarily in improved health and increased worker productivity, would be around $2 trillion. Other studies have found similar benefits.

That’s a return of more than 30 to 1, making clean air one of the best investments the country has ever made.

Science-based regulations even the playing field: The turning point came with the passage of the Clean Air Act of 1970, which put in place strict rules on pollutants from industry, vehicles and power plants.

These rules targeted key culprits: lead, ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter; substances that contribute to asthma, heart disease and premature deaths. An example was the removal of lead, which can harm the brain and other organs, from gasoline. That single change resulted in far lower levels of lead in people’s blood, including a 70 percent drop in U.S. children’s blood-lead levels.

The results have been extraordinary. Since 1980, emissions of six major air pollutants have dropped by 78 percent, even as the U.S. economy has more than doubled in size. Cities that were once notorious for their thick, choking smog — such as Los Angeles, Houston and Pittsburgh — now see far cleaner air, while lakes and forests devastated by acid rain in the Northeast have rebounded.

And most importantly, lives have been saved. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to periodically estimate the costs and benefits of air quality regulations. In the most recent estimate, released in 2011, the EPA projected that air quality improvements would prevent more than 230,000 premature deaths in 2020. That means fewer heart attacks, fewer emergency room visits for asthma, and more years of healthy life for millions of Americans.

The economic payoff: Critics of air quality regulations have long argued that the regulations are too expensive for businesses and consumers. But the data tells a very different story.

EPA studies have confirmed that clean air regulations improve air quality over time. Other studies have shown that the health benefits greatly outweigh the costs. That pays off for the economy. Fewer illnesses mean lower health care costs, and healthier workers mean higher productivity and fewer missed workdays.

The EPA estimated that for every $1 spent on meeting air quality regulations, the United States received $9 in benefits. A separate study by the non-partisan National Bureau of Economic Research in 2024 estimated that each $1 spent on air pollution regulation brought the U.S. economy at least $10 in benefits. And when considering the long-term impact on human health and climate stability, the return is even greater.

The next chapter in clean air: The air Americans breathe today is cleaner, much healthier and safer than it was just a few decades ago.

Yet, despite this remarkable progress, air pollution remains a challenge in some parts of the country. Some urban neighborhoods remain stubbornly polluted because of vehicle emissions and industrial pollution. While urban pollution has declined, wildfire smoke has become a larger influence on poor air quality across the nation.

That means the EPA still has work to do.

If the agency works with environmental scientists, public health experts and industry, and fosters honest scientific consensus, it can continue to protect public health while supporting economic growth. At the same time, it can ensure that future generations enjoy the same clean air and prosperity that regulations have made possible.

By instead considering retracting clean air rules, the EPA is calling into question the expertise of countless scientists who have provided their objective advice over decades to set standards designed to protect human lives. In many cases, industries won’t want to go back to past polluting ways, but lifting clean air rules means future investment might not be as protective. And it increases future regulatory uncertainty for industries.

The past offers a clear lesson: Investing in clean air is not just good for public health; it’s good for the economy. With a track record of saving lives and delivering trillion-dollar benefits, air quality regulations remain one of the greatest policy success stories in American history.

Richard E. Peltier is a professor of environmental health sciences at University of Massachusetts, Amherst. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Monday, April 28

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

County Council members Jared Mead, left, and Nate Nehring speak to students on Thursday, Jan. 30, 2025, during Civic Education Day at the Snohomish County Campus in Everett, Washington. (Will Geschke / The Herald)
Editorial: Students get a life lesson in building bridges

Two county officials’ civics campaign is showing the possibilities of discourse and government.

Comment: Musk doesn’t understand what Lincoln knew

That government should do the things that individuals and markets can’t or won’t do. That’s not waste, fraud or abuse.

Brooks: Trump’s greatest strength can also be his downfall

Trump has succeeded in his first 100 days by moving fast and breaking things. That serves his opposition.

Harrop: How can Elon Musk be a genius yet so clueless?

Now that President Trump has what he needs from him, Musk is being discarded, and poorer for it.

Comment: Stifling climate anxiety only ignores the problem

If we want kids to be less anxious about climate change, educate them and show them there are solutions.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Sunday, April 27

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

(NYT1) VATICAN CITY, April 19, 2005 -- VATICAN-CONCLAVE-1 -- Sisters with the order Lamb of God look in the direction of the chimney over the Sistine Chapel waiting for the telltale smoke to indicate the Cardinals voting on a new pope, Tuesday, April 19, 2005 in St. Peter's Square in Vatican City. (James Hill/The New York Times) *MAGS OUT/NO SALES*
Comment: How the conclave of cardinals will chose next pope

Locked in the Sistine Chapel, 252 members of the College of Cardinals will select a new pontiff.

Offer religious study outside of the school day

Everett school district taxpayers spend millions of dollars every year funding school… Continue reading

Greene has background, skills for Everett mayor’s office

I am endorsing Dr. Janice Greene for Mayor for the City of… Continue reading

Thanks for a fun, positive story about a young author

A recent front-page story was very encouraging and uplifting to read (“Edmonds… Continue reading

Let Trump tax cuts expire to trim deficits

The 2017 tax cuts that President Trump pushed through Congress are set… Continue reading

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.