CAMBRIDGE, Mass., May 4, 2015 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- States
will gain large, widespread, and nearly immediate health benefits
if EPA sets strong standards in the final Clean Power Plan,
according to the first independent, peer-reviewed paper of its
kind, published today in the journal Nature Climate
Change.
The researchers analyzed three options for power plant carbon
standards. The top option in the study prevents an expected 3,500
premature deaths in the US every year, with a range of 780 to up to
6100. It also averts more than a thousand heart attacks and
hospitalizations annually from air pollution-related illness. But
weaker options considered in the study provide fewer estimated
health benefits and could even have detrimental health effects,
according to the paper.
The study comes at a pivotal time for climate policy as EPA
prepares to release the final Clean Power Plan this summer. The
Plan is the nation's first attempt to establish standards for
carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. It is also viewed as an
important signal of US leadership in the run-up to international
climate negotiations in Paris in
December.
"If EPA sets strong carbon standards, we can expect large public
health benefits from cleaner air almost immediately after the
standards are implemented," said Dr. Jonathan Buonocore, Research Fellow in the
Center for Health and the Global Environment at the Harvard T.H.
Chan School of Public Health, and a co-author of the new paper.
The researchers mapped the air quality and related health
benefits for the entire continental US under three options for the
Clean Power Plan. They found that all states and all types of
communities see improved air quality under the top option.
Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Texas post the greatest health gains with 330
to 230 estimated premature deaths prevented each year.
"An important implication of this study is that the largest
health benefits from the transition to cleaner energy are expected
in states that currently have the greatest dependence on coal-fired
electricity," said Dallas Burtraw,
Darius Gaskins Senior Fellow, Resources for the Future, and a
co-author of the new paper.
Power plants are the nation's largest source of carbon dioxide
emissions that contribute to climate change. They also release
other pollutants like sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and
particulate matter -- precursors to smog and soot that harm human
health. The study looks at the added health benefits, or
co-benefits, of carbon standards from reductions in these other air
pollutants.
The results from the three policy options analyzed in the study
are surprising. The option that only implements power plant
upgrades, as favored by some groups, results in slightly lower air
quality and modest adverse health effects. The option with the
deepest cuts in carbon emissions does not produce the largest
health benefits because it lacks new end-user energy efficiency.
The top option for health prevents almost twice as many premature
deaths as the runner-up for every ton of carbon dioxide
reduced.
"The bottom line is, the more the standards promote cleaner
fuels and energy efficiency, the greater the added health
benefits," said Dr. Charles
Driscoll, University Professor of Environmental Systems
Engineering, Syracuse University, and
lead author of the paper. "We found that the greatest clean air and
health benefits occur when stringent targets for carbon dioxide
emissions are combined with compliance measures that promote
demand-side energy efficiency and cleaner energy sources across the
power sector," said Driscoll.
The results panned out like the story of the "three little
pigs." One option is like the house of straw – it seems protective
but it isn't. Another option is like the house of sticks – it is
stronger than straw but ultimately doesn't hold up. The final
option is like the house of bricks – it uses all the right building
blocks and has the best outcome.
The findings demonstrate that EPA's policy choices will
determine the clean air and public health benefits for states and
communities. The option in the study with the top health benefits
is the one that is most similar to the draft standards released by
EPA last June. So, the good news is that the formula in the draft
Clean Power Plan is on the right track to provide large health
benefits.
The new paper also has important international implications and
brings much-needed attention to the benefits of climate change
solutions. "The immediate and widespread local health benefits of
cleaner air from policies to address greenhouse gas emissions can
provide a strong motivation for US and global action on climate
change," Driscoll concluded.
A follow-on study analyzing the added benefits of power plant
carbon standards for water, visibility crops, and trees is expected
out this summer.
To view the original version on PR Newswire,
visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/clean-air-and-health-benefits-of-clean-power-plan-hinge-on-key-policy-decisions-300076067.html
SOURCE Syracuse University