The Badger Herald

OPINION & EDITORIAL

Don’t believe the gripe: Wisconsin air rating unfair

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Jack Craver:

Prison disparity racist? Not so fast (February 19, 2008)
Privacy, dignity trampled by parental notification policy (February 5, 2008)

by Jack Craver

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Last week the Wisconsin State Journal reported that Gov. Jim Doyle had sent a “secret” letter to the Environmental Protection Agency, asking for a favor. The Journal learned this from the Sierra Club, which had had an inkling the governor was up to no good.

It appears Mr. Doyle discovered late last year that some parts of our state were in big trouble with the federal government over “particulate pollution” standards. Simply put, many Wisconsin counties were exceeding federal standards for average daily emissions of particles — defined by the EPA as “inhalable course particles.”

These particles pose potentially serious health risks to many, especially those with prior respiratory conditions such as asthma or lung disease. In fact, last year the American Lung Association gave Dane County a “D” grade for its inordinate amount of particulate pollution. Apparently smokers are not the only culprits.

Typically the EPA responds to these “non-compliance” situations by requiring offending counties re-evaluate their pollution controls and possibly put in place new — and often costly — technologies to reduce emissions. That is why in Milwaukee County, for instance, car owners are required to get their vehicles checked for ozone emissions, while drivers in Dane County do not.

To prevent such measures, Mr. Doyle is trying with all his might to get the EPA off our case. In his letter pleading for mercy, the governor asserted new state regulations would bring all of Wisconsin into compliance by 2015. Bruce Nillis, attorney for the Sierra Club, was quoted by the Journal as saying the administration “is gambling with people’s health.”

Despite all this, the governor’s reasoning makes sense. It’s not our fault. It’s their fault.

By “their,” I mean the federal bureaucracy. You see, until two years ago Wisconsin had no problems with the feds. The daily emission average was capped at 65 particles per meter cubed, and Wisconsin counties were well within the limits. But in September 2006 the EPA, responding to exactly the type of concerns outlined earlier, lowered the limit by almost half — to 35 particles per meter cubed.

Since then, counties across the country have not been allowed a grace period to adjust to the new standards. In fact, the EPA, when determining if a county is in compliance with its standards, uses emissions concentration data from the past three years to conclude what each county’s daily and annual averages for particle emissions are. That means that a county’s particulate emissions in 2004 and 2005 — before the standards were changed — may very well be the determining factor in the EPA’s decision to levy penalties against it.

Ultimately, this means Wisconsin counties will be punished ex post facto.

Some environmentalists, myself included, would not necessarily refer to heightened regulation as punishment. However, the massive difference in regulation between counties deemed compliant and those found to be non-compliant puts the latter counties at such a disadvantage economically that the policy effectively results in de facto punishment for many areas of Wisconsin.

Tracey Holloway, a UW environmental studies professor specializing in air pollution and its effects, explained to me that — like any bureaucracy — the EPA runs on strict rules and does not recognize any gray area with regard to its policy on particle emissions. Borrowing Ms. Holloway’s expression — there is a “bright line” between compliancy and non-compliancy, and this turns a very nuanced topic into a black-or-white issue.

This means that while counties that just barely miss the mark are saddled with expensive and cumbersome reforms, those found to be compliant by the skin of their teeth continue to pollute in the same reckless fashion for the next three years.

This is not to say the EPA is wrong in having strict standards. In fact, no matter what libertarians tell you, effective bureaucracy is the cornerstone of good government. But in this particular instance the evaluation method is simply misguided, and it should be reworked to target the specific regional pollution problems.

As Ms. Holloway showed me, particulate pollution does not have a universal source. Here in Wisconsin, much of the problem stems from coal burning power plants, whereas in southern California the issue is more related to transportation. Some parts of the Southwest find themselves dangerously close to non-compliancy largely because of winds that kick up a lot of dust.

Locally it appears we are doing what we need to address our own problems. Last year’s successful lawsuit against the university-controlled Charter Street Power Plant was just the beginning. The MG&E power plant on Blount Street just announced $10 million in renovations to reduce emissions in response to community outcry against its poor environmental track record.

According to the EPA’s own projections, every Wisconsin county will be comfortably below the 35 particles per meter cubed standard by 2015.

I cannot be sure of the governor’s motives in this controversy. Mr. Doyle is a politician after all, and there is a politically powerful business lobby he no doubt is eager to please. However, whether heightened regulation is necessary or not, it is not fair for the federal government to declare Wisconsin counties “non-compliant” when they have been playing by the rules they set every year.

Jack Craver (craver@wisc.edu) is a sophomore majoring in history.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (March 11, 2008 @ 1:23pm):

Another instance of the federal government trying to impose its will on us. Just like Bush wouldn't let Arnold run his state, he won't let Doyle run his.

Anonymous (March 11, 2008 @ 4:53pm):

Since particulate pollution is only a problem on a local level, then why should not we be solving it on a local level? Like you say, each state has its own specific particulate pollution problems, and they should be able to solve them on their own according to their needs.
Even though you claim that, here in Madison, we are "doing what we need to address our own problems," the fact that the rest of Wisconsin is below EPA standards shows that we are not taking enough initiative in fighting for cleaner air. We should not have to wait for the EPA to tap us on the shoulder and tell us that we are getting a little too dirty for own good. This would not have been a problem in the first place if we were just a little more proactive. I'm not a fan of the federal government trying to impose its will on us unfairly, but I don't mind a little nudge in the right direction.

Add a comment

We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.