Authorities announced new federal legislation last week concerning regulation of air pollutants, leading Wisconsinites to debate the implementation of the measures in the state.
The proposed regulations could save $85 billion to $100 billion in health costs if power plants reduce harmful emissions by 2015.
Twenty-eight states are the target of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulations, including Wisconsin, which has a large dependency on power derived from coal.
Two byproducts of coal burning — sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide — are being focused on for reductions by the year 2015. On average, national emissions would be reduced by 70 percent and 60 percent, respectively.
Another EPA plan, called the Clean Air Interstate Rule, would reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide by 32 percent and nitrogen dioxide by 61 percent in Wisconsin, according to Lloyd Eagan, the director of the Bureau of Air Management at the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
“[The EPA regulations] are a step in the right direction — it is not as big of a step as what we would like to see, but it will help us achieve cleaner air in Wisconsin,” Eagan said.
Wisconsin works in conjunction with other Midwestern states, including Illinois, Indiana, Missouri and Iowa, to attain the standard necessitated by EPA regulations.
The reduction of fine particle and ground-level ozone pollution in the state will contribute to the cleanliness of air in other locations because emissions travel across state boundaries.
According to Eagan, even with the federal requirements, Wisconsin will not accomplish the required regulations in 18 months.
“[Wisconsin] will have to go beyond the federal Clean Air Interstate Rule to do this,” Eagan said.
Officials are currently formulating a state implementations program to bring Wisconsin up to par, including additional regulations on power plants. The difficulties in accomplishing proposed reductions in such a limited span of time are a result of the particular geography of the Lake Michigan region, as well as power plants that have not been properly regulated in the past, according to Eagan.
Power-plant emissions are the biggest source of mercury contamination in the country, and high levels pose health risks.
There is much debate in Wisconsin surrounding the EPA’s ability to control and reduce mercury levels, and Wisconsinites are concerned the regulations do not go far enough.
U.S. Rep. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., challenged the new EPA regulations in a letter Monday because she believes the measure did not thoroughly address safety issues.
“If the EPA issues this rule without the legally required analysis, the agency will … put the safety of thousands of Americans at risk,” Baldwin said in a release.
While Eagan and many environmentalists believe more regulation is the answer, some believe environmental regulation could potentially be a problem.
“In general principle, more regulation is not necessarily a good thing,” said Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow director Peter McCabe.
Clearly there needs to be some regulation, but the EPA’s over-regulations often inflict an economic burden on companies. In this way, the EPA stops allowing companies to regulate themselves, which naturally occurs over time, according to McCabe.
