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

An apartment building under construction in Olympia, Washington in January 2025. Critics of a proposal to cap rent increases in Washington argue that it could stifle new development. (Photo by Bill Lucia/Washington State Standard)
Editorial: Lawmakers should seek deal to keep rent cap at 7%

Now that rent stabilization has passed both chambers, a deal on a reasonable cap must be struck.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Thursday, April 17

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

Comment: Social Security shield we need from volatile markets

After what we’ve seen this month from markets, we should guard the stability Old Age Insurance offers.

Don’t cut vital spending on health from state budget

The residents of Washington did not create the state’s current budget issues,… Continue reading

Restore funding for lung cancer research

This year, more than 226,000 people will be diagnosed with lung cancer,… Continue reading

Men, listen to Fox; save your masculinity from women

According to Fox News’ Jesse Watters, tariffs will bring back manly jobs… Continue reading

Ask yourself who’s next for El Salvador prison

El Salvador President Nayib Bukele and Presidetn Trump agree that Kilmer Abrego… Continue reading

The sun sets beyond the the Evergreen Branch of the Everett Public Library as a person returns some books on Friday, Nov. 11, 2022, in Everett, Washington. (Ryan Berry / The Herald)
Editorial: Reverse ruinous cuts to federal library program

The Trump administration’s shuttering of the IMLS will be felt at the local and state levels.

Kids play on glacial erratic in the Martha Lake Airport Park on Friday, May 4, 2018 in Lynnwood, Wa. The Glacial erratic rock in the park is one of the largest in urban King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties. (Andy Bronson / The Herald)
Editorial: Little park at Martha Lake an example of success

For 35 years, a state program has secured vital funding for parks, habitat, forests and farmland.

South County Fire and Rescue crews responded after a dump truck crashed into an Edmonds home and knocked out power lines last September. (Courtesy of South County Fire)
Editorial: Edmonds voters, study up on fire district vote

Voters need to weigh issues of taxes, service and representation before casting their ballots.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Wednesday, April 16

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

Welch: State tax proposals will punish workers, businesses

A range of proposed tax legislation piles costs on families, rather than looking for spending cuts.

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.