The air is getting cleaner, the connection between asthma and ozone concentrations is debatable, and the health benefits of stricter ozone standards are, at the very best, marginal. And the EPA’s proposed ozone regulations would costs billions upon billions of dollars. All this is clear from the public record, and usefully summarized in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel in an op-ed by H. Sterling Burnett, senior fellow of the National Center for Policy Analysis.
But here’s a point that you don’t often see mentioned in the arguments about the EPA’s rule. For much of the country, the standards are simply unattainable:
Because the proposed standard would be lower than the natural levels of ozone in some areas, many cities and counties could risk bankruptcy trying to meet the new standard – and still fail.
A government regulation mandating a standard lower than that which is naturally occuring? How bizarre that something like that could even be proposed.
The NCPA has been doing good work on the ozone rules, bringing scientific AND economic analysis to bear. Good — and necessary — work.
Latest posts by NAM (see all)
- Manufacturers Win Several Website Design Awards - June 15, 2011
- China Makes Commitments on Trade, Intellectual Property - December 16, 2010
- ITC Details Widespread Theft of Intellectual Property in China - December 14, 2010