A recently released study suggests stronger power plant standards to cut carbon emissions could save lives and offer significant health benefits. The study, a joint effort by Harvard University, Boston University and Syracuse University, evaluated the impacts of various policy options to reduce power plant emissions on public health. The timing is important considering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released carbon pollution standards, named the Clean Power Plan, for the first time in June. The suggested standards included a range of policy options, and the three universities’ researchers evaluated the three likely policy frameworks that would represent strategies for high, moderate and low targets for future carbon emissions reduction targets.
The study evaluated these three different carbon emissions policy scenarios for power plants to gauge which one would have the largest positive impact on public health. The first scenario, with the lowest targets and therefore the most energy-company friendly, would have only generated modest carbon emission reduction and created an uptick in public health risks. Another, the most rigorous plan on the compliance side, with high emission reduction targets but allowing no local flexibility and lacking any energy efficiency measures, reduced carbon but offered limited improvements in public health. A more moderate approach, which allowed for local flexibility in meeting the EPA’s proposed rules, actually showed the most potential for reversing mortalities and hospitalizations attributed to climate change.Click to continue reading »