home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac of the 20th Century
/
TIME, Almanac of the 20th Century.ISO
/
1990
/
90
/
oct_dec
/
1105107.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-02-27
|
5KB
|
111 lines
<text>
<title>
(Nov. 05, 1990) Clean Air Act:Forecast--Clearer Skies
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1990
Nov. 05, 1990 Reagan Memoirs
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
NATION, Page 33
Forecast: Clearer Skies
</hdr>
<body>
<p>The revised Clean Air Act is costly but well worth the price
</p>
<p> No sensible American wants to breathe pollution, but that
has not made it easy to figure out how to pay to clear the
nation's air. It took more than a decade of often bitter debate
among environmentalists, industry representatives, scientists
and economists before House and Senate conferees finally agreed
last week on sweeping changes in the Clean Air Act, the first
major revision in the landmark law since 1977. After all the
lobbying and deal making, the bill that emerged is surprisingly
strong. Expected to be approved by President Bush early in
November, it offers no quick fix for the nation's filthy air,
but it does promise real progress in the years ahead.
</p>
<p> While recognizing the legislation's imperfections,
environmentalists feel triumphant. Says Daniel Weiss, director
of the environmental-quality program for the Sierra Club:
"There is no question that 10 years from now our air will be
significantly cleaner. Our work isn't finished, but this is a
bill of historical proportions." It also carries a price tag
of historical heft: as much as $25 billion to $35 billion a
year when the law goes fully into effect. Complains William Fay,
administrator of the Clean Air Working Group, an industrial
lobby: "Americans will pay the price through job losses and
dislocations, higher consumer-product prices, increased
electricity bills, reduced competitiveness, changed life-styles
and slower economic growth."
</p>
<p> The revised law will limit the output of industrial
pollutants that cause acid rain and will eliminate chemicals
that threaten the atmosphere's protective ozone layer. It aims
for a major reduction in the release of toxic and
cancer-causing chemicals from businesses and factories. In
addition, emissions from motor vehicles will have to be reduced
and cleaner-burning gasoline sold in the nine smoggiest U.S.
cities.* In a pilot program in Southern California that could
eventually be expanded, automobile manufacturers will have to
build thousands of cars that operate on alternative fuels such
as electricity, natural gas or methanol.
</p>
<p> To protect industries and especially jobs, many of the
antipollution rules will be phased in over 15 years. Among the
companies most affected by the legislation are utilities that
burn high-sulfur coal, which are concentrated in the Midwest.
These utilities are by far the worst emitters of sulfur dioxide
and nitrogen oxides, the prime causes of the acid rain that has
harmed forests, lakes and streams in the northeastern U.S. and
Canada. To meet the law's emission limits, power plants will
have to either switch to more expensive low-sulfur coal or
install costly scrubbers to clean the smoke chemically as it
goes up from chimneys.
</p>
<p> Giant corporations will not be the only ones bearing the
burden of the cleanup. For the first time small businesses,
from dry cleaners to auto-repair shops, will be required to
invest in pollution-control equipment. Much of the impact will
work its way through to consumers. Higher utility costs will
boost household electricity bills, antipollution devices could
add hundreds of dollars to the price of a new car, and
cleaner-burning gasolines and alternative fuels could end up
being more expensive than conventional gas.
</p>
<p> The environmentalists did not win every battle. By pleading
financial hardship, steelmakers got until the year 2020 to
eliminate cancer-causing emissions from their coke ovens, as
long as they take interim steps to reduce that pollution.
Electric utilities in the Great Lakes region--many of them
affected by the new acid-rain rules--fought off a proposal
to require them to reduce their release of mercury and other
toxic chemicals from coal-burning plants.
</p>
<p> The added clean-air costs of $25 billion a year or more may
be hard to swallow at a time when politicians are proposing
higher taxes and cutbacks in social services. Environmentalists
point out that the cost of doing nothing could have been
higher, perhaps $50 billion a year. It is not clear, though,
exactly how one calculates the price of forests ruined by acid
rain or the suffering caused by pollution-related lung diseases
and birth defects.
</p>
<p> In the end, Congress decided that money is a secondary
consideration. The fact that legislators found their political
courage when it came to human health, even as they have avoided
making hard choices on the country's financial health,
underscores just how dangerous America's dirty air has become.
</p>
<p>* Baltimore, Chicago, Hartford, Houston, Los Angeles,
Milwaukee, New York, Philadelphia and San Diego.
</p>
<p>By Michael D. Lemonick. Reported by Ann Blackman/Washington.
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>