This letter is in response to “Hard ride ahead; Clear Skies plan is anything but clean” (Perspective, Feb. 13), by Thomas William Heyck (who teaches British history at Northwestern University) and Josef J. Barton (associate professor of American history and director of the Chicago Field Studies Program at Northwestern). Heyck and Barton’s piece makes a number of claims about the president’s Clear Skies proposal and the current Clean Air Act that are flat-out inaccurate.
Here are the facts:
The president’s Clear Skies proposal, if passed, will reduce air pollution from U.S. power plants by about 70 percent from today’s levels–an unprecedented level of pollution reduction. It will require the power sector to invest about $50 billion to reduce air pollution– by far the largest single investment ever made to improve air quality in this country.
The Environmental Protection Agency projects that the pollution reductions mandated by Clear Skies will prevent the premature deaths of more than 10,000 people each year when fully implemented.
The assertion that Clear Skies would be weaker than the current Clean Air Act is just not true. Clear Skies is designed not just to deliver unprecedented emissions reductions but to do so without significantly affecting electricity prices. The mandatory, market-based cap and trade program for power generators builds upon the existing Clean Air Act to better coordinate control of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and mercury, and facilitate the achievement of critical health and environmental goals.
The president’s Clear Skies proposal has been endorsed by the National Governors Association, the National Association of Counties, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National Conference of Black Mayors. These organizations understand the need for a strong national program.
Our shared goal is cleaner air and improved health. Working together we can continue not only to protect the environment, we can do it faster and cheaper.
