Zeldin’s EPA Cuts Threaten Public Health and Air Quality

5 Jun at 8:02 pm

3437 posts

Zeldin’s EPA Cuts Threaten Public Health and Air Quality \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ EPA head Lee Zeldin’s proposed regulatory rollbacks aim to boost the economy but could cost thousands of lives annually. Health experts warn looser air pollution rules will increase smog, soot, and disease. The rollback also downplays benefits once credited with saving billions and lives each year.

Quick Looks

Zeldin calls environmental rules a “dagger through the heart” of climate regulation.
Proposed rollbacks target rules preventing 30,000 deaths and saving $275B annually.
Experts say the plan would spike pollution, asthma, and premature deaths.
EPA fact sheets emphasize costs, omit billions in health and environmental savings.
Regulations helped slash pollution deaths from 43,000/year in 2000s to 1,600/year by 2020.
Communities like Evansville, IN, already benefited from cleaner air standards.
Children and vulnerable people likely to suffer the most under weakened rules.
Industry-backed deregulation cited as key Trump-era campaign promise.

Deep Look

When Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin unveiled a sweeping plan to dismantle dozens of environmental regulations, he framed it as an economic revolution—a “Golden Age” for American industry and a blow to what he called the “climate-change religion.” But left unmentioned was the potential cost in lives, health, and long-term environmental impact.

According to a comprehensive Associated Press investigation, repealing the targeted EPA rules could result in tens of thousands of premature deaths, significantly increased pollution, and billions in healthcare costs. The AP’s estimates—based on the EPA’s own prior analyses and corroborated by independent scientific research—suggest the regulations in question currently prevent as many as 30,000 deaths annually and save approximately $275 billion every year.

A High-Stakes Rollback with Human Consequences

The rules on the chopping block primarily limit emissions from fossil fuels—coal, oil, and natural gas—which are the largest contributors to both local air pollution and global climate change. Eliminating or weakening these standards would allow more smog, soot, mercury, and other harmful pollutants into the air.

Cory Zigler, a biostatistics professor at Brown University who studies air pollution mortality, warned plainly: “More people will die.” His research shows clear links between coal-related pollution and respiratory and cardiovascular deaths.

Peer-reviewed studies support these claims. In southwest Indiana, where coal-fired power plants once fouled the skies, EPA regulations significantly improved air quality over the past two decades. Airborne particulate pollution dropped dramatically after utilities installed pollution scrubbers—devices required by the very regulations now under threat.

The Disputed Costs and Overlooked Benefits

The Trump administration’s EPA, led by Zeldin, has leaned heavily on the high cost of compliance in its messaging. In fact, of the ten fact sheets released with the rollback announcement, nine ignored benefits altogether, and eight highlighted only the costs.

But AP’s review of 20 major rules with full cost-benefit analyses found that benefits outweighed costs in 17 cases—many by wide margins. For example, the Biden-era clean car rule was projected to produce over $100 billion in annual net benefits, mostly from reduced hospital visits, deaths, and pollution-related health costs.

Other measures targeting emissions from trucks, power plants, and industrial sites could save tens of billions more. Yet those figures are largely absent from the current administration’s public materials.

Scott Segal, an industry attorney, argued that these analyses exaggerate health gains while ignoring job losses, energy prices, and other economic tradeoffs. But public health experts disagree, noting the EPA’s scientific methodology has remained consistent for decades and is based on peer-reviewed research and transparent modeling.

What’s at Stake for Vulnerable Communities

In communities like Evansville, Indiana, residents have seen the tangible benefits of cleaner air. Kirt Ethridge, who grew up there, remembers running laps at school while a line of inhalers waited on a bench. His asthma attacks were frequent and sometimes sent him to the emergency room. Since scrubbers were installed and coal use declined, he and others have seen vast improvements.

Now a father himself, Ethridge worries about his daughter, who has respiratory vulnerabilities. “I want to raise my kids in Evansville,” he said. “I don’t want to raise my kids in a bowl of pollution.”

Further north, Jessica Blazier’s son Julian suffers from multiple breathing-related health conditions. She fears the rollbacks will directly affect her son’s quality of life. “It’s almost adding insult to injury in our particular circumstance,” she said.

In areas like theirs, EPA regulations have provided not just cleaner skies but healthier lives. According to Zigler’s study in Science, between 1999 and 2020, coal-related deaths in southwestern Indiana alone ranged from 19,000 to 23,000. Nationwide, deaths linked to coal emissions dropped from 43,000 per year in the early 2000s to just 1,600 by 2020, thanks to cleaner fuels and tougher rules.

The Political Context: Deregulation vs. Public Health

The EPA’s regulatory retreat aligns with the Trump administration’s broader deregulatory push, supported by fossil fuel and manufacturing sectors. These industries contributed heavily to Trump’s 2024 campaign and remain central to his economic vision.

Zeldin acknowledged the rule changes must still go through the federal rulemaking process, which includes public comment and scientific review. However, the intent is clear: shift EPA focus away from climate and health protections toward economic growth—even if that comes at the cost of public well-being.

Former Republican EPA administrators Christine Todd Whitman and William Reilly have condemned the rollback effort. “This administration is endangering all of our lives—ours, our children, our grandchildren,” said Whitman.

Even among GOP circles, there’s concern that the dismantling of landmark regulations like the Clean Air Act could reverse decades of progress.

A System Built on Science, Now Under Pressure

EPA regulatory processes are among the most rigorous in government. A 2024 EPA analysis on particulate pollution spanned 445 pages and cited over 90 scientific papers. These rules are not arbitrary—they reflect decades of data on the health effects of pollution.

Health and environment experts like Kristi Ebi and Howard Frumkin say the actual health impacts of repeal could be even worse than AP estimates, which do not fully account for rising climate-related disasters, infectious diseases, or heat-related mortality.

“This is a rigorous, compelling, and much-needed analysis,” said Frumkin, who served under President George W. Bush at the CDC. “Because of these regulatory rollbacks and funding cuts, Americans will die needlessly.”