 |
|
|
|||||
The Trump administration announced on March 12, 2025, that it is reconsidering more than 30 air pollution regulations in a series of moves that could impact air quality across the United States. Reconsideration is a term used to review or modify a government regulation. While Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin provided few details, the breadth of the regulations being reconsidered affects all Americans. They include rules that set limits for pollutants that can harm human health, such as ozone, particulate matter and volatile organic carbon. Zeldin wrote that his deregulation moves would roll back trillions in regulatory costs and hidden taxes on U.S. families. But thats only part of the story. What Zeldin didnt say is that the economic and health benefits from decades of federal clean air regulations have far outweighed their costs. Some estimates suggest every $1 spent meeting clean air rules has returned $10 in health and economic benefits. How far America has come, because of regulations In the early 1970s, thick smog blanketed American cities and acid rain stripped forests bare from the Northeast to the Midwest. Air pollution wasnt just a nuisanceit was a public health emergency. But in the decades since, the United States has engineered one of the most successful environmental turnarounds in history. Thanks to stronger air-quality regulations, pollution levels have plummeted, preventing hundreds of thousands of deaths annually. And despite early predictions that these regulations would cripple the economy, the opposite has proven true: The U.S. economy more than doubled in size while pollution fell, showing that clean air and economic growth canand dogo hand in hand. The numbers are eye-popping. An Environmental Protection Agency analysis of the first 20 years of the Clean Air Act, from 1970 to 1990, found the economic benefits of the regulations were about 42 times greater than the costs. The EPA later estimated that the cost of air-quality regulations in the U.S. would be about US$65 billion in 2020, and the benefits, primarily in improved health and increased worker productivity, would be around $2 trillion. Other studies have found similar benefits. Thats a return of more than 30 to 1, making clean air one of the best investments the country has ever made. Science-based regulations even the playing field The turning point came with the passage of the Clean Air Act of 1970, which put in place strict rules on pollutants from industry, vehicles, and power plants. These rules targeted key culprits: lead, ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate mattersubstances that contribute to asthma, heart disease, and premature deaths. An example was the removal of lead, which can harm the brain and other organs, from gasoline. That single change resulted in far lower levels of lead in peoples blood, including a 70% drop in U.S. childrens blood-lead levels. The results have been extraordinary. Since 1980, emissions of six major air pollutants have dropped by 78%, even as the U.S. economy has more than doubled in size. Cities that were once notorious for their thick, choking smogsuch as Los Angeles, Houston, and Pittsburghnow see far cleaner air, while lakes and forests devastated by acid rain in the Northeast have rebounded. And most importantly, lives have been saved. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to periodically estimate the costs and benefits of air-quality regulations. In the most recent estimate, released in 2011, the EPA projected that air-quality improvements would prevent over 230,000 premature deaths in 2020. That means fewer heart attacks, fewer emergency room visits for asthma, and more years of healthy life for millions of Americans. The economic payoff Critics of air-quality regulations have long argued that the regulations are too expensive for businesses and consumers. But the data tells a very different story. EPA studies have confirmed that clean air regulations improve air quality over time. Other studies have shown that the health benefits greatly outweigh the costs. That pays off for the economy. Fewer illnesses mean lower healthcare costs, and healthier workers mean higher productivity and fewer missed workdays. The EPA estimated that for every $1 spent on meeting air-quality regulations, the United States received $9 in benefits. A separate study by the nonpartisan National Bureau of Economic Research in 2024 estimated that each $1 spent on air pollution regulation brought the U.S. economy at east $10 in benefits. And when considering the long-term impact on human health and climate stability, the return is even greater. The next chapter in clean air The air Americans breathe today is cleaner, much healthier, and safer than it was just a few decades ago. Yet, despite this remarkable progress, air pollution remains a challenge in some parts of the country. Some urban neighborhoods remain stubbornly polluted because of vehicle emissions and industrial pollution. While urban pollution has declined, wildfire smoke has become a larger influence on poor air quality across the nation. That means the EPA still has work to do. If the agency works with environmental scientists, public health experts, and industry, and fosters honest scientific consensus, it can continue to protect public health while supporting economic growth. At the same time, it can ensure that future generations enjoy the same clean air and prosperity that regulations have made possible. By instead considering retracting clean air rules, the EPA is calling into question the expertise of countless scientists who have provided their objective advice over decades to set standards designed to protect human lives. In many cases, industries wont want to go back to past polluting ways, but lifting clean air rules means future investment might not be as protective. And it increases future regulatory uncertainty for industries. The past offers a clear lesson: Investing in clean air is not just good for public healthits good for the economy. With a track record of saving lives and delivering trillion-dollar benefits, air-quality regulations remain one of the greatest policy success stories in American history. Richard E. Peltier is a professor of environmental health sciences at UMass Amherst. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
Qatar will provide natural gas supplies to Syria with the aim of generating 400 megawatts of electricity a day, in a measure to help address the war-battered countrys severe electricity shortages, Syrian state-run news agency SANA reported Friday. Syrias interim Minister of Electricity Omar Shaqrouq said the Qatari supplies are expected to increase the daily state-provided electricity supply from two to four hours per day. Under the deal, Qatar will send two million cubic meters of natural gas a day to the Deir Ali power station, south of Damascus, via a pipeline passing through Jordan. Qatars state-run news agency said that the initiative was part of an agreement between the Qatar Fund for Development and the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources of Jordan in collaboration with the United Nations Development Program and aims to address the countrys severe shortage in electricity production and enhance its infrastructure. Syrias economy and infrastructure, including electricity production, has been devastated by nearly 14 years of civil war and crushing Western sanctions imposed on the government of former President Bashar Assad. Those who can afford it rely on solar power and private generators to make up for the meager state power supply, while others remain most of the day without power. Since Assad was ousted in a lightning rebel offensive in December, the countrys new rulers have struggled to consolidate control over territory that was divided into de facto ministates during the war and to begin the process of reconstruction. The United Nations in 2017 estimated that it would cost at least $250 billion to rebuild Syria, while experts say that number could reach at least $400 billion. The United States remains circumspect about the interim government and current President Ahmad al-Sharaa, the former leader of the Islamist insurgent group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. Washington designates HTS as a terrorist organization and has been reluctant to lift sanctions. In January, however, the U.S. eased some restrictions, issuing a six-month general license that authorizes certain transactions with the Syrian government, including some energy sales and incidental transactions.
Category:
E-Commerce
We all know influencing can pay wellbut just how well? Philadelphia-based influencer Brandon Edelman, known online as @bran_flakezz, recently went viral on TikTok after revealing he made $768,000 last year, primarily from brand partnerships and creator funds. After taxes and expenses, he pocketed net earnings of just over $300,000. Known for his self-described “feral party content,” Edelman discussed his TikTok career on Your Rich BFF, a finance podcast hosted by Vivian Tu. “So $768,000 is the top number, 20 percent of that goes to management, so were down to, like, what $550k? From $550k, $200,000 of that goes to taxes, Edelman said. Just the way it goes. Now were down to $330k. After the $330k, you have your expenses. I have a team now, so its like, lawyer, accountant, therapist . . . its insane. After doing the math, the 28-year-old revealed he wound up pocketing, probably about $300,000still a far cry from his previous $40,000 salary working in the fashion industry. I grew up, literally, dirt poor, so this is insane, he told Tu. My parents made enough money to put food on the table, but they didn’t have savings. We lived paycheck to paycheck. I knew when I grew up, I wanted to be more financially secure. (Fast Company has reached out to Edelman for comment.) Edelmans transparency has encouraged a wave of salary disclosures across social media. Still, Edelman is the exceptionnot the rule. In 2023, 48% of creator-earners made $15,000 or less, according to a 2024 report by the Wall Street Journal, pointing to figures from NeoReach, an influencer marketing agency. Just 13% made upwards of $100,000. Theres also the racial pay gap to account for. Influencers like @aliyahsinterlude and @claaaarke joined the conversation on TikTok, addressing pay disparities and the different expectations put upon creators of color in the industry. A 2024 report from SevenSix Agency, a British influencer marketing and talent management agency, revealed stark pay disparities based on ethnicity, with white influencers earning up to 50% more than their BAME counterparts. For example, when it comes to Instagram Reels, white influencers earn an average of 1,637.62 ($2,100.92) per post, while Black influencers make 1,080.41 ($1,386.07). South Asian influencers average 1,135.00 ($1,456.10), Southeast Asian influencers 700.63 ($898.85), and East Asian influencers 1,009.55 ($1,295.16). Edelman acknowledged this pay disparity in a follow-up video on his TikTok page. This is why salary transparency is important, he explained. In every industry, in every walk of life. We don’t know what we don’t know. For us to be able to have open conversations about what we are making gives us the edge to then negotiate what we are actually worth.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||