By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Environmental Protection Agency has announced a change in its approach to air pollution regulations. The agency will no longer calculate the monetary value of health benefits, such as avoided healthcare costs and prevented deaths, when assessing rules for fine particulate matter and ozone, focusing instead on costs to industry. This shift, part of a broader business-friendly realignment, has drawn criticism from environmental and public health advocates who view it as a dangerous abandonment of the agency’s core mission to protect public health. While the EPA insists it remains committed to its mission and will still quantify emissions, critics argue that the change could lead to weakened safeguards, potentially allowing increased pollution and disregarding the value of lives saved and health benefits.
Read the original article here
EPA to stop calculating money and lives saved by curbs on air pollution, is that the gist of things? Well, it seems that way. It’s like the EPA is deciding to take a break from quantifying the good that clean air regulations do. Instead of figuring out how many lives are saved or how much money is preserved due to cleaner air, they’re going to… well, not. It feels like a move that prioritizes business interests over public health and environmental well-being.
The working class, the ones who are most affected by air pollution, seem to be seen as expendable. This action by the EPA could be interpreted as a lack of concern for the health and welfare of everyday citizens. It’s a sentiment that suggests prioritizing profits over people, the corporations over communities.
This decision seems to align with a broader agenda where corporate interests and profit margins overshadow concerns about public health and environmental protection. There’s a feeling that this is part of a pattern, and it all feels like a bit of a slap in the face to anyone who breathes air. It’s almost as if some people in power see no value in human life, or at least, don’t prioritize it.
There’s talk of this action being part of a larger plan, a dismantling of regulations and protections that have been in place for years. The move to stop calculating the benefits of air pollution controls fits right into this. Without these calculations, it’s easier to claim that environmental regulations are too costly and ineffective. It feels as if the goal is to make it seem as though these environmental regulations are a waste of money, without accounting for the actual costs and lives saved.
The lack of empathy from some of those in power is a recurring theme here. It’s a disconnect from the experiences and concerns of the general public. If something doesn’t directly affect them or their immediate circle, it’s apparently not a problem. This attitude can lead to decisions that harm the environment and public health, especially when it comes to air pollution.
The lack of any measurement, of any tracking of positive outcomes, it feels like it’s a way to hide the truth. They’re removing the data that proves the positive impact of clean air initiatives. Then they can get away with saying that these things are too costly and aren’t doing any good. It’s like stopping the vote count when you don’t like the results.
This approach is about more than just numbers and calculations; it’s about setting a tone. It’s a message that signals the priorities of those in power. It’s a message that says business interests are more important than human lives and the health of the planet.
It’s also about a system where people who already have power, use that power to enrich themselves. There’s a call for reform, a desire for those in positions of authority to be held accountable. And a call for those in power to not live in a world disconnected from the people they are supposed to serve.
It’s about the importance of elections and holding those in power responsible. It’s about not allowing the corruption to continue. It all comes back to a sense of needing to protect the people and the planet from those who would exploit them for personal gain.
And finally, it’s about the hope for real change, for a system where people’s lives and the environment truly matter. It’s about a world where corporations are held accountable, and the health of communities takes precedence over corporate profits. It’s about a world where the air is clean, and the value of human life is recognized in policy and action.