The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is ditching Biden-era rules that tightened limits on fine-particle pollution. This could lead to dirtier air and more premature deaths in the United States, under the Trump administration,
Finalised last year, it was supposed to reduce dangerous particulate matter measuring less than 2.5 micrometres, including soot, which is linked to heart attacks, strokes, respiratory illness, and lung cancer.
Critics argue that rolling back the rules puts industry profits ahead of public health. They argued that this approach weakens protections meant to keep vulnerable communities safe from toxic air.
Biden Admin's Clean-Air Rule
With this rule, the Biden administration had lowered the acceptable level of PM2.5 from 12.0 micrograms per cubic metre of air to 9.0 micrograms. This was estimated to prevent 4,500 premature deaths and 290,000 lost workdays by 2032.
Roughly one-thirtieth the width of a human hair, these particles can penetrate deep into the lungs and bloodstream.
The Trump administration's EPA argued that the previous rule 'was implemented without the rigorous, stepwise process that Congress requires', claiming the regulation exceeded the agency's authority, per Washington Post.
In court filings, the EPA requested that the rule be vacated ahead of the 7 February area designation deadline. 'EPA now confesses error and urges this Court to vacate the Rule', the agency stated, effectively abandoning the legal defence of the Biden-era regulation.
The Cost of Reversing Clean-Air Rule
Rolling back the rule came from industry concerns that stricter standards would be expensive.
The Biden administration estimated that compliance could cost the US economy up to £482 million ($590 million) each year. Manufacturers, refineries, and utilities warned that these tougher standards could hold up the construction of new plants or obtaining federal permits.
Paul Noe, vice president of public policy at the American Forest and Paper Association, said the allowed emission levels would leave 'insufficient headroom'.
West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrisey supports EPA's decision, saying the rollback would shield manufacturers, utilities, and families from unnecessary financial strain. Trump supporters echoed a similar sentiment as this could balance environmental safeguards with economic growth.
However, critics argue that health risks will be higher than any possible savings.
Health Risks, More Vulnerable Communities
An attorney from the Natural Resources Defense Council, described the decision as stripping Americans of 'their right to breathe clean, safe air, free from deadly soot pollution'.
He added that this places EPA on the side of polluters while asking courts to remove protections meant to prevent illness and death among Americans.
Earthjustice's senior attorney noted that the decision does not question the scientific evidence showing the harm of PM2.5. Instead, it avoids putting safer standards in place, leaving communities at greater risk.
After all, the Biden-era standards were particularly intended to address pollution in disadvantaged areas. This is where residents often face higher exposure to fine particulates. Removing these protections could massively affect these communities, increasing health inequality.
Legally, the EPA must review particulate pollution limits every five years. However, the agency's decision not to defend the Biden-era rule raises questions about whether stricter standards will ever be put in place to protect Americans from dirty air.
