Experts Warn: Reversing Biden’s Climate Policies Could Threaten Pennsylvania’s Health and Environment

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is considering rolling back limits on greenhouse gas emissions from coal and natural gas power plants. Critics say this could harm health and the environment for many people in Pennsylvania.

The EPA estimates that this proposal could save the power sector around $19 billion in regulatory costs over the next 20 years. Thomas Schuster, the director of the Pennsylvania chapter of the Sierra Club, warns that relaxing these standards could increase health risks from extreme weather and respiratory illnesses. He emphasized that with climate change already upon us, it’s crucial to push forward with clean energy initiatives instead of taking steps back.

Schuster explained that the EPA must follow a formal process to replace any current regulations. He encourages people to share their opinions during the public comment period about this proposal. However, the EPA claims rolling back these regulations could lower energy costs and support other sectors, like manufacturing.

The concern is that such deregulation might lead to more emissions of harmful substances, including mercury, known for its detrimental effects on children’s development. Schuster pointed out that climate change has already led to extreme weather events, like devastating storms in Pennsylvania. Last April, for instance, heavy rains caused landslides, while the previous summer recorded some of Pittsburgh’s hottest days ever.

In South Dakota, lawmakers are considering the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," which could result in thousands of lost jobs due to the repeal of clean energy funding and programs. According to Daniel O’Brien from Energy Innovation, up to 1,600 jobs could disappear by 2030 in South Dakota alone, reflecting a larger national trend where around 840,000 jobs could be at stake if this bill passes. As the state continues to benefit from low energy prices and new manufacturing jobs tied to renewable energy, shifting resources back to fossil fuels could raise household energy bills significantly.

Many experts, including O’Brien, caution that cutting clean energy incentives may lead to industries moving out of the state, seeking more favorable conditions elsewhere. Additionally, recent data shows a predicted drop in sales of zero-emission vehicles from over 50% in 2030 to around 30% in the following years, as the economic landscape shifts.

Switching gears, Washington Gas in D.C. is undertaking a large-scale project to replace gas pipes at a cost of over $200 million. Advocates argue this shift may not be the best approach for public health or the environment. Claire Mills from the Chesapeake Climate Action Network argues that many of the pipes being replaced are modern and not likely to leak. Instead, she urges a phased transition to clean energy.

Finally, in West Virginia, Appalachian Power is seeking to raise rates and modify how solar energy is compensated for homeowners. With residents already burdened by rising costs, energy advocates are urging them to voice their concerns in upcoming public hearings.

Overall, while there are many discussions about energy policies across various states, the consensus among environmentalists and experts is clear: pressing forward with clean energy is vital for public health, economic stability, and the environment.

To learn more about ongoing energy discussions, check out the Energy Innovation report and EPA proposals.

Source link

htmlcss bootstrap, multi level menu, submenu, treeview nav menu examples