Return to the ground floor of this tower
Return to the Main Courtyard
Return to Fort Freedom's home page
]]]]]]]] THE ANSWERS ON ACID RAIN FALL ON DEAF EARS [[[[[[[[
(3/7/90)
From The Wall Street Journal, 6 March 1990, p. A20:3.
Mr Singer, a professor of environmental sciences at the
University of Virginia, has written ``Global Climate Change''
(1989) and ``The Ocean in Human Affairs'' (1990), both published
by Paragon House. [He is also a charter subscriber of AtE.]
[Kindly uploaded by Freeman 10602PANC]
A billion-dollar solution for a million-dollar problem: This
is perhaps a facile way to summarize the acid-rain issue, but
it's not far from the truth. The proposal to control emissions
that could spur acid rain -- now being debated on the Senate
floor as part of the Clean Air Bill -- could cost $5 billion to
$10 billion a year; the benefits, in terms of reduced damage, are
uncertain and, at best, quite small.
This appears to be the conclusion of the National Acid
Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP), which is just
completing at 10-year scientific study. This monumental federal
program may be worth every penny of the half billion dollars
spent -- if only it substantiates that the ecological damage from
acid rain would take decades, not years, to occur, if it occurs
at all. There is time for measured responses that avoid the
costly mistakes that come from panicky over-reaction.
Acid deposition, commonly referred to as acid rain, occurs
when sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, emitted from fuel-
burning power plants, motor vehicles and other man-made and
natural sources, are transformed into acid compounds. Carried by
the winds, they either fall out in dry form or rain out in water
droplets, often quite far from their sources of emission. The
scientific debate has been about the precise relationship that
the levels and locations of emissions have with the acidity and
locations of the rain, and about the severity of the ecological
effects. The policy debate has been about the degree and timing
of emission control and about who -- and what sectors and what
regions -- should pay the bills (read: billions) that ultimately
are passed on to consumers.
NAPAP brings some answers to these debates. First, America's
best-kept secrets: From 1973 to 1988, sulfur dioxide emissions
decreased 23%, to 24 million tons, despite a 45% increase in coal
use; nitrogen oxides have declined 14% since a 1978 peak. Both
decreases are the result of current clean-air laws.
And now the kicker, the outcome of this grand experiment in
emissions reduction: ``No apparent trend in the acidity of
rainfall has been detected,'' according to James Mahoney,
director of NAPAP, in October testimony before Congress.
``Because of complex atmospheric reactions, percentage reductions
in emissions may not result in similar percentage reductions in
depositions,'' he added. Thus the relationship is not at all
proportional -- as was claimed in a 1983 National Academy of
Sciences report, widely used as the basis for proposals to cut
sulfur dioxide emissions, including the Senate bill.
NAPAP also counters the common wisdom that acid rain effects
are caused only by sulfur dioxide from industrial sources. The
Adirondacks, Catskills and Poconos are all downwind from major
sulfur dioxide sources in the Midwest, yet according to NAPAP,
only 11% of the lakes in the Adirondacks and 2% in the
Catskills/Poconos have enough acidification to damage fish.
Mostly small lakes are affected, further suggesting that local
geology and soil drainage may be a contributing factor in
acidification.
Another surprise: Except for red spruce at high elevations,
acid rain hardly seems to bother trees, and may even contribute
to fertilization. Similarly, agricultural crops are sensitive to
ozone, but not to acid rain. Acid rain's effects on materials,
buildings and statues are difficult to quantify. In spite of
lurid claims by the American Lung Association, there is no solid
evidence on health effects. Finally, acid droplets do cause some
deterioration of visibility, but so do all particulates,
including sand and dust.
So what's all the fuss about? Asking this question about the
emperor's clothes got a former NAPAP director into trouble. His
successor, Mr. Mahoney, had to admit to Sen. Daniel Patrick
Moynihan (D., N.Y.) at the October hearing that even heroic
efforts to reduce emissions may not improve small lakes located
in acidic drainage basins -- certainly not very quickly.
Treating these lakes with lime every few years would be far more
cost-effective.
Acid rain has become a symbol of national sin -- the sin of
prosperity -- calling, it seems, for national expiation. We
offer in sacrifice jobs and economic growth. Scientific evidence
no longer seems to matter; nor does an analysis of the cost of
controls vs. the benefits that might be achieved. The odds are
that the debate in Congress on the Clean Air Bill will continue
to ignore the NAPAP results -- the only scientific basis for
determining benefits -- since NAPAP doesn't produce the answer
that regulators want to hear.
Why does the bill still call for a sulfur dioxide reduction of
10 million tons? Why not two million, or five million, or even
all 24 million tons? It's hard to answer this when there is no
cost-benefit analysis to guide policy. Yet everyone knows that
as the degree of control is raised, costs escalate wildly while
benefits increase only slightly.
The proper course is not hard to find. With no impending
catastrophe on the horizon, the current improvements due to
existing clean-air laws should be speed up by easing certain
restrictions rather than by imposing new ones. For example:
o Encourage policies that lead to a more rapid replacement of
old power plants and of older, heavily polluting cars.
o Allow a free choice of the technology or of any other
measure to reduce emissions, coupled with an expanded system of
flexible emissions trading.
o Increase the utilization of existing nuclear plants.
o Conserve more energy wherever it makes economic sense.
Only after this first stage of emission reductions has been
exhausted, and any reduction in acid rain documented, should
legislators even consider the more drastic control measures that
threaten the economic well-being of Americans.
* * *
Return to the ground floor of this tower
Return to the Main Courtyard
Return to Fort Freedom's home page