HomePublications

EPA Speeds Ahead with Ill-Conceived Vehicle and Gasoline Standards

Susan E. Dudley, Wendy Gramm

December 20, 1999

Republican-American

The Clinton Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency seem bound and determined to change the nation's driving habits, despite judicial rebukes and statutory constraints, and they are now manipulating statistical models to promote their agenda. 

EPA is rushing to issue draconian new "Tier 2" vehicle emissions and gasoline regulations in the next few weeks.  These regulations were proposed in May to bring the nation into compliance with stringent national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone, which EPA issued amid much controversy in 1997.

Just one day after EPA proposed these vehicle and gasoline regulations, however, the courts struck down the NAAQS on which they were based.  In fact, the courts said EPA had construed sections of the Clean Air Act "so loosely as to render them unconstitutional delegations of legislative power," and had ignored offsetting health benefits of ozone in the atmosphere.

Instead of throwing in the towel, EPA has used it to flog its air quality model until it has confessed the results EPA seeks - that the regulations are necessary for much of the nation to comply with the pre-existing NAAQS. The new modeling statistics contradict EPA's earlier analysis, but that doesn't deter EPA.  These statistics serve the purpose of supporting the agency's objective of restricting emissions of oxides of nitrogen from vehicles to 1/20^th of their current levels and reducing the sulfur content of gasoline to 1/10^th its current level.

So why do we care?  Don't the ends justify the means, with the ends being substantially improved air quality?  In fact, EPA admits that air quality will not improve significantly, and will actually get worse in some areas of the country. An EPA analysis that it has not publicized shows that the regulations could actually increase seasonal ozone concentrations in some parts of the country.  In other areas, the agency's statistical analyses shows that the lower vehicle emissions could reduce ozone concentrations by .0004 parts per million.  In layman's terms, that's only a 1.3 percent reduction.  This results because, though vehicle emissions can combine with sunlight to form ozone, they don't do so in a direct fashion, and the resulting ozone levels depend on various manmade and natural factors.

And of course, getting rid of the last vestiges of sulfur in gasoline doesn't come cheap.  Consumers will cover the costs - through rising vehicle and gas prices -- to the tune of between $3.5 and $6 billion per year.  By EPA's understated estimates, consumers will pay hundreds of dollars more per vehicle.

The areas of the country that would experience deteriorating air quality include parts of the Great Lakes region, parts of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Southern California, Utah, Washington, Colorado, Southern Florida, and even parts of the Northeast. The Western States will be hardest hit by the costs. EPA data reveal that they will pay ten times the national average cost per pound of pollutant removed, yet will receive no benefits because they live in areas that already meet the current NAAQS standard. The only places in the country that can't meet the current air quality standards are California, which would not be included under the Tier 2 regulations, and a handful of localized areas around Houston and in the Northeast.

If, in reality, only Houston and some areas in the Northeast might benefit from the regulations, why should the entire country make drastic, costly changes in the cars we drive and the fuels we use?  It's almost as if air quality means less to EPA than proving it can't be bossed around by the courts.

Our recommendation is that this issue be addressed not by EPA, but by the states or regional councils, such as the Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG), which have been remarkably successful at designing innovative solutions to their own pollution problems.  Because, no matter what EPA claims, what may affect one area may be a non-issue in another.

Americans want clean air, and they're getting it.  Without new "cleaner car" initiatives, ozone concentrations have declined by at least 30% since 1978.  Americans also like to drive their cars, whether it be to the grocery store, to take their kids to school, or to go on a family vacation to the country or the shore.  Right now, Americans can still have both. But if EPA has its way, and moves forward with Tier 2 regulations, driving might become a rare luxury only the well-to-do can afford.