Correction: An Analysis of Costs and Health Co-Benefits for a U.S. Power Plant Carbon Standard

Re-envisioning EPA and its work in the post-Trump era: perspectives from EPA employees

The Trump administration has severely curtailed the work of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA has rolled back environmental protections, lost ground on addressing climate change and environmental justice, and shed large numbers of experienced staff. All of this has accelerated a longer-term decline in EPA resources, expertise, and authority. Here, we present perspectives of EPA employees and retirees on reconfiguring and strengthening the agency to address current and future environmental health problems, based on qualitative data obtained through 100 semi-structured interviews with 76 current and former EPA employees. Interviewees emphasized a number of internal and external issues, including a hyper-partisan context in which the agency operates, lack of public understanding of the extent of domestic and global environmental problems, budget shortfalls, staffing and leadership challenges, reduced scientific capacity and use of science in decision-making, insufficient attention to environmental justice, and lagging technology. We argue that reforms cannot only be expert-driven but must also come from the public, incorporating community driven solutions and focusing on remedying environmental injustice.

Air Quality-Related Health Benefits of Energy Efficiency in the United States

While it is known that energy efficiency (EE) lowers power sector demand and emissions, study of the air quality and public health impacts of EE has been limited. Here, we quantify the air quality and mortality impacts of a 12% summertime (June, July, and August) reduction in baseload electricity demand. We use the AVoided Emissions and geneRation Tool (AVERT) to simulate plant-level generation and emissions, the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model to simulate air quality, and the Environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP) to quantify mortality impacts. We find EE reduces emissions of NO _x by 13.2%, SO₂ by 12.6%, and CO₂ by 11.6%. On a nationwide, summer average basis, ambient PM_2.5 is reduced 0.55% and O₃ is reduced 0.45%. Reduced exposure to PM_2.5 avoids 300 premature deaths annually (95% CI: 60 to 580) valued at $2.8 billion ($0.13 billion to $9.3 billion), and reduced exposure to O₃ averts 175 deaths (101 to 244) valued at $1.6 billion ($0.15 billion to $4.5 billion). This translates into a health savings rate of $0.049/kWh ($0.031/kWh for PM_2.5 and $0.018/kWh for O₃). These results illustrate the importance of capturing the health benefits of EE and its potential as a strategy to achieve air standards.