The Hindu Business Line : US forced to pay attention to emission problems

THOUGH the US walked out of the Kyoto Protocol on the worldwide problems created by emissions, regardless of where they originated, on the grounds that the matter `needed more thought', it has been forced to pay evermore attention to local problems created by emissions.

This March, the US Environmental Protection Agency issued the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) that requires 28 eastern states to `be good neighbours, helping states downwind by controlling airborne emissions at their source'.

The eastern states have higher rates of mortality and morbidity than those in the west. The localised effects of `emissions at source' are thought to be a major reason for this. CAIR will permanently cap emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in eastern US.

Significantly, the cap has been restricted to emissions that have a more localised effect than to those which, via their effects on global warming, cause a major increase in the incidence, intensity and unpredictability of catastrophic atmospheric events worldwide, namely carbon dioxide and hydrofluorocarbons.

When fully implemented by 2015, CAIR is expected to reduce SO2 emissions in the 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia by over 99 per cent, and Nox emissions by over 60 per cent from 2003 levels.

For greenhouse gases, however, no restrictions have been stipulated even on the rate of growth over the years, let alone any requirement to cut back on present levels.

Reduced SO2 and NOx emissions are expected to result in `$85-100 billion in health benefits and to substantially reduce premature mortality in eastern US.

About 17,000 premature deaths are expected to be averted each year, apart from millions of lost work and schooldays and tens of thousands of non-fatal heart attacks and hospital admissions.

The proposed caps are not absolute for any given emission-generating producer. The producer has the right to trade over-emissions for under-emissions in much the same way as the emission trading mechanism available under the Kyoto Protocol.

The difference is that in this case the money stays within the US, instead of flowing to countries such as India, which account for the lion's share of emissions reductions worldwide. Furthermore, CAIR leaves out of its purview the pollutants that, at the global level, most urgently need to be taken into account.

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page