Burning coal may cost the public of the United States up to half a trillion dollars in hidden damage

Interesting study released by the US EPA:

Second Prospective Study - 1990 to 2020

In March 2011, EPA issued the Second Prospective Report which looked at the results of the Clean Air Act from 1990 to 2020. According to this study, the direct benefits from the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments are estimated to reach almost $2 trillion for the year 2020, a figure that dwarfs the direct costs of implementation ($65 billion).

In 2020, the Clean Air Act Amendments will prevent over 230,000 early deaths. Most of the $2 trillion in economic benefits (about 85 percent) are attributable to reductions in premature mortality associated with reductions in ambient particulate matter.

A Good Investment for America

This net improvement in economic welfare is projected to occur because cleaner air leads to better health and productivity for American workers as well as savings on medical expenses for air pollution-related health problems. The beneficial economic effects of these two improvements alone are projected to more than offset the expenditures for pollution control.

www.epa.gov...

Recommendations

Clean Air Act programs address a wide variety of air pollutants beyond the fine particle and
ozone pollution which emerged as the primary focus of this study’s quantitative results. The
data and modeling tools needed to estimate the health and environmental consequences of
these other pollutants, however, are limited. There is an ongoing need for investment in
research to improve the coverage of potentially important effects in benefit‐cost studies of air
pollution control programs. Additional research is also needed to reduce uncertainties in the
estimates of effects already incorporated in benefit‐cost studies, especially relatively significant
effects such as those associated with fine particle‐ and ozone‐related premature mortality and
the economic value of avoiding those outcomes.


Programs to reduce key Clean Air Act pollutants through national ambient concentration
standards such as those for fine particles and ozone, programs to address air pollutants with
more localized affects such as toxic compounds and heavy metals, and programs and policies
which reduce emissions of greenhouse gases may impose various requirements on a given
source of emissions. Future air pollution program assessments would be more useful to
policymakers and the public if they were designed to provide insights on the combined effects
of programs to address these different categories of air pollution.

www.epa.gov...

reply to post by liejunkie01


Thanks for posting. I'll reply tomorrow with some ideas.

reply to post by liejunkie01


If your bill is $450/month then it sounds like you'd be best off doing as much as you can to reduce energy consumption in your home first before looking into something like PV solar panels.

There are numerous things you can do, depending on where you live and how much you want to spend.

It sounds like you probably have a drafty house, so by far the cheapest yet most effective thing to do in that case would be invest in some caulking/weather stripping and a smoke pen. Find the leaks and seal them up. Air exchange can account for about half of the heat loss in a typical older home.

Beyond that there's all sorts of options from better insulation/windows to tankless water heaters to high efficiency furnaces. These things are often interconnected too - e.g. the better windows you get, the more you reduce your peak heating requirement, the less you have to spend on a new furnace.

There's also all the little things that add up. Just practice good habits: short showers, cold water wash your laundry, don't waste electricity, use CFL or (better yet LED) light bulbs.

And if you're the industrious DIY type then there are also plenty of projects you can try out yourself. Again it depends on budget, priorities, and the climate where you live but have a look through this site for loads of ideas:

Build It Solar