Ozone Regulations Target Ohio Economy

By Marc Kilmer, posted November 30, 2007

Who can be opposed to clean air?

No one disagrees on the goal, but there are a variety of ways to get there.

Unfortunately, those who favor heavy-handed government regulations to achieve higher air quality have controlled the debate. It does not matter if these regulations will achieve their goals or will just lead to job losses.

As the federal government prepares to revise its standards for ozone levels, it would be a good idea for the public to know that there is much more to this debate than "clean air." Before new regulations are enacted that will harm Ohio’s economy, we need to determine whether or not they are really needed and how much they will cost.

Although you would never know it by the rhetoric of environmental groups, our nation has been experiencing improved air quality over the past 40 years. Since 1970, the emissions of the six main air pollutants have declined by 54 percent. Ozone, responsible for smog and the target of new regulations, has fallen 21 percent since 1980, even as our economic output has more than tripled during this period. Both emissions from power plants and vehicles are on track to being reduced significantly over the next few decades.

Even with this decline, the air is not 100 percent clean and interest groups are pressuring the Environmental Protection Agency to lower the acceptable level of ozone in the air from 84 parts per billion (ppb) to as low as 60 ppb.

There are two questions policymakers should consider before supporting new air pollution regulations: is this regulation the best way to clean the air? And, are the benefits from the new regulation worth the costs the economy would suffer?  For the proposed ozone regulations, the answer to both questions appears to be "no."

This answer is especially true when one considers the cost of new regulations. Meeting current ozone standards costs our economy around $20 billion a year. The amount would increase if the current standards are made even tougher. These burdensome regulations would be especially devastating in Ohio. The state has experienced a loss of almost 250,000 manufacturing jobs since 2000. Strict new ozone regulations would hit the state’s manufacturing sector hard, likely leading to even more of these jobs leaving the state.

There is also the chance that farmers would be targeted in an attempt to bring ozone levels into compliance with these proposed standards. In a state where 14 percent of the workforce is employed in agriculture, this is a troubling possibility. Fewer jobs means a loss of income and access to health care for many throughout the state.

Not only will the economy be harmed, but state and local tax dollars will be diverted to make changes to meet the new standards. This means less money for education, transportation, and other government needs.

In short, these new regulations would hurt Ohio workers and taxpayers without producing any significant benefit. That is why a diverse coalition of groups is speaking out against the proposed standards in addition to elected officials from across the state. Groups representing Ohio’s two largest industries - manufacturing and agriculture - are in the forefront of the opposition. This includes organizations such as the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce, the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, and the National Association of Manufacturers.

Skepticism about the plan is also coming from other sources. For example, the federal Environmental Protection Agency's own air chief, Robert Meyers, recently addressed a panel on this issue and stated that "there is a lot of uncertainty" and "other esteemed scientists are saying that the data is not sufficient to change the standard."  This groundswell of opposition poses serious questions about the science being used to support the new standard.

Clean air is a priority. We have been making remarkable progress in this direction over the past 40 years. New standards for ozone emissions will do little to make our air cleaner and will hurt both workers and taxpayers throughout Ohio. The federal Environmental Protection Agency should consider the harm its actions could cause. A lower ozone standard is just not worth the cost.

Marc Kilmer is a policy analyst with the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, a research and educational institute located in Columbus, Ohio.