A new report from the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI)—Green for All: Integrating Air Quality and Environmental Justice into the Clean Energy Transition—argues that policies focused solely on reductions in carbon dioxide may increase the harms from other pollutants on Black, Hispanic, and low-income populations. Fossil fuel sources release greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide. No matter where it is released, more carbon dioxide contributes to the increase in global temperatures. However, burning fossil fuels also generate “co-pollutants” that have more local impacts. Ignoring those co-pollutants has costs to public health. Air pollution alone can decrease average life expectancy by 1.6 years. And these impacts tend to be concentrated low-income communities and communities of color due to the systematic siting of gas, oil and coal-fired power plants near their homes.
California—-which focused specifically on statewide greenhouse gases reductions throughout its cap-and-trade system—offers an example. With a modeled a 20 percent reduction in GHG emissions, the PERI report found a doubling in health and welfare impacts from co-pollutant and a tripling for Black residents in particular. A separate study in the journal, PLoS medicine, noted that California reduced emissions by replacing out-of-state coal energy with domestically sourced natural gas generation, causing an increase in co-pollutants.
The alternative to a sole focus on greenhouse gas reductions is a strategy that also requires reductions in co-pollutants, both nationally and in specific communities. The PERI report studied the results of adding these additional requirements to a 20% national reduction of CO2-equivalent emissions. The requirements are designed to emphasize the geographic distribution of air quality benefits and to reshape decisions on which gas plants are tapped for additional generation.
PERI found that mandating a 50 percent reduction in nationwide damages from co-pollutant generated $9.56 billion in benefits, while only costing an additional $4.81 billion. On top of this, emphasizing 50 percent damage reductions in black, brown, and low-income communities generated another $10.61 billion in benefits, while only costing $4.84 billion more. Without these additional requirements, these co-pollutant damages from natural gas increased by 30 percent - even if they fell overall across the country. They would disproportionately fall on Hispanic communities, who tend to live near gas-fired units. Not only do these communities benefit from an environmental-justice target, but they do so without a change in the overall gas-coal mix for the country.
These results have clear implications for decarbonization beyond the electricity sector. In a previous post, I noted the benefits of prioritizing Asian-American communities – who suffer disproportionately from vehicular air pollution – during the rollout of electric busses. Eliminating co-pollutant hotspots will also be crucial as the U.S. builds an electric charging infrastructure. Making the transition equitable will also make everyone healthier.
