By Alexis Weiss | Cronkite News

WASHINGTON – Arizona does everything it can to improve air quality, but cannot meet federal standards as long as pollution from other jurisdictions can travel across borders. the director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality testified Wednesday.

Karen Peters said the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed “Good Neighbor Plan,” which would limit emissions in states where pollution affects downwind states, would address pollution in downwind states like Arizona. said it was “important” to She points to areas like Yuma, where smog itself is rare but still outside of clean air compliance.

“Yuma is heavily impacted by ozone shipments from California and Mexico,” Peters said. in testimony to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. “There is virtually nothing that can be done in terms of local emission reductions to reduce ozone pollution in the Yuma Non-Achieved Area.”

The same is true for the Phoenix Mesa area, and Peters said there are “very few, if any, emissions reductions left available” to help the area achieve clean air standards.

But critics public hearing He called the plan a costly and draconian attempt to force federal policy into states, saying it would force businesses and power plants to shut down.

“It threatens U.S. manufacturing, including the U.S. forest products industry.” Paul Noe Vice President of Public Policy for the American Forest Paper Association. “Ultimately, this is America’s workforce, the red and blue states, both rural and urban, in high-paying, highly skilled manufacturing jobs. is a threat to

of Good Neighbor Plan It calls for significant reductions in ozone-producing emissions from power plants and industrial facilities in 23 states whose odors are transported to other states. In addition to fossil fuel-fired power plants, it also applies to facilities that manufacture iron, steel, cement, paper, glass, petroleum and coal products, transportation of natural gas, and mining of metal ores.

Most of the states affected by the plan are subject to both power plant and industrial limits, but California is subject to industrial emissions limits only, while Alabama, Minnesota and Wisconsin regulate power plants only. There is a need.

Arizona is not currently one of the states covered by the rule, but an EPA spokesperson said Wednesday that “further analysis is required” as to whether the rule applies to the state.

Dr. David Hill, director of the American Lung Association, hits back at critics who cite the economic costs of the new regulations, saying they can actually encourage more economic activity by reducing the health burden. claimed.

“The EPA predicts it will prevent premature death, avoid hospitalization, and reduce asthma exacerbations.” Hill testified.

“More than 400,000 fewer people will be absent from school, and parents will lose their jobs when their children miss school. More than 25,000 days of lost work will be averted,” he said. “So enacting this rule would bring significant benefits to health care and the economy.”

Maryland Democratic Senator Ben Cardin acknowledged concerns about the cost of the plan, but said the health benefits outweighed them. The challenge for lawmakers is to find that sweet spot, “because the risk factor to our population and the cost factor to our population show that the federal government today is not living up to its responsibilities.”

But Wyoming Republican Senator Cynthia Ramis said the rule would not force the plant to close, removing more than 14,000 megawatts of electricity from the system and “crippling” affordable electricity for the country. said he was concerned.

“The premature forced shutdown of the country’s coal-fired power plants is a danger to America’s energy security and grid reliability,” Lumis said. “For this reason alone, not to mention his 90,000 direct coal mining jobs in 26 states, including Arizona, Oregon and Pennsylvania, this administration must change course.”

Senator Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) argued against the plan on the economic arguments, citing Yuma, which borders California to the west and Mexico to the south. The city of less than 100,000 people could face severe economic restrictions if its neighbors do not take responsibility for the pollution they are causing in the area, he said.

“There is a limit to economic growth in the region because the region exceeds EPA’s ozone standards,” Kelly said. Of Yuma’s pollution, “10% comes from somewhere in Arizona, but essentially none from Yuma County.”

About 40% of the ozone in the Phoenix area is produced within the state, but the rest comes from other sources, such as natural background sources and other states and even countries, Peters said. … apparently …

Kelly was unable to answer Lumis’ question about how much pollution could be coming from Chinese manufacturing. He said he could see the sand and smog drifting across it.

Peters said there are things that can be done to reduce pollution in the area, but many of them are outside the state’s jurisdiction, making the situation “frustrating” for her. can not meet Peters said the state has made some progress in improving air quality.

“The Maricopa region has seen a decline in ozone emissions over the last 20 years,” Peters said after the hearing. “But time is not on our side. We have to do it sooner.”