- Jan 26, 2024
- 3 min read
Since 1970 many have wondered if the Clean Air Act has made a difference in reducing air pollution despite population growth. However, the answer isn't as simple as a "Yes" or "No.
On the one hand, some anti-environmental circles believe there is not an air pollution problem to fix (as they drive their Teslas to keep up with the Joneses) and are unsure why it was even a policy. Then there are others that think we already have too many environmental policies in place that are making things more expensive than they need to be.
On the other hand, some environmental circles believe the Clean Air Act has made a difference, and then others believe that it has only benefited some and has systemically exposed communities of color to more air pollution. In my opinion, it has made a difference, but the benefits have not been equal across the board especially for low income communities.
And while many have studied the data to try an prove their respective cases, the data in this field is a little extra tricky and skeptics abound. There are constant attempts to debunk the notion it has helped improve air quality and to undermine new supporting policies. However, a new study on hard to dilute data has come out this month.
A group of 9 social scientists, led by Yanelli Nunez, PhD from Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health analyzed various data sets covering a 40 year time span, going all the way back to the beginning of the Clean Air Act in 1970.
Their study, An environmental justice analysis of air pollution emissions in the United States from 1970 to 2010, was recently published in Nature Communications on January 17, 2024 and they evaluated air pollution changes in 6 core source generation sectors:
Overall the study finds that the U.S. has seen reductions in air pollution emissions from various pollution sources since the Clean Air Act was enacted in 1970. The Clean Air Act has in fact helped to substantially improve air quality in the U.S., which is something to celebrate. The study's findings also validate environmental justice concerns that some communities bear a higher burden of air pollution, and more importantly, it provides hard to dispute evidence for environmental justice naysers.
Specifically the data reveals the following key findings:
Median family income was a driver in air pollution reductions in the major pollution sources.
Counties with median family incomes above $75,000 had larger declines in industry, energy, transportation, residential and commercial related emissions.
Racial and ethnic air pollution disparities exist, particularly in the industry and energy pollution generation sectors.
Mitigating traffic-related pollution in the most burdened areas will be key in reducing current racial, ethnic and economic disparities and preventing them from getting worse as a result of the current electric vehicle adoption trends among higher income households.
In an interview with Columbia Magazine, one of the researchers, Marianthi Kioumourtzoglou, notes that in the study they "provide information about potential racial/ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities in air pollution sources," which can inform future policy development and complement local-level analysis.
Nunez also shares that "policies specifically targeting reductions in overburdened populations could support more just reductions in air pollution and reduce disparities in air pollution exposure." The lessons learned from the 53 years of the Clean Air Act should be used to address the fact that air quality has not improved for everyone, especially as we develop policies to transition to renewable energy resources, "which will have a collateral impact on air quality and, as a result, on public health.
