Paying for more smog?

After more than four years of stalling by the Environmental Protection Agency, a federal appellate court just might finally consider whether the agency used junk science to force both gas prices and smog levels higher.

I say “just might” because it looks like the court is about to sweep the matter under the rug in EPA’s favor.

On Feb. 14, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is to hear arguments in National Alternative Fuels Association (NAFA) vs. EPA. The lawsuit centers on EPA rules issued in 2000 mandating lower urban ground-level ozone by reducing the sulfur in gasoline — the “Tier 2 standards.”

By way of background, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 directed EPA to issue regulations reducing emissions from motor vehicles, including those contributing to ozone, such as volatile organic hydrocarbons (VOCs) and nitrogen oxide (NOx). These standards resulted in reformulated gasoline, which has been in the market for some time.

The law also directed the EPA to study whether further emission reductions would be required after the reformulated gasoline rules were put into effect. This study was then used by EPA to justify issuing the “Tier 2” standards. Here’s where the controversy begins.

EPA claimed that, unless low-sulfur gasoline was mandated nationwide, the emissions reduction under the Tier 2 rules might be nullified — citing automakers’ dubious concerns that conventional gasoline might harm the new emissions-control equipment required by the rules. This claim was tested and validated in its study, according to EPA.

According to NAFA’s lawsuit, however, a report done for NAFA by a leading independent emissions-testing laboratory indicates EPA rigged the test to achieve a preordained result.

“It was concluded that [the] methodology used by EPA was faulty and that the data used did not support the conclusion that emissions from Tier 2 vehicles [caused harm to emissions equipment] … Emissions data from only four vehicles were used … an SUV, a pickup and two minivans. … The SUV [vehicle] emissions were weighted to represent two-thirds of the final estimate … ,” the laboratory concluded.

Adding insult to injury, EPA’s tests were then introduced into the public rulemaking record after it was too late for public comment, the NAFA lawsuit maintains.

Four years later, the public may be paying both in higher gasoline costs and more pollution because of EPA’s actions.

When asked about rising gas prices in an August 2004 interview on National Public Radio, economist Philip Verleger of the Institute for International Economics attributed the 50-cent increase between March and July on the EPA’s low-sulfur regulations and limitations on gasoline refinery capacity. NAFA estimates the low-sulfur rules cost in the 20- to 25-cent range.

But the ultimate irony — as noted by the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Kay Jones in 1999, using EPA’s own data — is the agency’s Tier 2 rules may actually worsen air pollution.

Although EPA characterizes NOx as a precursor to ozone, NOx reductions can actually increase or decrease ozone concentrations depending on the locations and emission rates of NOx and other air pollutants, says Mr. Jones. He cited work by the National Academy of Sciences.

“Smog in many urban areas increases when NOx concentrations are further reduced, while declines generally occur in less heavily populated downwind areas,” says Mr. Jones. His prediction has come true, say some leading atmospheric scientists — NOx reductions may, in fact, be increasing urban ozone levels around the country.

You would think a federal court would be eager to get involved where a federal agency may have used faulty scientific testing, increasing consumer costs and pollution. Yet the D.C. Court of Appeals seems on the verge of letting EPA get away with it.

Story Continues →