Aug 26, 2018 4 min read

Premature deaths ranging from 470 to 1,400 per year.

More than 40,000 new cases of exacerbated asthma annually.

At least 21,000 additional missed days of school.

All of this will happen by 2030 if the Affordable Clean Energy rule proposed by the Trump administration last week goes into effect.

More coughing and wheezing, more trouble breathing and more lives being cut short is apparently just the price we have to pay for making America great again.

Of course, much of the subtext of the “Make America Great Again” slogan isn’t about truly making America great but rolling back the clock. And the Affordable Clean Energy rule is almost expressly designed to keep old-school, coal-burning power plants open just a little longer, even as investors and much of the rest of the industrialized world see the potential in renewable energy or natural gas.

And what’s a little more air pollution if you can close your eyes and believe it’s 1960 again?

The Affordable Clean Energy rule is the replacement for the Clean Power Plan that was put forward by the Obama administration, but never went into effect because of multiple legal challenges. The Clean Power Plan would have quickened the pace of coal-burning power plants being put out to pasture through inducements for utilities to use renewable energy sources, and the establishment of nationwide goals for reducing carbon emissions that contribute to climate change. The Affordable Clean Energy rule, on the other hand, allows states to set pollution rules for power plants, conveniently forgetting pollution does not thoughtfully respect state boundaries, but can drift from one jurisdiction to another. The Affordable Clean Energy rule also settles for minor efficiency improvements at coal-burning power plants.

It should be noted the estimates of deaths and asthma that could result from this plan come not from an environmental organization, but from the Trump administration’s own Environmental Protection Agency. As The New York Times noted, “instead of listing the health gains of the Trump plan … it is instead describing the effect of the Trump plan as benefits lost.” Andrew Wheeler, acting head of the EPA, served up anodyne promises that the rule would provide “the states and regulated community the certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance.”

Environmental groups swiftly denounced the rule. The Clean Air Council said it would “increase harmful air pollution and premature deaths by propping up the nation’s struggling and obsolete coal fleet well beyond its expiration date.” It also pointed out that the six remaining coal-burning power plants in Pennsylvania are in areas where 30 percent of the surrounding populations live below the poverty line, and that three of the six have violated the Clean Air Act within the last year.

If there’s a silver lining to be had, it’s the likelihood that the march to renewable energy will continue. According to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, almost all the energy capacity added in the first quarter of this year – a full 95 percent – came from renewables like wind, solar, hydropower and geothermal. In contrast, no additional capacity was added for coal.

“The simple reality is that there are only three large-scale options: natural gas, wind and solar,” according to Pavel Molchanov, who analyzes energy markets for the Raymond James financial firm. He told The New Republic in May, “It would be ludicrous for anyone to invest in (new coal plants) given how dreadful the economics are.”

If that’s the case, why is this administration so intent on keeping these outmoded plants on life support?