As a critical election season swings into full gear, a new report reveals some fascinating disconnects between how people vote and the safety of the air they breathe. Using Environmental Protection Agency data, Dr. Vivian Thomson, a retired University of Virginia professor, and her study team analyzed the difference in health impacts from coal power plant pollution levels now and those in 2007, before two Clean Air Act regulations, the mercury and transport rules (the latter is formally called the Cross State Air Pollution Rule) went into force. Both rules are on a hit list that a coal executive sent to the White House, and the EPA has already drafted a repeal of the mercury rule.
The research team has made its results easy to understand in this excellent story map full of visuals -- called “Betraying the Base: The Potential Air Quality Impacts of President Trump’s Coal Advocacy.” In a nutshell, the study found that air quality has improved significantly in areas that are strongholds for Trump, thanks to coal air pollution regulations that his Administration is now aggressively working to repeal.
Trained as both a natural scientist and a political scientist, Thomson says she’s long studied maps of air pollution from power plants and election results maps. Most recently, she was struck by the areas of overlap with areas that have benefited significantly from power plant pollution reductions and those that voted for Trump. “There was a prospect of areas losing the gains these pollution standards had helped them reach,” said Thomson. “We wanted to see who’s got the most to gain and who has the most to lose.”
