Your Environmental Protection Agency is using "junk math" to replace "sound science."
The EPA says the cost to the power industry to limit mercury emissions far exceeds the public health payoff. But it turns out that a Harvard University study reached the exact opposite results. And that study was paid for by the EPA, co-authored by one EPA scientist and peer reviewed by two more EPA scientists. It was the bureaucrats and political appointees who rejected the science.
The study found that tougher rules the EPA honchos rejected would have saved taxpayers $5 billion a year through reduced health care expenses. The EPA honchos had said the tougher rules would have cost the electric power industry $750 million a year.
But since the mercury findings didn't mesh with the EPA leaderships' wants -- and those of the power industry -- the big wigs decided to ignore it.
It's hard to follow sound science when you refuse to listen to the sound. (MSNBC)