Public Citizen Comments to the EPA Regarding Proposed Changes to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
Hello, my name is Haley Schulz. I am a Community Organizer with Public Citizen, a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest. I am firmly opposing the EPA’s proposal to repeal and delay the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program requirements.
Not only has the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program been a primary pillar in data transparency for the public, but it has benefited industry and communities, alike. While providing essential emission data, companies can be proactive and monitor emissions, providing cost avoidance by being proactive rather than reactive. Communities I work with rely on many monitoring tools, like FLIGHT, to actively check industry polluters and use that data to protect their community, as well as hold polluters in-check in congruence with state and federal regulators, like the EPA. The public already lost EJ Screen. Pulling further resources with transparent data that benefits both industry and the public is reckless.
As the EPA, you are beholden to the public first. The claim that the GHGRP “has no material impact on improving human health and the environment” is a baseless statement. Decades worth of robust data and facts have proven what the public at-large AND the EPA have recognized and known for years – greenhouse gas emissions are harmful not only to our environment and way of life, but to human health. Unchecked emissions will only lead to a higher cost of mortality and negatively impact our society as we know it.
I live in Houston, Texas, where we are one of the most polluted cities in the country. Our petrochemical and fossil fuel buildout is significantly higher than most cities and we are home to the largest coal plant in the state. Without a program that tracks and reports GHG emissions, the public will be left in the dark without knowing what is in their air. For communities with climate action plans or companies with sustainability reports, they all rely on access to this data. While companies self-report emission data, the public shares their lived experiences and research, and the regulators enforce protective regulations. By removing or delaying the reporting of GHG emission data, we are eliminating visibility and taking out an essential pillar of checks and balances.
To cut the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program will not save $2.4 billion, it will cost Americans with their lives. Neither this program nor holding polluters accountable drive up the cost of living – it is a part of business to either reduce emissions to protect Americans or pay the fine. Until GHG emissions are essentially halted, or counties reach attainment status for ozone, there will still be a need to monitor, report, and make the data accessible for GHG emissions.
Without transparency, there can be no accountability. And without accountability, like what this program provides, the public is at the mercy of the offenders. Greenhouse gas emissions will not disappear if reporting is taken away, so by delaying actions taken thanks to this reported data, we are only making pollution control and environmental justice more expensive and difficult to handle in the years to come. Do not remove or delay the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program requirements and let’s strengthen public confidence in the agency created to protect our environment. Thank you for your time and consideration of my comments.