By Keith Mauck

A good friend of mine suffers from asthma, and she’s tired of being the poster child for the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulations. As she has rightly observed, the agency justifies all of its clean-air regulations by asserting they will reduce asthma attacks and fight the nation’s rising asthma rates.

The EPA claims asthma is linked to ozone, which is the colorless gas that results from sunlight striking volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxide (NOX) produced by combustion. To reduce ground level ozone concentrations below their current levels, the EPA announced a stricter ozone standard from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb Oct. 1.

Although this slight change might appear fairly benign, it has been called the most expensive regulatory change in U.S. history. What’s more, it is likely to have no impact on asthma.

Here are the facts: The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) readily admits it does not know what causes asthma. Not every asthma sufferer is the same; asthma can be exacerbated by different triggers and require different treatments.

The EPA’s assertion that air-quality improvements relieve respiratory symptoms is under attack. Not only has the agency been accused of “cherry picking” studies that show a link between ozone and asthma, but also a new study conducted by a research team affiliated with Johns Hopkins has found a strong link between asthma and indoor air pollution caused by poverty. Tobacco smoke, cockroaches, mice, old housing materials, and mold all contribute to asthma discomfort. The team found little evidence that living in cities where more ozone forms is a contributing factor to the disease.

This means the new ozone standard, which is expected to reduce U.S. productivity and destroy jobs, could do more harm than good. By reducing economic growth, it’s likely many American families will become poorer and less able to afford health care and healthier food. Throwing more people into poverty will not be beneficial for public health.

All of the 50 states will feel the impact of the new ozone standard, but some will be punished more than others. New Jersey, for example, struggles to comply with the existing standard of 75 ppb because ozone drifts in from other states. The prevailing wind blows from west to east, bringing ozone spawned from the emissions generated by power plants in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia into New Jersey, which will make it very difficult to comply with the new standard.

In fact, many regions of the country have not yet complied with the existing ozone standard and are in the process of cutting NOX and VOC levels. Their actions will continue to lower ground-level ozone levels under the current standard. Plus, the EPA admits their ozone-mitigation initiatives are working. Since 1980, national average ozone levels have declined 33 percent and continue to fall today.

Some ground-level ozone will never be eradicated because it is naturally-occurring. Scientists say it is emitted by the interaction of sunlight on hydrocarbons emitted by soil and plants. The background ozone level in Yellowstone National Park, which is hardly a hub of industrial activity, has been measured at 66 ppb, which is just below the EPA’s new standard.

Critics of the new standard have called it a solution in search of a problem. And although ozone levels have been dropping, the number of asthma cases has soared since the 1980s. That’s another reason to doubt the connection between ozone and asthma. Even Gina McCarthy, the administrator of the EPA, has stated ozone in concentrations below 72 ppb have not been proved to be harmful in clinical studies.

My asthmatic friend is convinced that her breathing problems have nothing to do with ozone or other pollutants regulated by the EPA. Her asthma flares up when she is exposed to pollen and changes in the weather. Through trial and error, she also recently discovered that her breathing is much improved by avoiding milk products.

The new ozone standard is unnecessary and could harm the very people it is supposed to protect. By raising costs and reducing economic opportunities for everyone, it will make our society poorer and quite possibly expose more children to the asthma triggers associated with poverty. There’s no good reason to move forward with this regulation.

Keith Mauck, J.D., is Publisher of GoHaynesvilleShale.com, GoMarcellusShale.com and EagleFordForum.com.