On Sept. 30, the New York Times reported that the Trump Administration put forth a comprehensive repeal package for the legislation that prevents mercury emissions from coal plants. Current Environmental Protection Agency Director Andrew Wheeler, a former lawyer for Murray Energy Corporation, has indicated his full support for the measure. Supporters of the repeal say that current regulations unfairly target coal plants, while detractors claim that this constitutes the most brazen attempt yet to repeal environmental action on behalf of the fossil fuel industry. Is this repeal legally sound, and what kind of effects could this repeal have on the environment and nearby communities? 

Prof. Sabine von Mering (GER) 

Of course it is awful. The World Health Organization has shown that mercury emissions may harm the developing nervous system in babies, making them less able to think and learn. Perhaps that’s the sinister goal, given that the government doesn’t want anyone to learn or think? But seriously, this travesty of environmental protection is why we need to get fossil fuel money out of politics so that we can elect politicians who hire EPA directors who work for the good of the people and not those who only care for the profits of the coal, oil or gas industry. Check out nofossilfuelmoney.org. That’s also why Brandeis must join the fossil fuel divestment movement and thereby use our privileged position as a leading institution of higher learning and say that we need environmental protection and climate action now. By the way, there is an election on Nov. 6. Register. Get involved. Canvas for environmental champions. Vote!

Prof. Sabine von Mering is the Director of the Center for German and European Studies, specializing in German literature and climate change in the humanities. 

Jess Spear ‘21

Every human should have the ability to breathe clean air and live a healthy life, and the proposed legislation threatens to directly impede this inalienable right.  The World Health Organization lists mercury as a top chemical of major public health concern, especially threatening children in utero and infants.  The communities surrounding coal plants are disproportionately poor and/or of color and already face significant adversity.  Experiencing heightened air pollution should not be one of these struggles.Many developed countries are moving towards relying more on renewable energy sources; this would be a step in the opposite direction for America.  If we wish to pride ourselves on being a leader on the global stage, we must also lead in taking care of the Earth and its people.  All sources of mercury pollution should be restricted; coal plants should not be the exception. This repeal is despicable.

Jess Spear ’21 is a member of Brandeis Climate Justice. 

Linzy Rosen ’22

I’m extremely worried about this decision. It’s negligent for the EPA to replace the importance of “co-benefits”, such as health and safety, with the need to satisfy the coal industry. Mercury could severely damage species and work its way up the food web. Rain washes mercury into the ocean where fish and other organisms absorb it. These organisms are then exposed to the harmful, behavior-disrupting chemical and may be consumed by other species higher up the food chain, such as humans, where mercury will continue to reside. Communities near coal plants are also at stake. Mercury is a known neurochemical, meaning it disrupts the nervous system and can cause birth defects. Protecting human health and the planet is worth the costs. It’s very clear that this is another attempt of the Trump administration to fill the pockets of polluting industries and disregard the well-being of people and our environment.

Linzy Rosen ’22 is a prospective Environmental Studies and Politics major and a member of Students for The Right to Immigration Institute. 

Melanie Rush ’20

Unfortunately, the questions of legally admissible and morally justifiable are questions that have become disconnected within our current administration. While scientifically it is clear that the proliferation of fossil fuel emissions must be significantly decreased, the unfortunate backing of the EPA provides this repeal an air of legitimacy. As the current administration receives aid from the Republican controlled congress and soon to be Republican controlled judicial branch, the likelihood of viable opposition to this type of repeal is unfortunately slim. Large-scale support for environmental deregulation only serves the interests of the fossil fuel industry yet will affect the entire global community for generations to come. The continued relaxation of environmental regulations can only bring the consequences of global warming at an even faster pace. 

Melanie Rush ’20 is Vice President of Mock Trial Internal Affairs and Recruitment, Events, and Media Coordinator for Brandeis Quiz Bowl.