Testimony of Elizabeth Martin Perera in support of EPA’s Power Plant Carbon 

Standard (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0660)

On behalf of the Union of Concerned Scientists

May 24, 2012

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in support of EPA’s power plant 

carbon standard. My name is Elizabeth Martin Perera, I live in Bethesda, MD and I 

am a senior Washington Representative and Public Health Analyst at the Union of 

Concerned Scientists. I present this testimony today on behalf of my two children 

Lia and Aiden and also on behalf of UCS’s more than 350,000 supporters, and 

network of more than 17,000 scientists. We strongly support the EPA’s efforts to 

regulate carbon emissions from coal and oil fired power plants under the Clean 

Air Act.

America’s public health is gravely threatened by Climate Change and EPA’s actions 

to move forward regulating global warming emissions are grounded in strong 

science. This first draft rule regulates global warming emissions from new power 

plants and we urge the EPA to move swiftly in completing this rule and in 

releasing a draft rule to regulate emissions from existing power plants as the 

majority of global warming emissions come from existing power plants. I would 

like to submit three things for the record today as part of my testimony. First, is a 

letter I have signed along with 369 physicians, nurses, and public health experts 

urging our policy makers to support the Environmental Protection Agency’s 

(EPA’s) ability under the Clean Air Act to take action that will protect public health 

and address climate change. 

This letter reads: 

Climate change poses significant threats to the health and well-being of all 

Americans, with disproportionate impacts on children, the elderly, and the 

poor. Our own medical journals1,2,3,4,5 and professional organizations (such as 

the American Medical Association,6 American Academy of Pediatrics,7 

American Public Health Association,8 and American Nursing Association9) have 
sounded the alarm. Health effects will include heat-related illnesses, 

exacerbated cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, more frequent outbreaks 

of water-borne diseases (such as Cryptosporidium) and vector-borne diseases 

(such as West Nile virus), and mental health impacts resulting from the stress of 

coping with extreme weather including flooding and hurricanes.10 

On April 2, 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that global warming emissions are air 

pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act (CAA).12 Subsequently, the EPA 

performed an exhaustive review of the relevant scientific research and 

determined that global warming emissions endanger public health and welfare 

and therefore must be regulated under the CAA.13 Because the EPA’s finding is 

based on well-established science, any effort to prevent or delay the agency 

from taking action to reduce global warming emissions is a rejection of that 

science. 

The EPA is charged with protecting our public health and our environment, and 

the Clean Air Act is an extraordinarily successful and cost-effective way of doing 

so. In 2010 alone, this science-based law prevented an estimated 160,000 

premature deaths and millions of cases of respiratory and cardiovascular 

disease—annual benefits that are projected to grow during the next decade. 

The Clean Air Act is also good for the economy, with its benefits exceeding its 

costs by 26 to 1.14 Now the EPA must be allowed to act on its authority under 

the law and begin regulating global warming emissions. 

Finally I would like to submit two short reports which I co-authored with our 

climate scientist Todd Sanford that provide more details on the expected impacts 

from climate change. These two reports are a part of the UCS Climate Change and 

Your Health series, and the first is entitled Rising Temperatures, Worsening Ozone 

Pollution. Ozone pollution is directly linked to temperature, thus climate change 

could likely lead to increased ozone levels. Our analysis found that, within the next 

ten years, climate change-induced ozone increases in the United States could result 

in 2.8 million additional respiratory illnesses, 5,100 more infants and seniors 

hospitalized with serious breathing problems, and 944,000 extra missed school 

days. All told, these and other health-related impacts could cost approximately 

$5.4 billion in 2020 alone. And if global warming pollution continues unabated, 

the impacts and costs could rise. 
The second report is entitled After the Storm: The Hidden Health Risks of 

Flooding in a Warming World. Heavy rainfall events that can lead to flooding have 

been increasing at the same time as temperatures have been rising in the United 

States. The problem will likely grow worse in the coming years as Earth's 

atmosphere continues to warm, leaving more and more Americans vulnerable to 

the immediate and lingering health impacts of flood events. This report combines 

a review of flooding health risks with a look at how climate change and current 

development patterns will likely increase the threat in the years ahead.

We urge you to act swiftly to finalize this rule and propose the rule for existing 

power plants. Our children’s future depends on it. Thank you for your time.