No biologically plausible mechanism exists to explain how particulate matter, at current concentrations, contributes to mortality. In the absence of any information about possible toxic mechanisms, the EPA relies upon a statistical inference that includes not a single measurement of an individual's particulate matter exposure. Few if any benefits can be expected from the proposed regulation. In contrast, the costs are high, especially when the costs are measured in lives. Many economists have pioneered analyses that demonstrate regulatory costs include deaths.
Individuals bear the costs of regulations through higher taxes and higher costs.
Those burdens reduce disposable income, and mortality rates go up as disposable income goes down. The greatest impact would be on less wealthy people. Those costs translate into 27,000 induced fatalities each year, with the majority of deaths occurring among the less wealthy. As the costs go higher, the discrepancy will widen. In the absence of any biologically plausible explanation for an association between particulate matter and mortality, the estimated number of lives saved must be viewed with skepticism.