Clearing the Air

President Reagan crossed an important threshold on Wednesday with his endorsement of a U.S.-Canadian study that identifies sulfur emissions from coal-burning electric-power plants as a major cause of acid rain. The President may have done so primarily to defuse a longstanding source of friction between the United States and Canada, our loyal and sometimes long-suffering neighbor to the north. Obtaining the endorsement was the major purpose of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney’s trip to Washington, and it certainly will help ease some of Mulroney’s domestic political problems.

Whatever the reason, the President deserves commendation. In a single day he advanced his personal record on the issue light years from the 1980 campaign when Candidate Reagan insisted that the bulk of certain kinds of pollution came from trees, volcanoes and other natural sources. But there can be no celebrating until the Administration demonstrates its commitment to acting on acid rain--rather than just studying it--by putting up the money for an effective control program. The President was vague on that point Wednesday, although the study--co-authored by former Transportation Secretary Drew Lewis--called for a $5-billion investment shared by government and industry.

For years respected scientists have been saying that sulfur emissions from U.S. utilities and other sources, including autos, need to be halved in order to have an effective campaign against acid rain. The Canadians already have launched such an effort, even though much of the devastation of lakes and forests north of the border is believed to have been caused by emissions from U.S. sources. Several Northeastern states have adopted similar programs.

The report written by Lewis and his Canadian counterpart, William Davis, calls for a five-year program to develop methods of burning coal more cleanly. The technology for that exists now, not to mention the option of using low-sulfur coal mined in the West. But even as late as Wednesday a White House spokesman said that the President was not entirely convinced of industry’s role in the cause of pollution leading to acid-rain damage.

Congress has been somewhat ahead of the Administration on this issue, but is bogged down in regional factions over just what should be done and who should pay. Meanwhile, the evidence mounts that air pollution is causing long-term damage to the environment on a national and international basis.

One of the more encouraging comments on Wednesday came from the Edison Electric Institute, the power industry’s research organization. The institute said that the technologies promised by the U.S.-Canadian agreement “will provide the electric utility industry with methods to supply electricity in a more cost-effective and environmentally sound manner.” It is interesting that the industry itself was the one to point out that environmental controls can result in monetary dividends as well as sound social policy.