First, I’m very pleased to see this — the study and PPG’s coverage.

Next, it seems so problematic to assign a dollar value to loss of life. It’s not apples and oranges — those are both tree fruits. Money and life just don’t correlate. It’s like measuring anxiety in inches.

And, it says the jobs are mostly rural — I don’t doubt that — but the health costs are mostly urban? That’s a surprise. Why wouldn’t the health costs happen in the same place the jobs do? Except for those associated with climate change, which would be global, hitting urban and rural places alike.

Finally, when you assign dollar values to economic activity, and then add to it health and environmental costs, regardless of how appropriately you do so, seems to me your cost benefit analysis isn’t complete until you ask ……

The Third Question: are the people receiving the benefits and the people paying the costs the same people? Because if not, this is the definition of environmental injustice. The Trump Administration has dealt with the burgeoning environmental injustice of their policies by eliminating the EJ office in EPA…but that only solves the problem if you think some people don’t count.

Mary Wildfire, Roane County, WV