They never learn, do they? I doubt they'll accept responsibility for the thousands of damaged/destroyed engines and millions of dollars lost this will bring. The benefits will NOT outweigh the costs.
The regulators tend to not give two hoots about the benefits outweighing the costs. They have to do something to justify their livelihoods and creating new regs out of whole cloth with frequently "made up" stats and justifications. So it wrecks your engines? Why should we care? We don't. The frequently stated reasons that it will save "x" lives over "y" years are difficult to prove, but that doesn't matter.
Let me say that I worked for a government regulatory agency (US) for over 30 years, and levels of contaminants (natural and otherwise) didn't depend on what might be safe or not, but on the detection limit of whatever contaminant was of concern. It amazes me that anyone over the age of maybe 60 survived to that age given the filthy air, water, and food we took in.
There need to be regulations, I'm not advocating "dirty air" or "dirty water", but let's face it they're about as clean as possible. Each increment becomes more and more expensive and difficult until we're paying double to reduce the contaminant that last 0.01% or less. Is it really worth it?
JMHO.