The Air Is Dirty Ha? How About A Lower Ozone Standard?

cartoon-epa-co2EPA is required, under the Clean Air Act, to update air quality standards every five years based on the current scientific research. Doing so will protect the public health and the environment. Not far from now EPA is expected to pass lower ozone standards. As some people might have guess it the states are not happy about this. Lower ozone standards mean the states and companies will spend more money. By “cutting ozone emissions to 70 parts per billion would cost industry about $3.9 billion in 2025, while a stricter limit of 65 would push the cost up to $15 billion.” Doing so would most likely hurt the states’ economies stated by Mike Pence with 10 other Republicans governors in a letter to the EPA.

The state would usually do the “management and not really protection”, Liz Kaaztz Chary stated. It’s true and I do agree with him. States top priority is the management and protection will come later who know when. They won’t move a finger until people become outrageous and protest about it. That is how it how it works, the state won’t do anything until they got pressured by the public. Though the EPA is kind of unreasonable because their studies were based on the current standard in 2008. A Lot changes happened during the last seven years.

-“Ozone compliance depends on toughness of new standard

*Phiseth O.


Are the Agencies Really Representing the Public Interest?

 -Bill’s full interview with Wood

As our country continues to progress into a more efficient industrials, our environment continues to regress. The government has been passing many regulations to stop and to improve the regression of the environment, but so far it is not going anywhere. “Agencies in charge of implementing environmental laws…are meant to represent the public interest — not corporations and moneyed interests.” (Wood). When in the process of making an environmental regulation it may get affected by many factors and one of them is the corporation. For agencies in the government to work properly they needed money and where might some of the money be coming from? Corporation sponsor; there will always be conditions along with those money. Many of those conditions are going toward the corporation’s interest. Don’t get me wrong, the public interest also included too, but the corporation’s interest will alter the regulation.

One can view that this country is in control in the hand of the rich indirectly. Money can buy anything and the government is included. Our world itself is running on money. As our country becoming more developed our system of government also becoming more corrupted.

-“Environmental Agencies Are Failing Us

*Phiseth O.

EPA First Coal Ash Regulation

In this Feb. 5, 2014 photo, coal ash swirls on the surface of the Dan River as state and federal environmental officials continued their investigations of a spill of coal ash into the river in Danville, Va.

In this Feb. 5, 2014 photo, coal ash swirls on the surface of the Dan River as state and federal environmental officials continued their investigations of a spill of coal ash into the river in Danville, Va.

If people think EPA have regulations for coal ash you’ll wrong. In fact there is none! For the first time, EPA released a regulation to deal with coal ash. Before the regulation the way to deal with the coal ash was left for the state to deal with. So now EPA finally take a stand to reinforce the way to deal with coal ash by labeling the coal ash as a “solid waste” and that’s like your ordinary household trash. With that regulation the EPA will require the storages site to have regular inspections. “Ponds that are currently polluting groundwater will have to close. New ponds will need to be built away from wetlands.” All other options, like the enforcement of these rules, are left for the states.

Some people may feel great about this, but not so much for the environmentalist. They think that the EPA could’ve go even further with the regulation. They think that the coal ash should’ve been classified as “hazardous waste”, why? It’s because “coal ash often contains a variety of toxic elements like selenium, mercury, and lead (although the exact amounts vary).” If organisms, including human, were to take in those chemicals their health will be at risks. Though the con side is that by labeling the coal ash as “hazardous waste” it will “cost companies $1.4 billion per year, or $20 billion in all.” Based on 2012 statistic, “the nation’s coal plants generated some 110 million tons of it. About 40 percent of that ash gets recycled to help make concrete, pavement, and other materials.” With that in mind, if EPA were to classified coal ash as “hazardous waste”, then the recycling companies may not want to buy them.

It may not be a strong start for EPA regulation on coal ash, but it’s the first step. Things may improve because now there’s a regulation that will keep an eye on the storages sites. Though, if things don’t turn out right the EPA can always reinforce it later on.

-“The EPA is regulating coal ash waste. And environmentalists aren’t happy.

-“EPA sets first national standard for coal waste

*Phiseth O.

ADHD In Air Pollution Led To EPA’s Carbon Pollution Plan

PLOS ONE, an open access peer reviewed scientific journal, published a study showing how air pollution can increase the chance of unborn child of being diagnosed with hyperactivity disorder, also known as ADHD. The published study also stated that those who were being expose to pollution that contains polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) during their pregnancy stage will be more likely to diagnosed with ADHD. “PAHs are toxic pollutants that are released through the burning of coal, oil, gas or tobacco, and are also formed by cooking meat over high temperatures.”

Normally people in their every day lives will not take notice of this problem because it does not affect them. However, around this time when news about negative effects about air pollution on people’s health is where people start to stand up and protest about it. People demanded that the government should do something about air toxic problem and what did the government decided to do? This Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed a plan “cut carbon emissions from existing power plants, which was announced last week and will go into effect in 2015. The proposed rule calls for a 25 percent cut in carbon emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants by 2020 and a 30 percent cut by 2030, compared to 2005 levels. The regulations are meant to mitigate the damaging effects of climate change, but they bring with them major benefits for public health.” That is one long plan, and by long I mean it will affect the country’s economy no matter how one may look at it.

Cutting the carbon emissions is cutting the use of fuel and oil which people can’t live without it on their daily lives. Not only people will be in rage about it but also the running industrial factories will be heavily affected by it. Whatever the government does money will be required to put things into action and it will not be little.

-“Air Pollution Exposure Can Drastically Increase A Child’s Chances Of Developing ADHD

*Phiseth O.