BUCKNACKT'S SORDID TAWDRY BLOG We should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive & well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate, bier or wein in hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WHOO-HOO, WHAT A RIDE!!!!!!"
Showing posts with label ozone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ozone. Show all posts
26 April 2012
State Of The Air 2012: American Lung Association Reports Improvements, Challenges 25APR12
THE repiglicans and tea-baggers want to eliminate the EPA, and that is not campaign rhetoric, they are serious. From the American Lung Assoc via HuffPost....
More than 127 million Americans -- about
41 percent of the country -- still suffer from pollution levels that can
make breathing dangerous, according to a new report.
The American Lung Association State of the Air 2012, released Wednesday, shows signs of air-quality improvement, but also indicates struggles in many regions nationwide. The volunteer health organization examined 2008-2010 ozone levels, the main ingredient of smog air pollution, and air-particle pollution at official measuring sites across the U.S.
Out of the 25 cities with the most ozone pollution, 22 saw improvements in air quality over last year's report. Similar advancements were seen among cities with the most year-round particle pollution.
“State of the Air shows that we’re making real and steady progress in cutting dangerous pollution from the air we breathe,” said Charles Connor, American Lung Association president, in a statement. "But despite these improvements, America’s air quality standards are woefully outdated, and unhealthy levels of air pollution still exist across the nation, putting the health of millions of Americans at stake.”
ALA project director Janice Nolen told The Huffington Post that the continued cleanup of power plants and fleet turnover has led to improvements.
"Cleaning up air pollution has measurable public health benefits," Nolen said. During the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, for example she said, morning traffic levels decreased by 23 percent, the region's ozone levels decreased by 28 percent, and pediatric asthma emergency room visits dropped by an estimated 42 percent.
"These results suggest that efforts to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality also can help improve the respiratory health of a community," according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website.
Nolen also cited the EPA's 2010 findings that reduced air pollution resulting from Clean Air Act amendments in 1990 prevented more than 160,000 premature deaths.
Despite the benefits of reduced air pollution, Nolen said that generally, "we are not yet at the point where we're providing air that doesn't send people to the emergency room."
Regions that topped the list for year-round particle pollution included Bakersfield-Delano, Calif.; Hanford-Corcoran, Calif; and Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, Calif.
While short-term particle pollution is based on a 24-hour period, year-round particle pollution is considered the annual average of pollution in the region. The report used a weighted average number of days for both ozone and short-term particle pollution levels.
Bakersfield-Delano also was first among regions most polluted by short-term particle pollution, with Fresno-Madera, Calif., and Hanford-Corcoran following. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside; Visalia-Porterville, Calif.; Bakersfield-Delano were the three most ozone-polluted regions in the country.
Four cities were newcomers to the list of cities most polluted by particle pollution: Wheeling, W. Va.; Atlanta; Fairmont, W. Va.; and Davenport, Iowa. Although the cities were added in part because other cities made greater improvements in reducing pollution levels, the list includes cities "where some of the cleanup measures haven't been put in place as much, where you've had a lot of pollution from coal plants," said Nolen.
Some states suffer not just from plants in their own cities, but plants in other states. "The folks who live in those communities can't address it themselves. They can't stop the pollution from blowing across state lines," according to Nolen.
The reasons for high levels of air pollution vary to a degree by location. California regions face challenges due in part to the agricultural processes, weather and goods-movement industry there. The goods-movement industry includes everything from ships, trucks and trains to machines that load and unload freight and stock store shelves.
In the middle and eastern U.S., coal-fired power plants play a larger role in contributing to air pollution.
The report lists at-risk groups that are particularly vulnerable to air-pollution threats, although air pollution does not necessarily cause these conditions. They include people with asthma, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and those of certain ages. Another notable group listed is people living in poverty.
"Over 16.9 million people with incomes meeting the federal poverty definition live in counties with unhealthful levels of ozone," the report says.
Nolen said people with low incomes tend to be at higher risk from air pollutants than wealthier people. "One, they live closer to sources that are producing the pollution. You don't have high rent housing near a power plant, or downwind from an industrial site contributing to a problem, or near a busy highway ... You also have folks who have higher incidents of diseases, which makes them at higher risk ... Third, often it's harder for them to get medical care."
She encouraged at-risk groups and concerned citizens to "let your member of Congress know that you expect the Clean Air Act to protect you and your family. Which means we have to have pollution reductions that can provide that kind of protection. We're not seeing that."
While Nolen said the EPA is taking some steps to reduce pollution, it faces challenges in the court and from members of Congress.
With an eye toward the future, one of ALA's goals for the year, Nolen said, is "to get a strong particulate matter standard out and finalized ... There are cleaner sources than coal burning for energy. But we do realize we have a ways to go."
More information and rankings from this year's State of the Air report can be found here.
Click through the slideshow below to see the cities with the most year-round particle pollution:
1 of 12
The American Lung Association State of the Air 2012, released Wednesday, shows signs of air-quality improvement, but also indicates struggles in many regions nationwide. The volunteer health organization examined 2008-2010 ozone levels, the main ingredient of smog air pollution, and air-particle pollution at official measuring sites across the U.S.
Out of the 25 cities with the most ozone pollution, 22 saw improvements in air quality over last year's report. Similar advancements were seen among cities with the most year-round particle pollution.
“State of the Air shows that we’re making real and steady progress in cutting dangerous pollution from the air we breathe,” said Charles Connor, American Lung Association president, in a statement. "But despite these improvements, America’s air quality standards are woefully outdated, and unhealthy levels of air pollution still exist across the nation, putting the health of millions of Americans at stake.”
ALA project director Janice Nolen told The Huffington Post that the continued cleanup of power plants and fleet turnover has led to improvements.
"Cleaning up air pollution has measurable public health benefits," Nolen said. During the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, for example she said, morning traffic levels decreased by 23 percent, the region's ozone levels decreased by 28 percent, and pediatric asthma emergency room visits dropped by an estimated 42 percent.
"These results suggest that efforts to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality also can help improve the respiratory health of a community," according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website.
Nolen also cited the EPA's 2010 findings that reduced air pollution resulting from Clean Air Act amendments in 1990 prevented more than 160,000 premature deaths.
Despite the benefits of reduced air pollution, Nolen said that generally, "we are not yet at the point where we're providing air that doesn't send people to the emergency room."
Regions that topped the list for year-round particle pollution included Bakersfield-Delano, Calif.; Hanford-Corcoran, Calif; and Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, Calif.
While short-term particle pollution is based on a 24-hour period, year-round particle pollution is considered the annual average of pollution in the region. The report used a weighted average number of days for both ozone and short-term particle pollution levels.
Bakersfield-Delano also was first among regions most polluted by short-term particle pollution, with Fresno-Madera, Calif., and Hanford-Corcoran following. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside; Visalia-Porterville, Calif.; Bakersfield-Delano were the three most ozone-polluted regions in the country.
Four cities were newcomers to the list of cities most polluted by particle pollution: Wheeling, W. Va.; Atlanta; Fairmont, W. Va.; and Davenport, Iowa. Although the cities were added in part because other cities made greater improvements in reducing pollution levels, the list includes cities "where some of the cleanup measures haven't been put in place as much, where you've had a lot of pollution from coal plants," said Nolen.
Some states suffer not just from plants in their own cities, but plants in other states. "The folks who live in those communities can't address it themselves. They can't stop the pollution from blowing across state lines," according to Nolen.
The reasons for high levels of air pollution vary to a degree by location. California regions face challenges due in part to the agricultural processes, weather and goods-movement industry there. The goods-movement industry includes everything from ships, trucks and trains to machines that load and unload freight and stock store shelves.
In the middle and eastern U.S., coal-fired power plants play a larger role in contributing to air pollution.
The report lists at-risk groups that are particularly vulnerable to air-pollution threats, although air pollution does not necessarily cause these conditions. They include people with asthma, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and those of certain ages. Another notable group listed is people living in poverty.
"Over 16.9 million people with incomes meeting the federal poverty definition live in counties with unhealthful levels of ozone," the report says.
Nolen said people with low incomes tend to be at higher risk from air pollutants than wealthier people. "One, they live closer to sources that are producing the pollution. You don't have high rent housing near a power plant, or downwind from an industrial site contributing to a problem, or near a busy highway ... You also have folks who have higher incidents of diseases, which makes them at higher risk ... Third, often it's harder for them to get medical care."
She encouraged at-risk groups and concerned citizens to "let your member of Congress know that you expect the Clean Air Act to protect you and your family. Which means we have to have pollution reductions that can provide that kind of protection. We're not seeing that."
While Nolen said the EPA is taking some steps to reduce pollution, it faces challenges in the court and from members of Congress.
With an eye toward the future, one of ALA's goals for the year, Nolen said, is "to get a strong particulate matter standard out and finalized ... There are cleaner sources than coal burning for energy. But we do realize we have a ways to go."
More information and rankings from this year's State of the Air report can be found here.
Click through the slideshow below to see the cities with the most year-round particle pollution:
Cities Most Polluted By Year-Round Particle Pollution
Getty
08 September 2011
BAD POLITICS, DIRTY AIR from GREENPEACE 8SEP11
PRES Obama's decision on ozone pollution controls is wrong, period. Not only would the law protect the health of all Americans and so lower health care cost it would also put Americans back to work, building the equipment required to cut ozone pollution and installing it. This from Greenpeace....
 | |
 | |
Watch our new online ad and tell President Obama that dirty air and sick voters won’t win him anything. The President and his political team are convinced that, no matter what they do, they’ll have the full support of people like you who care about the quality of the air they breathe and the health of their families. So when he announces that he won’t be enforcing ozone pollution protections that according to the EPA would save 12,000 American lives and ease the health burden of the 24 million people suffering from asthma, he’s hoping not to hear from you. But he has to. It’s the only way we are going to get the President to stop working for corporate polluters and start working for everyday Americans. The President will address the nation tonight about the job situation. Greenpeace has just released a 30 second ad in advance of tonight’s speech that addresses his job situation. Our goal is to get 20,000 views in the next couple of hours before the President’s speech. We’ll be pushing this video to news media and blogs we know his supporters watch. But we can’t get his attention without you. Check out the video and share it with everyone you know who supported the President in 2008... He needs to be reminded that in November he is counting on people who care about the environment and the health of their family and loved ones. Not just for votes, but for volunteer hours and everything else that goes into winning a campaign. This is all about politics and it is sickening. There is still hope. The President just needs to start protecting our health from ozone pollution -- much of which comes from coal-fired power plants -- and stop doing the dirty work of corporate polluters. If you agree, watch the video and share it with your friends. Thanks for all you do, Philip Radford Greenpeace Executive Director P.S. Forward this message to the people you know who supported the President in 2008. It's the only way we are going to get the message out.  | |
   Click here to forward this message. | |
| | |
Greenpeace 702 H Street, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20001 | 1-800-722-6995 | |
09 July 2011
EPA Issues New Standards For Coal-Burning Plants 7JUL11
FINALLY they are doing something right!
The Environmental Protection Agency sent a strong message Thursday to power plants that burn coal. It's time to clean up dirty exhausts that travel long distances, and 75 percent of Americans will breathe healthier air as a result.
The new EPA transport rule is designed to clean up the pollution that blows from power plants into other states. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson says it's about fairness.
"This is EPA, the federal government, doing what the federal government should and has a responsibility to all Americans to do. And that's leveling the playing field, ensuring that one community doesn't put out smog and soot at the expense of the residents downwind," she says.
The new rule replaces a similar Bush administration regulation that was struck down by a court that deemed it too lenient. The new rule will cut almost 2 million more tons of pollution per year than the Bush administration program.
States from Texas to New York will have to slash 70 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions and 50 percent of nitrogen oxides from power plants, compared with 2005 pollution levels.
Scientists say the fine particles and ozone from these plants contribute to deadly heart and lung failures.
The agency estimates the rule will be so potent that within three years, it will prevent as many as 34,000 premature deaths each year.
It's also expected to reduce hundreds of thousands of asthma attacks per year. That really resonates with Jackson, whose sons both had asthma when they were small. Her younger son still carries a rescue inhaler.
Jackson says she wants every parent with an asthmatic child to have "as close to a normal experience in childhood as possible."
She says less power plant pollution will mean fewer days when parents have to tell their kids they can't play outside because the air is bad.
"When you talk about asthma attacks, every single one can mean hours — if not days — of caring for a sick child or family member. It can mean hospitalization," she says.
That adds up to lots of costs for families and society. Jackson says that's part of why the new rule is projected to provide billions of dollars in public health benefits.
Some power companies complain the deadlines are too tough to allow them time to install pollution control equipment. So, they will have no choice but to shut down some older coal-fired power plants.
Pat Hemlepp represents American Electric Power, which is one of the country's biggest power companies, with plants in 11 states from Texas to Michigan.
"Taking power plants out of service like this pulls tax dollars out of the communities, pulls jobs out of communities, in addition to increasing electricity costs," Hemlepp says. "This is a region of the country that's struggling to recover from the economic downturn, and doing this on such a short timeline is an economic hit that could be avoided."
But overall, Harvard Economist Robert Stavins says, the new regulation is a real winner for the economy.
"It doesn't mean that there are no costs, but the benefits of the transport rule in terms of human health protection tremendously outweigh the costs of this," he says.
Stavins says even in parts of the country where electricity costs will increase a little bit, health care savings in those same communities will more than compensate.
Enlarge AP Sunflower Electric Cooperative's coal-fired power plant in Holcomb, Kan., churns out electricity. Kansas is one of the states included in the new pollution rule.
The new EPA transport rule is designed to clean up the pollution that blows from power plants into other states. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson says it's about fairness.
"This is EPA, the federal government, doing what the federal government should and has a responsibility to all Americans to do. And that's leveling the playing field, ensuring that one community doesn't put out smog and soot at the expense of the residents downwind," she says.
The new rule replaces a similar Bush administration regulation that was struck down by a court that deemed it too lenient. The new rule will cut almost 2 million more tons of pollution per year than the Bush administration program.
States from Texas to New York will have to slash 70 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions and 50 percent of nitrogen oxides from power plants, compared with 2005 pollution levels.
Scientists say the fine particles and ozone from these plants contribute to deadly heart and lung failures.
The agency estimates the rule will be so potent that within three years, it will prevent as many as 34,000 premature deaths each year.
It's also expected to reduce hundreds of thousands of asthma attacks per year. That really resonates with Jackson, whose sons both had asthma when they were small. Her younger son still carries a rescue inhaler.
Jackson says she wants every parent with an asthmatic child to have "as close to a normal experience in childhood as possible."
She says less power plant pollution will mean fewer days when parents have to tell their kids they can't play outside because the air is bad.
"When you talk about asthma attacks, every single one can mean hours — if not days — of caring for a sick child or family member. It can mean hospitalization," she says.
That adds up to lots of costs for families and society. Jackson says that's part of why the new rule is projected to provide billions of dollars in public health benefits.
Some power companies complain the deadlines are too tough to allow them time to install pollution control equipment. So, they will have no choice but to shut down some older coal-fired power plants.
Pat Hemlepp represents American Electric Power, which is one of the country's biggest power companies, with plants in 11 states from Texas to Michigan.
"Taking power plants out of service like this pulls tax dollars out of the communities, pulls jobs out of communities, in addition to increasing electricity costs," Hemlepp says. "This is a region of the country that's struggling to recover from the economic downturn, and doing this on such a short timeline is an economic hit that could be avoided."
But overall, Harvard Economist Robert Stavins says, the new regulation is a real winner for the economy.
"It doesn't mean that there are no costs, but the benefits of the transport rule in terms of human health protection tremendously outweigh the costs of this," he says.
Stavins says even in parts of the country where electricity costs will increase a little bit, health care savings in those same communities will more than compensate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)