From the 1970s to the 1990s, U. S. citizens were actively involved in grassroots actions, culminating in 1970, 1977, and 1990 Clean Air Acts. The affected industries put up strong political opposition to this legislation but it has accomplished a lot in terms of human health and air quality. One of the main achievements of the Clean Air Act is that the atmosphere is now almost lead-free. According to estimates by EPA, since 1970, lead emissions have reduced by 85% (EPA para. 4). This progress is expected to continue as older agricultural equipment and motor vehicles powered by leaded gas turn obsolete. Moreover, many urban centers now adhere to the sulfur dioxide (SO2) standards set by the federal government. By 1977, there was already a 20 percent reduction in lead emissions (APA para. 6).
1970, 1977, and 1990 Clean Air Acts specify six criteria for air pollutants. Between 1980 and 2006, the implementation of these criteria resulted in a 49 percent decrease in air pollution (Miller & Spoolman 263). This is despite the significant increases in vehicle miles traveled, gross domestic product, population, and energy consumption. The 1990 U. S. Clean Air Act authorized emission trading and under this program, power plants with the highest levels of pollution (there are 110 of these in 21 states) were allowed to sell and buy SO2 pollution rights. The less pollution the more carbon credits earned. Consequently, coal-burning-powered plants in the U. S. realized a 53 percent reduction in SO2 emissions between 1990 and 2006 (Miller & Spoolman 264). Today, a newly manufactured car in the U.S emits approximately 75 percent less pollution in comparison with cars manufactured before 1970. In 10 to 20 years, we are likely to witness additional gains in the form of new energy-efficient cars, and emission engine systems.
The Clean Air Acts have not escaped the attack of executives of the affected companies, on grounds that they would be detrimental to economic growth, and that they would be costly to implement (Miller & Spoolman 267). On the other hand, proponents of these regulations opine that the implementation of these regulations is more expensive than the actual cost. Besides, implementing these standards has resulted in job creation. It also boosts the economy because companies endeavor to develop novel technologies that minimize air pollution.
Students, education institutions, and citizen groups can also take an active role in the fight against air pollution at the community level. Students and citizens groups can educate the local community on the need to use mass transit such as railway transport as opposed to having to use personal vehicles (Miller & Spoolman 268). Citizens groups and students should also encourage the local community to cycle or walk to work instead of driving. Educational institutions should also educate members of the community on the need to use cars with improved fuel efficiency to reduce air pollution. Also, education institutions should advise members of the community on the need to get rid of older cars because they emit more pollutants. In addition, educational institutions can also advise members of the community on the need to periodically check car exhaust systems, possibly twice a year.
Works Cited
EPA. History of the Clean Air Act. 2010. Web.
EPA. What are the six common air pollutants? 2010. Web.
Miller, George and Spoolman, Scott. Environmental Science. Stamford, Mass: Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
Miller, George and Spoolman, Scott. Sustaining the Earth: an integrated approach. Stamford, Mass: Cengage Learning, 2008. Print.
The Clean Air Act (CAA) is a legislation that pertain elimination or minimizing air pollution in the United States. The atmosphere determines almost every aspect of human beings and other organisms. Pollution with substances such as carbon monoxide, CFCs and Nitrogen Oxides has had detrimental effects on the air that maintains the life of people and therefore should be a matter of concern for not only to the government but also the individual efforts.
It is through the Clean Air Act that the issue of air pollution has been politically addressed at a national and international level. The enforcement has positive outcomes especially concerning matters of people’s health. Several models are employed to determine the effect of the increased quality of air to the environment and the population at large. The federal law states the responsibilities that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) bears in relation to enhancing the lives of the public through improving the environment.
The Act maintains regulatory requirements which have to be kept vigilant for its compliance. It accomplishes this through consultants and legal, personnel who are aware of the provisions and the enforcement regulations. This paper is aimed at discussing the Clean Air Act, its essence, historical background, implementation strategies, its regulations and the future prospects (Belden, 2001).
The Statutes of the CAA
The CAA which is coded as 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq and aims at safeguarding the public health and environmental protection by controlling pollutants of the atmospheric air. Through the EPA, the CAA states the standards and enforces compliance through the states. The regions that are not up to the standards or the “nonattainment areas” have to establish control strategies that are stipulated by the CAA.
It is the role of CAA to determine the origin of toxic pollutants as well as the ones responsible for the acid rain. By providing a permit for the origin of air pollutants it helps curb air pollution thus ensuring the atmosphere is protected and also in maintaining the state of clean air for areas with no pollution.
The federal law attains the objective through data collection, comprehensive research, as well as collaborating with the local authorities. The 1970 amendment of the CAA emphasized the role of EPA in maintaining air purity through scientific as well as technological applications. It stated the decrement of automobile pollutants by 90% up to nineteen seventy five.
In addition an EPA program was created that ensured technological control of origin of the emerging main hazardous substances. Also a regulation program was created to deal with air pollutants and its implementation through the Federal Enforcement Authority.
EPA was funded greatly by the federal government and that maintained its continuity In nineteen seventy seven, the amendment of the CAA reset the standards, prolonged deadlines to comply with the standards and established a program named the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) . The CAA amendment of nineteen ninety set various programs to ensure clean air via FY1998 and established detailed provisions (Lipton, 2006).
CAA Historical Perspective
Initially, CAA was enacted in July nineteen fifty five led by President Eisenhower but since then it has undergone several changes. Its provisions aimed at funding the United States surgeon General aiding in research for the regulations to be implemented. When several individuals died in nineteen sixties in London & New York due to ‘Killer Smog’ it triggered national and international debates on air contamination.
As a result, another CAA was passed in nineteen sixty three with key emphasis on grants as well as research to enhance air quality through the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW). This was followed by approving Air Quality Act of 1967 by President Johnson. This Act established origin of air pollutants regulation whose main objective entailed safeguarding the state resources and improving citizen’s welfare and their health. Moreover, it aimed at creating research at the state and regional level.
This was to be done through HEW which would engage in eliminating and controlling air contamination. Although it formed the basis of federal-state coexistence essential for the continuity of the CAA, the demerit of the Air Quality Act included inadequate compliance with the provisions (Lipton, 2006).
Later the CAA was passed by the congress in nineteen seventy with the main objective of enhancing public safety. It empowered EPA to create National Ambient air Quality standards (NAAQS) to set the appropriate levels of quality air worth for human consumption.
It also allowed the basis by which the states would put into practice the State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for NAAQS to operate smoothly. EPA disapproval of SIP meant its mandate to enforce a plan with the right standards. The statute initiated regulation of poisonous pollutants and a standard aimed at regulating the emissions from automobiles.
In addition, the legislation was also amended in nineteen seventy seven where nonattainment areas were on the rise with slow progress to achieving the aim and noncompliance with the regulations. Therefore, the amendments aimed at attaining the objectives set in nineteen seventy. This resulted to deadlines extension together with new control laws for areas not complying with NAAQS. It established a program called Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) meant to maintain clean air in attainment areas.
The final amendment occurred in nineteen ninety headed by President Bush and has seen the enforcement of laws by the congress concerning the pollution of air. It incorporated other programs such as Stratospheric Ozone program while reinforcing the previous amendments. It categorized the nonattainment areas, reinforce mobile emission regulations, stated the need for alternative fuel for region with high air contamination, set standards based on the technology and a way to deal with emergency hazardous emissions.
Moreover, it created a control program addressing the issue of acid rain, came up with permit program managed by the state to deal with main origins of pollutants, applied the Montreal Protocol meant at eliminating substances that deplete the ozone and to update implementation requirements’ (Lipton, 2006).
The EPA is awarded with the task of ensuring that the standard of air is safe for human, stating the deadlines to achieve the standards and regulating air pollutants from electric appliances, power plants automobiles and industries through cleanup strategies such as application of the Montreal Protocol.
It controls the origin of major one hundred and eight hazardous substances like benzene. The accomplishments of the federal laws stipulated in the act are tremendous with human safety safeguarded. For instance, lead is hazardous to the public and its source had to be put to check which in turn has seen a great decrease in its emission (Belden, 2001).
Implementation Strategies
The EPA is awarded with the task of creating NAAQS but it is entirely the role of the states to enforce ways to comply with the standards. State Implementation Plans stated in CAA section 110 are used by the states and are taken to EPA for approval. SIPs rely heavily on computer models as well as emission inventories to evaluate instances of air contamination.
In case of a standards extension more controls are placed on the sources to curb standard ‘exceedances’. EPA awards permits for the upcoming sources and those already determined where the parties have to clearly determine whether the emissions will go beyond what is set. The nonattainment regions have to be monitored to reduce emissions from the sources that are already in place.
The CAA nineteen ninety amendments assign EPA with the power of awarding sanctions in those regions that do not forward the SIP, or one that is inadequate or failure in SIP implementation. According to Lipton, “ Unless the state b corrects such failures, a 2-to-1 emissions offset for the construction of new polluting sources is imposed 18 months after notification to the state, and a ban on most federal highway grants is imposed six months later.
An additional ban on air quality grants is discretionary. Ultimately, a federal Implementation Plan may be imposed if the state fails to submit or implement an adequate SIP” (2006). In regions that are nonattainment, there are absolutely no funding and federal permits awarded because of inconformity with SIP. The restriction of financial aid on projects may be temporary but conformity with SIPs must occur in these areas once in two years.
CAA Regulations and Future Prospects
The detailed provisions stated in the nineteen ninety legislation could be a green light for dealing with the future problems facing the national air quality. However, it does not deal with every aspect that may arise in the future. It has subjected to all activities to EPA in establishing policies, making rules, awarding regulation documents and engaging in various interpretations.
This is overworking a single agency that is delegated with all the procedures. Other permitting agencies categorically deal with particular industries at state and local setups. This significantly affects the finances and operations of these industries through their engagements.
Furthermore, EPA offers complex documents with guidelines containing CAA requirements. This in turn affects their performance since they end up boycotting some deadlines even though it has continued to suffocate specific entities with rules. On the other hand, EPA has effective procedures of awarding policy guidance and in dealing with the affected parties.
This has gained them a high input in the recent past since the last amendment was made. Its staff regards inputs from the stakeholders with the local and state agencies armed with professional knowhow and contribute to the EPA policymaking and CAA enforcement. However, increased scrutiny from the congress has evaluated CAA programs needing accountability in efficiency, and reasons for failure to achieve quality air.
These demands have resulted to EPA underfunding and in turn laming its efficiency in making and handling CAA requirements and uncertainty in achieving the objectives. As a result, it has had overreliance on other sources of funding such as local agencies and institutions like the universities for its operations which creates loopholes for its professionals to compromise CAA values to impress the clients (Novello & Martineau, 2004).
With the advancing technology, industries are not sure whether the levels of the emission standards required are possible. It is the role of the EPA to determine whether some substances will remain or banned from operating thus burdening the industries to hire professionals who could accurately advice them. The professionals should be well aware of current records (Clean Air Docket) of CAA requirements and rules available in state agencies, electronically, in regional offices’ libraries, seminars, EPA or in Washington DC.
The conferences held by EPA are mostly sponsored by organizations such as The American Bar Association as well as Waste Management Association which publish required information regarding EPA. EPA has established Technology Transfer Network (TTN) that is free and offers electronic information on air pollution globally through communication software.
The internet has aided EPA where complex CAA requirements are available and individuals using the internet could air their views, contribute in policy making and in permit application. Moreover, The EPA has established forums to reach individuals from all walks of life where they collect data, participate in discussions and determine the creation of policies. It is mainly geared at achieving the provisions set in the nineteen ninety CAA amendments.
The nineteen ninety nine report released appreciated the federal support and more specifically in decreasing emissions from automobiles and for essential programs (Novello & Martineau, 2004). With all the resources, EPA will hopefully manage the problem of air pollution in the future.
Conclusion
The CAA complexity in its environmental statutes in maintaining air quality is evident as it has established many detailed regulations as stipulated by the Code of Federal Regulations.
Irrespective of the fact that the last amendment dates back in 1990, there are no limits for setting new regulations to rhyme with the initial objective of maintaining public health and safeguarding the environment. The federal EPA is empowered by CAA for its implementation. The states significantly contribute to ensuring that the state air is in accordance with the standards set by the CAA through SIP.
The hazardous substances add up to a hundred and eighty eight that risk human health and that of the surroundings which have to be regulated through Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) (‘NRC’ 2003). Much of the requirements set in the nineteen ninety amendments have been accomplished although there is still a long way to go for the entire United States to be freed from risks emanating from air pollution.
It is notable that around a hundred million people in the US live in nonattainment areas where ozone pollution and contamination from fine substances act as a health hazard. Therefore, a great challenge still lies ahead which have to be countered with more efficient NAAQS implementation through collaboration of the state and the federal agency, EPA (Wood, 2000).
Environmental laws have been dependent strongly on the political arena. For instance, the Americans attribute the issues of the environment to the government whose efficiency depend on government’s attention. Environmental issues triggers press attention which makes it hard for the government to ignore them.
The future of EPA continues to be affected by international decision such as the Montreal Protocol which contains provisions for dealing with ozone depleting agents e.g. CFCs (Davies & Mazurek, 1999). Safeguarding people’s health is not only beneficial in increasing the life expectancy but also in managing the nation’s economic expenditures that can be otherwise avoided.
References
Belden, R. (2001). Clean Air Act: Section of Environmental Energy, and Resources. Chicago, Illinois: American Bar Association.
Davies, C. & Mazurek J. (1999). Pollution Control in the United States. Washington D.C: Resources for the Future.
Lipton, J. (2006). Clean Air Act: Integration and Analysis. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
National Research Council (NRC). (2003). Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations: Current Knowledge, Future Needs. Washington D.C: National Academies of Sciences.
Novello, D. & Martineau, R. (2004). The Clean Air Act handbook.2 Ed. Chicago, Illinois: American Bar Association.
Wood, D. (2000). Air Pollution: Status of Implementation of the Clean air Act Amendments of 1990.Washington D.C: United States Government Accountability office.
The Clean Air Act (CAA) is an example of public policy from the environmental field. It was enacted in 1970 to underline the federal government’s role in air pollution control and the necessity to regulate air emissions from stationary sources (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2021). Public health issues and welfare risks must be addressed to identify pollutant standards and ensure that industrial organizations achieve them properly. In a short period, this environmental law has become a local and global policy for mobile sources to be followed.
The chosen issue requires the attention of citizens because of several reasons. According to Kraft and Furlong (2017), most public problems are usually characterized by complex and multifaceted aspects, addressing the contributions of the private sector and the government. The intention to protect human health by controlling emissions from cars or trucks is the first explanation for the public policy’s recognition. Citizens need to understand the outcomes of their decisions that harm the environment and affect their well-being. Another reason is related to the government and its regulatory role. This public policy provokes certain social unrest and even cynicism about the quality of the governmental work (Daniels et al., 2019). Few individuals understand how the CAA is implemented and what steps to take to predict air pollution. The population should know if the alternatives to driving cars and the work of industrial organizations are possible.
The proposed solution to the existing environmental problems and the role of the CAA in modern society may include improved education for all potential stakeholders. People need to learn about the impact of the physical environment and polluted air on human communities (Daniels et al., 2019). The level of education and access to real-life examples and assessment tools should be associated with improvements because individuals will be able to comprehend the relationship between their personal decisions and the environment and make the right choices with time.
References
Daniels, B., Follett, A. P., & Davis, J. (2019). The making of the Clean Air Act. Hastings Law Journal, 71, 901-958. Web.
Kraft, M. E., & Furlong, S. R. (2017). Public policy: Politics, analysis, and alternatives (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Environment law can be defined as a cluster of laws that contain elements that have power over human activities on the earth and public health. It has diverse obligations and prospects that can be put into practice in addressing collective impacts and susceptible populations.
For instance, Clean Air Act protects city residents from air pollutions. This paper will provide detailed information on how Clean Air Act came into formation and its impact on eradication of pollution (Wood, 2000).
Provisions of CAA
Clean Air Act (CAA) is a law that was drafted by the federal government of America with the intention of protecting the Americans from breathing in contaminated air.
Currently, it plays a significant role in regulating air emissions from both stationary and mobile devices. In addition, CAA also authorises EPA to form NAAQS that protects both public health and public welfare from hazardous air pollution (Belden, 2001). Reasons for introduction of CAA
The origin of CAA dates back to early 1950s. It was signed into law by President Eisenhower in July 1955. However, its core provisions were signed by the congress in 1970 (Davidson and Norbeck, 2011).
In 1970, the federal formulated procedures that were to be used by EPA in setting up national standards for preventing air pollution. For instance, it was assigned the duty of reducing emissions from new automobiles by 90%. EPA was also allowed to establish new performance standards. The standards will aid in determining the amount of pollution that was to be emitted by different industries in diverse regions.
In the amendment of 1970, CAA also encouraged states to come up with plans that could aid in reducing air pollution. It was amended in early 1977 and 1990 in order to elongate the deadlines and to denote on new policies for keeping the air clean (United States, 1981).
For instance, the amendment of 1975 required EPA to come up with programs that will not only aid in regulating emission of air toxins, but also strengthen federal enforcement authority.
CAA obliges the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to come up with quality national health standards in order to eradicate pollutants such as smog, carbon (ii) oxide, and nitrogen (ii) oxide.
In addition to enforcing state governments into coming up with cleanup plans for the environment, it also requires EPA to enforce nations into setting up national standards for major sources of pollution such as automobiles and electric power plants.
In addition, it also authorises discharge controls of over 180 hazardous air pollutants, set ups a program that curbs the production of acid rain and recommends for the prevention of deterioration of clean air. CAA also implements programs such as Montreal Protocol to eradicate most of the ozone depleting chemicals.
Economic impacts of CAA
Just as in the past, Clean Air Act plays a significant role in protecting the citizens of America from air pollution. America is one of the nations in the world that records few cases of premature deaths and illness.
With few cases of deaths and illness, it is evident that America allocates little amount of money towards health issues. It is also evident that the productivity of American workers is recommendable. Thus, the Act has played a significant role towards boosting the economy of America.
It is also evident that the Act acts as one of the economic investment for America. For example, it is evident that health benefits of CAA outnumber the amount of money invested in them.
According to the EPA peer review carried in 2011, there is also great probability of Americans benefiting directly from CAA. For instance, the study estimates the benefit of CAA to exceed in 2020 by a factor of 3-to-1.
CAA has enabled America for more than 40 years to manage its economy and create employment opportunities for its citizens. For instance, the reduction of air pollution by about 70% in 2011 enabled America to advance domestically.
Additionally, America also faced an increase in employment opportunities almost the same period by 88%. Occasionally, pollution prevention involves construction of companies and purchase of equipment which not only last for long, but also create employment opportunities.
According to data collected from U.S manufacturers in 2005, the amount spent in curbing pollution was less than one percent of the amount spent in shipping goods (United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Environment and Public Works. Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate Change, and Nuclear Safety, 2004).
CAA has also created market opportunities in diverse states. It has played a great role in the field of technology by inspiring people into becoming innovative. For instance, it has led to the emergence of new technologies that contribute to America being a global market.
Impacts of CAA to the environment
Despite of the low attention paid towards Clean Air Act, it is evident that it has played a significant role towards the lives of the Americans. For instance, it has managed to eradicate cases of pollution by elements such as lead, sulphur (ii) oxide, carbon (ii) oxide, nitrogen (ii) oxide, particle pollution, and ground level ozone.
Currently, EPA has also managed to reduce cases of premature mortality by 160,000, heart attacks by 130,000, lost work days by 13 million and asthma by 1.7 million. The 2020 vision of EPA is also outstanding; it plans to reduce the number of early deaths in America from 160,000 t0 230,000. (Lipton, 2006).
References
Belden, R. (2001). Clean Air Act. New York: American Bar Association.
Davidson, J & Norbeck, J. (2011). An Interactive History of the Clean Air Act: Scientific and Policy Perspectives. New York: Elsevier.
Lipton, J. (2006). Clean Air Act: Interpretation and Analysis. New York: Nova Publishers.
United States. (1981). The Clean Air Act as Amended August 1977 and July 1980. New York: U.S Government Printing Office, 1981.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Environment and Public Works. Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate Change, and Nuclear Safety (2004). Clean Air Act: alternative fuels and fuel additives : hearing before the Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate Change, anthe Nuclear Safetyty of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, first session, on provisions of the Clean Air Act…, Volume 4. New York: U.S.G.P.O.
Wood, D. (2000). Air Pollution: Status of Implementation of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. New York: DIANE Publisher.
A law regarding labor finds its approval from the state legislature or congress. At the local level, this law is usually termed as an ordinance. Such laws are either based on the chronological facts relating to period passed or according to topic. This paper serves to explain the more on the Clean Air Act enacted and reinforced by the Federal government.
Select one labor statute or regulation at the federal, state or local level, which you find, of interest
The Clean Air Act came into being following a legislation passed by the American congress in 1970. This Act was tailored to ensure that all American citizens have breathing air that is pollutant-free. Despite its concern to keep the environment from air pollution effects, this law majorly focused on Public health protection. Several amendment have been passed on this Act, with the first taking effect in 1977 and another which sought to specify new strategies for cleaning up the air and extend deadlines for legal actions in 1990.in the face of all this, the laws original framework and its attached public health objectives have never changed (Lipton, 2006).
Describe the objective of the statute or regulation including the number of the particular law or regulation; provide at least one example of how an organization has implemented the statute
The clean air Act was passed with the major objective of protecting the American citizens from pollutants that include Ozone (smog), sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide and particulate soot. The state government sought to work out a clean-up strategy that will meet the health standards outlined. In addition, this law sought to empower the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which sets standards regarding new sources of air pollution such as power plants, automobiles and trucks.
In this respect, section 109 of Clean Air acts provides that the EPA shall publish National Ambient Quality Standards paying attention on specific pollutants. Here, the health and welfare forms the basis of criterion used to decide on the kind of pollutants to control and the level at which it is regulated. The pollutants considered at that time included sulfur oxide, carbon monoxide, ozone, particulate matter, sulfur oxide and lead.
Another section of the act is the 112 section, which directs EPA to set up the limits for the emissions of toxic pollutants. This is more concern as a precaution put in place to mitigate increased mortality or any serious incapacitating illness (Belden, 2001).
Hussey Seating Company (Hussey) is an example of a company, which made a deliberate move towards the implementation of the Clean Air act. This implementation served as an effort to improve the working surroundings by cutting down the air emissions from their wood finishing process. In addition, this was a measure adopted in preparation for the imminent Clean Air Act.
This company deals in bleacher seating that majorly comprise long, flat and comparatively narrow boards. Initially, polyurethane varnish was used to finish the two coats on both sides. Following a suggestion posed by an employee in 1993, the company decided to undertake a research on the viability of UV cured coating. In 1994, the results of the analysis led to a move that saw the company switch to automated UV coating. Consequently, the emission from the UV covering system became a problem of the past. In the same line, hazardous air pollutant (HAP) and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions were cut down from nearly 50 tons to only 219 pounds yearly.
Secondly, Hussey Company replaced the nitrocellulose solvent-based covering for making wood chair back and arms with coating from aqueous polyester. This switch to aqueous –based coating worked to reduce the VOC emission to less than two pounds for every gallon. This is a big contrast to the six pounds in every gallon when using nitrocellulose coating (Air & Waste Management Association, 1999).
Discuss how an organization should or has measured and monitored for compliance with the statute
NAAQS are special air quality standards in America that serve to regulate the air quality. These standards are divided into primary NAAQS, which are set at a level that serves to protect the general public health and secondary NAAQs established to guard the environment. The standards units are in microgram per cubic meter or pert per million over a known time. These standards referred to as “criteria pollutants” measure the six categories of pollutants.
Conclusion
Organizations monitor the compliance with the Clean Air Act by analyzing the concentration of the criteria pollutants in the working environment. This is compared with the threshold or regulated level for one or more National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Following this, the area is classified as nonattainment if it is found to exceed certain level.On the other hand, if the levels are lower than those established by NAAQS it is classified as attainment. Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ) owns the ambient air monitors, which serve to monitor these levels. These monitors are located in the different states across the country. EPA (Belden, 2001) publishes the analyzed results.
References
Air & Waste Management Association. (1999).EM: Air & Waste Management Association’s magazine for environmental. London: The Association.
Belden, R. (2001).Clean Air Act. New York, NY: American Bar Association, 2001
Lipton, J. (2006).Clean Air Act: Interpretation. Detroit: Nova Publishers.
The 1990 Clean Air Act is a part of U.S. lawmaking linked to the decrease of pollution and air contamination. Although the 1990 Clean Air Act is a national law that covers the entire country, different states do much of the work to carry out the Act. The law distinguishes that states should guide in carrying out the Clean Air Act, as toxic waste control problems often require the special realization of local industries, topography, housing patterns, etc. (Munton, 1997)
Implementation policy by the USA
Under the Clean Air Act, Environment Protection Association sets restrictions on certain air contaminants, comprising setting limits on how much can be in the air wherever in the United States. The Clean Air Act also gives EPA the power to limit releases of air contaminants coming from sources like chemical factories, efficacies, and steel mills. Personal states or tribes may have tougher air pollution regulations, but they may not have weaker contamination limits than those set by Environment Protection Association.
This association must approve state, ethnic, and local organization plans for reducing air pollution. If a plan does not meet the necessary requirements, EPA can issue approves against the state and, if required, take over enforce the Clean Air Act in that area. EPA assists state, tribal, and local charities by offering research, expert investigations, manufacturing designs, and funding to maintain clean air development. (Vannijnatten, 2003)
Implementation by Canadian Government
The central government listed its new Canada’s clean Air act legislation. Highlights are as follows:
Will found short-, medium- and long-term aims for air contaminators from main human sources (comprising industry, shipping, and certain manufacturers).
Amends Canadian Environmental Protection act 1999, Energy Efficiency act, and Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption Standards act.
Will move a figure of materials from the list of “CEPA Toxic” substances to new Categories, “air pollutants” and “greenhouse gases” (generally called “air Emissions”).
Consultations with industrial sectors will occur over the next nine months.
In most cases, efforts will be made to align Canadian standards with those in the U.S. (Levy, Carrothers, Tuomisto, 2001)
Conclusion
Evaluating and contrasting policy implementation clean air act in both United States and Canada.
In comparison then you find that both nations have given the greatest share of their revenue on health care facilities since it’s through preserving health facilities then that the economy repeatedly grows. Both Canada and the United States have a resemblance on relying greatly on private third party indemnity and it’s through this then that both states have been in a location to improve their health customaries.
The clean air act in both the United States and Canada was really to decrease the rate of air toxic waste, which really impacts the health of its citizens. In both the united states and Canada, they have established policies and programs in order to ensure that the quality of air is made to standard, Some of the known harmful gases have been restricted which comprises gases like carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide among other gases that have actually reduced by a higher rate of proportion and this has generally been attained through these courses which ensure that power factories and greenhouses which discharge these harmful gases have been controlled.
In both the states, they have put most of their prosperity in fitness activities since if the health of the inhabitants is influenced, then you find that the financial system of that country goes down. Canada and United States have financed most of their profits on it since it is the most luxurious item on their budgets. In Canada, it’s a must for every citizen to have health insurance since it’s regarded as a basic right and value for all. (Wold, 2005)
References
Levy, J. I., Carrothers, T. J., Tuomisto, J. T., Hammitt, J. K., & Evans, J. S. (2001). Assessing the Public Health Benefits of Reduced Ozone Concentrations. Environmental Health Perspectives, 109(12), 1215.
Munton, D. (1997). Acid Rain and Transboundary Air Quality in Canadian-American Relations. American Review of Canadian Studies, 27(3), 327-58.
Vannijnatten, D. L. (2003). Analyzing the Canada-U.S. Environmental Relationship: A Multi-Faceted Approach. American Review of Canadian Studies, 33(1), 93.
Wold, C. (2005). Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the GATT: Conflict and Resolution?. Environmental Law, 26(3), 841-921.
From the 1970s to the 1990s, U. S. citizens were actively involved in grassroots actions, culminating in 1970, 1977, and 1990 Clean Air Acts. The affected industries put up strong political opposition to this legislation but it has accomplished a lot in terms of human health and air quality. One of the main achievements of the Clean Air Act is that the atmosphere is now almost lead-free. According to estimates by EPA, since 1970, lead emissions have reduced by 85% (EPA para. 4). This progress is expected to continue as older agricultural equipment and motor vehicles powered by leaded gas turn obsolete. Moreover, many urban centers now adhere to the sulfur dioxide (SO2) standards set by the federal government. By 1977, there was already a 20 percent reduction in lead emissions (APA para. 6).
1970, 1977, and 1990 Clean Air Acts specify six criteria for air pollutants. Between 1980 and 2006, the implementation of these criteria resulted in a 49 percent decrease in air pollution (Miller & Spoolman 263). This is despite the significant increases in vehicle miles traveled, gross domestic product, population, and energy consumption. The 1990 U. S. Clean Air Act authorized emission trading and under this program, power plants with the highest levels of pollution (there are 110 of these in 21 states) were allowed to sell and buy SO2 pollution rights. The less pollution the more carbon credits earned. Consequently, coal-burning-powered plants in the U. S. realized a 53 percent reduction in SO2 emissions between 1990 and 2006 (Miller & Spoolman 264). Today, a newly manufactured car in the U.S emits approximately 75 percent less pollution in comparison with cars manufactured before 1970. In 10 to 20 years, we are likely to witness additional gains in the form of new energy-efficient cars, and emission engine systems.
The Clean Air Acts have not escaped the attack of executives of the affected companies, on grounds that they would be detrimental to economic growth, and that they would be costly to implement (Miller & Spoolman 267). On the other hand, proponents of these regulations opine that the implementation of these regulations is more expensive than the actual cost. Besides, implementing these standards has resulted in job creation. It also boosts the economy because companies endeavor to develop novel technologies that minimize air pollution.
Students, education institutions, and citizen groups can also take an active role in the fight against air pollution at the community level. Students and citizens groups can educate the local community on the need to use mass transit such as railway transport as opposed to having to use personal vehicles (Miller & Spoolman 268). Citizens groups and students should also encourage the local community to cycle or walk to work instead of driving. Educational institutions should also educate members of the community on the need to use cars with improved fuel efficiency to reduce air pollution. Also, education institutions should advise members of the community on the need to get rid of older cars because they emit more pollutants. In addition, educational institutions can also advise members of the community on the need to periodically check car exhaust systems, possibly twice a year.
Works Cited
EPA. History of the Clean Air Act. 2010. Web.
EPA. What are the six common air pollutants? 2010. Web.
Miller, George and Spoolman, Scott. Environmental Science. Stamford, Mass: Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
Miller, George and Spoolman, Scott. Sustaining the Earth: an integrated approach. Stamford, Mass: Cengage Learning, 2008. Print.