User:Surfertk/Sandbox

Title I - Air Pollution Prevention and Control Part B - Ozone Protection In light of advancements in understanding of atmospheric chemistry, this section was replaced by Title VI in 1990. These changes reflect a change in scientific understanding about how Ozone is formed and depleted. Specifically, Ozone's absorbtion spectrum covers UVC light and shorter wave UVB, letting through UVA (which is largely harmless to people). Ozone exists in the Stratosphere, not troposphere, exhibiting a lateral distribution because it is destroyed by strong sunlight; there is more at the poles. Ozone is made naturally when O2 comes in contact with photons from solar radiation. Therefore a decrease in the intensity of solar radiation also results in a decrease in the formation of Ozone in the stratosphere. This exchange is known as the Chapman mechanism: O2 + UV photon => O + O (note that atmospheric Oxygen as O is highly unstable) O + O2 +M => O3 (O3 is Ozone) + M

where M represents a third molecule necessary to carry off the excess energy of the collision of O + O2. Depletion of Ozone occurs in the presence of Freon and Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Following discovery of the Ozone hole in 1974, the 1987 Montreal Protocol was successful in implementing a plan to replace CFCs. The speed and cooperation of the Montreal Protocol is viewed by some environmentalists as an example of what is possible for the future of environmental issues, if the political will can be garnered.

Title II - Emission Standards for Moving Sources Part A - Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards (CAA § 201-219; USC § 7521-7554) This part of the bill was extremely contentious at the time it was passed. The automobile industry argued that they could not meet the new standards and Senators expressed concern about the impact of this part of the legislation, in particular, on the economy. Specific new emissions standards for moving sources passed years later. Jevons paradox has done away with much of the system-gains in automobile efficiency since then. Because cars are more efficient, driving is less costly, so people now drive more on average, and this increased driving has overwhelmed the energy savings gained by the initial improvements in fuel efficiency. This same problem may be observed in the broader commercial sense when things are made more efficiently, driving down costs, so more units are sold, so that incremental improvements are overcome. This is what is so often lauded as improving profits and quality of life, but is environmentally damaging. Meanwhile, the focus is usually on the success of the solution, so drumming up further political support for the issue may be difficult. If individuals, corporations, and nations can externalize their costs, they will.

The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants. Since the initial establishment of 6 criteria pollutants of Ozone, Particulate Matter, Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxides, Sulfur Dioxide, and Lead. Advancements in testing and monitoring have lead to the discovery of many other significant air pollutants since both the 1970 and 1990 Clean Air Acts.

Robert Fri argues in “How Environmental Forces Shape Energy Futures” that energy and environmental policy making are inextricably linked. This perspective is echoed by many others including Robert Friedmanand Rosa Bierbaum in their article “The Bumpy Road to Reduced Carbon Emissions”. Characteristics of environmental drivers include the need for an empirical understanding of the costs and benefits of pollution reduction and how they accrue to different groups. Where benefits and costs accrue to different players, conflict is increased. Over time, the mix of costs and benefits has shifted. Pollution used to be primarily local, and the same people used to reap the benefits and benefits of whatever system was used. Extensive distribution and higher levels of more centralized production have changed this system to be less democratic. Increased NIMBYism has meant that those who reap the benefits (such as electricity or heating) often are not exposed to the immediate environmental costs (contaminated air or water). The energy/environment relationship has been changed by negative externalities accruing where and when people do not connect them with their own behavior and choices. Trans-boundary pollution changed this and politically changed pollution as a national issue. This was particularly true in Northern Europe in the second half of the 20th century and provided the impetus for some of the first real controls on industrial pollution, including the Clean Air Act.

Some people believe that the traditional model of exponential growth is anachronistic. John Gibbons advocates in “Conservator Society Still a Dream” for an “equilibrium oriented model”, proposing that where in the economy cost factors are incorporated matters less than widespread recognition that it is necessary to include such factors in market pricing. A further alternative policy to the Clean Air Act might include efforts to build consensus in the economic sector on how to incorporate environmental costs and benefits into National Accounts. Although this will be a very data-intensive process, as evidenced by the beginnings of such an undertaking by the Dutch in recent years, it is useful for the policy-making process, and invaluable for making informed decision. The derived conventional wisdom is limited and problematic without such an empirical basis for making assessments about tradeoffs between environment and economy. --Surfertk (talk) 07:08, 8 December 2010 (UTC)