Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEPA Refuses to Take Action Against Acid Rain, Rejects Scientific Advisory Committee’s Recommendation
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 21, 2012
EPA Refuses to Take Action Against Acid Rain, Acid Deposition
Agency Rejects Scientific Advisory Committees Recommendation to Strengthen Pollution Standard to Safeguard Wildlife and Environment
WASHINGTON - March 21 - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced today that it will not improve a critically important rule to protect the public from the ongoing harmful impacts of the acid rain pollutants nitrous oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides (SOx). The EPAs review of the existing standard for these pollutants and the deadline for a final decision on whether to update it were required under the terms of a settlement agreement in a case brought by the Center for Biological Diversity and allies in 2005.
EPA staff and the Scientific Advisory Committee proposed new and protective standards that had been years in the making and would have been an elegant solution to the serious, ongoing harm being inflicted by acid rain, said Kassie Siegel, director of the Center for Biological Diversitys Climate Law Institute. The EPA is wrong to reject the advice of its own scientific advisors, and wrong to continue many years of unacceptable delay in addressing this danger.
In todays decision, the EPA admitted that the current standard is inadequate to protect against ongoing acid deposition in many of the nations lakes, streams, estuaries and sensitive terrestrial habitats. In fact, the EPA announced in 1998 that harm from these pollutants was ongoing, but cited scientific complexity and uncertainty as reasons for inaction and pledged to collect the information needed. In response, EPA staff scientists developed an improved and more protective standard that addresses both harmful pollutants and varying levels of acid sensitivity in different ecosystems. The Scientific Advisory Committee recommended that the EPA add a new, more protective standard based on this approach.
But in todays decision, the EPA rejected the scientific recommendations and announced it will retain the existing, admittedly inadequate standard.
The EPA has acknowledged the ongoing harm from acid deposition, including negative ecosystem effects in many estuaries, impairing fish production and human activities such as swimming, boating and tourism; reduced growth rates in a number of fish species, such as salmon and trout, attributed to acid stress; declines in species richness; and harm to species at the base of the food chain. Acid deposition on sensitive terrestrial ecosystems also contributes to decline in native and imperiled land species.
See their links at:
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2012/acid-rain-03-21-2012.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1539 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (7)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
EPA Refuses to Take Action Against Acid Rain, Rejects Scientific Advisory Committee’s Recommendation (Original Post)
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
OP
Well, not distortions. But, I will wait for the full story, not just one side of it. nt
bluestate10
Mar 2012
#1
So that is the environmental side of the story. Where can we find the other side of the story?
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#2
This is what happens when you have a single, corporate party running the government
villager
Mar 2012
#3
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)1. Well, not distortions. But, I will wait for the full story, not just one side of it. nt
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)2. So that is the environmental side of the story. Where can we find the other side of the story?
Last edited Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:01 PM - Edit history (1)
villager
(26,001 posts)3. This is what happens when you have a single, corporate party running the government
n/t
FSogol
(45,525 posts)4. Glad you read the Center for Bio Diversity articles. Why did you forget to post the 500+ articles
they wrote complaining about the Bush administration?