Skip to main content

View Diary: Huge: SCOTUS upholds EPA efforts to regulate greenhouse gases (131 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The NAAQS standards of the Clean Air Act (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    renzo capetti, ColoTim, CanyonWren

    for criteria pollutants were written to have public health considerations trump everything else.   That is why they
    are defended aggressively by the American Lung Association, Earthjustice and others.

    •  Well, mostly (0+ / 0-)

      but there remain concessions to politics and feasibility. So ozone stays at 75 ppb, when EPA's "science-based" recommendation for 60 ppb was overruled. The quotes are there because there is no known safe level for ozone, and EPA knows that.

      Then there are the PM limits, given as mass densities. That's not too bad for PM10, but not good for PM2.5, and using mass densities skews the attainment strategies. EPA knows full well that if you must have a single number it should be number density. But mass is much easier to measure than number.

      Still, given the money and power arrayed against them, overall EPA have done a damn fine job.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site