Pollution Battle Waged On Capitol Hill

Industry Lobbyists Press White House To Block Tougher Limits On Smog Blamed On Health Crises

(AP)  Big industries are waging an intense lobbying effort to block new, tougher limits on air pollution that is blamed for hundreds of heart attacks, deaths and cases of asthma, bronchitis and other breathing problems.

The Environmental Protection Agency is to decide within weeks whether to reduce the allowable amount of ozone - commonly referred to as smog - in the air.

A tougher standard would require hundreds of counties across the country to find new ways to reduce smog-causing emissions of nitrogen oxides and chemical compounds from tailpipes and smokestacks.

Groups representing manufacturers, automakers, electric utilities, grocers and cement makers met with White House officials recently in a last-ditch effort to keep the health standard unchanged. They argued that tightening it would be costly and harm the economy in areas that will have to find additional air pollution controls.

Oil and chemical companies also have pressed their case for leaving the current requirements alone in meetings on Capitol Hill and with the Bush administration. A dozen senators and the Agriculture Department urged EPA not to tamper with the existing standard.

On the other side are health experts who conclude that tens of millions of people, particularly the elderly and small children, are still being harmed by poor air quality.

EPA said last summer that the current health standard - no more than 80 parts of ozone for every billion parts of air - does not provide needed protection against asthma, heart attacks and respiratory problems.

EPA has estimated a reduction to 70 parts per billion could result annually in 2,300 fewer nonfatal heart attacks; 48,000 fewer respiratory problems, acute bronchitis and asthma attacks; 7,600 fewer respiratory related hospital visits, and 890,000 fewer days when people miss work or school.

Under court order to review the standard, the EPA must decided by mid-March on what to do.

"The less pollution in the air, the fewer people are going to get sick, fewer children will have asthma attacks, fewer people are going to die," says Janice Nolen of the American Lung Association, which has argued along with almost every other health and medical group to tighten the smog standard issued in 1997.

The federal health standards set air quality benchmarks that states and local officials must strive to meet through various pollution reduction measures, or risk federal sanctions such as the loss of federal highway money. The law says the standard must be based on protecting public health and not cost, a position the Supreme Court has reinforced.

EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson has acknowledged the standard should be tightened, but he has been unwilling to go as far as health scientists say is needed to protect older Americans, children and the 20 million people that suffer from asthma.

The EPA's independent science advisory panel recommended a standard of between 60 and 70 parts per billion, as did a second EPA advisory board on children's health.

Both industry lobbyists and environmentalists say they believe Johnson has taken the view that the standard should be tightened to 75 parts per billion - an approach that doesn't satisfy either industry or health experts

"It's a political compromise," says Frank O'Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, an advocacy group. Even so, he adds, "every major industry is ... putting the squeeze on" to get the White House to leave the current standard in place.

"The results vary but most studies show a steady reduction in the public health burden as the standard is tightened," said Jonathan Levy of the Harvard Center of Risk Analysis.

Levy co-authored a 2006 study that examined the health benefits of tougher smog restrictions in California. It found that tightening the ozone standard to 70 parts per billion would annually result in 270 fewer premature deaths, 280 fewer emergency room visits for asthma and 1,800 fewer hospital admissions for respiratory disease in the state - a reduction of 75 percent in all three categories.

Another study estimated 3,800 premature deaths would be avoided nationwide.

Johnson met shortly before Christmas with representatives from environmental and health groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Public Health Association. At the meeting, they echoed the views of 111 health scientists who last year told the EPA the ozone health standards needed to be lowered to between 60 and 70 parts per billion.

Industry groups argue that the science is inconclusive and that the need for a tighter standard has not been shown since 104 counties have yet to meet the current requirements. If the standard is lowered to 75 parts per billion, the number of counties in violation grows to nearly 400, and at 70 parts per billion to 533, according to the EPA.

That means states would be forced to clamp new emission controls on businesses, and motor vehicles to clean up the air.

"It could trigger layoffs nationwide, further eroding U.S. economic competitiveness," Sen. George Voinovich of economically stressed Ohio, and six other Republican senators recently wrote the EPA. More than a dozen senators have weighed in against any change, while 22 House members told the EPA it should abide by "overwhelming scientific evidence in favor of stronger smog standards."

EPA has put the annual cost of meeting a 75 parts per billion standard at $9.8 billion. A 70 parts per billion ozone standard would cost $22 billion annually. But the EPA notes that the costs of either could easily be offset or exceeded by reduced health care costs.

Manufacturing groups from Virginia and Wisconsin have asked their senators to intervene. National lobbying powerhouses such as the National Association of Manufacturers, the American Petroleum Institute, the American Chemistry Council and Alliance for Automobile Manufacturers have met with administration officials and lobbied Congress to keep the smog standard unchanged.

NAM Vice President Keith McCoy said his group told the White House Office of Management and Budget that the EPA was not considering the economic impact.

"Our position is that the existing standard ... should remain in place," said Daniel Riedinger, a spokesman for the Edison Electric Institute which represents investor-owned power companies and recently also took its case to the White House.

"Urge them to retain the current standard," Harry Berry, the county executive/judge in Hardin County, Ky., wrote to his senator, Republican leader Mitch McConnell. Berry warned tougher smog health requirements would be "another blow to the bottom line" for businesses in his area.

William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies representing the state and county officials who would have to enforce new air quality requirements, said his group isn't opposed to a tougher standard.

"It's going to make our job that much more daunting," Becker said, "but what trumps that ... is public health."

[octavianfdlr]

Posted by lochlan:

WE put a tarriff on the goods the company wants to bring back into our country based on their carbon footprint. If they went to another country to pollute the worlds air from a country whose restrictions are less, the penalty will be more $$$ in tarriffs to put their products on our shelves.

Corporate sanctions.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ozone (O3) is not carbon dioxide (CO2) and has nothing to do with a "carbon footprint." Ozone concentrations can be increased by greater emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) caused by, for example, higher combustion temperatures in motor vehicle engines. Thus the well-understood trade-off:
Less ozone, more carbon dioxide;
More carbon dioxide, less ozone.

Yet the Global Warming alarmists keep telling us that the ONLY way we can decrease toxic pollution like ozone is to decrease carbon dioxide (increase toxic pollution like ozone.)

Don''t you want cleaner air? Tell your elected representatives (and any candidates for public office) to reject the false pronouncements of the IPCC!

[hsinco-2009]

More greed and corruption.

Like it? Want more?

Vote John Bu$h McCain!

[sjc_1]

Most of the people in Southern California live where the air does not pass EPA standards now. They should all be driving plug hybrids that run on natural gas.

As for what we will do for jobs...we will be converting peoples cars to plug hybrids that run on natural gas.

[mcvet]

Since I have COPD I am all far reduced air pollution. The problem is, we force companies to flee to Mexico and other countries that do not have the laws we do or do not enforce the laws that they have. What do we do for jobs?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Sebastian27 at 01:47 PM : Mar 06, 2008
+ report abuse

THAT means that someone negotiated a flawed Trade Agreement. We do NOT breath dirty air or dirty water because some slime ball CEO whats to Exploit Cheap Poor people''s labor. Nope. I got a grandson who deserves to grow up healthy.

[mcvet]

Worse than a bunch of little old ladies... yeah, crying like the children they claim to defend. Just look at them-- tree huggers, Sierra Club, Nature Conservancy types, all with one sinister political agenda-- making the air fit to breathe.

Disgusting...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by alphaa10 at 03:40 AM : Mar 06, 2008
+ report abuse

I guess that tells you what they think of our intelligence huh? LOL

[mcvet]

WE put a tarriff on the goods the company wants to bring back into our country based on their carbon footprint. If they went to another country to pollute the worlds air from a country whose restrictions are less, the penalty will be more $$$ in tarriffs to put their products on our shelves.

Corporate sanctions.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by lochlan at 01:56 PM : Mar 06, 2008
+ report abuse

I like it!!

[lochlan-2009]

What do we do for jobs?


Posted by Sebastian27

WE put a tarriff on the goods the company wants to bring back into our country based on their carbon footprint. If they went to another country to pollute the worlds air from a country whose restrictions are less, the penalty will be more $$$ in tarriffs to put their products on our shelves.

Corporate sanctions.

[sebastian27-2009]

Since I have COPD I am all far reduced air pollution. The problem is, we force companies to flee to Mexico and other countries that do not have the laws we do or do not enforce the laws that they have. What do we do for jobs?

[rf35]

Corporate America is so short-sighted. They don''t realize they could actually save money in the long-run with fewer missed work days and less paid for employee health care. Corporate America is so short-sighted. They don''t realize they could actually save money in the long-run with fewer missed work days and less paid for employee health care. Not to mention that less polluting usually = more efficient, therefore less waste.

[neobrian-2009]

It`s Easy to see,No One Cares

You''''re greed is endless and disgusting, and I sure hope the representation don''''t think the voters aren''''t watching. Not these days!!!

Posted by lochlan at 10:35 AM : Mar 06, 2008
----------------
Just look at how many people have posted on this article,...Very Few ! There are too concerned with things they ca not do anything about,( like how others vote ),.We CAN do something here,...Organize ! Back people with like minds,...STOP ''CORPORATE GREED '' !
Corporate Greed affects Every aspect of our lives,...Our Air,Our Water,Our Safety,.Our products,..Our Total Environment ! VOTE DEMOCRATIC!
STOP THE MADNESS !

[lochlan-2009]

I don''t think so Corporate America. The balls you people have, asking (probably bribing) the representatives to allow you to continue poisoning people so you can continue to make rediculaous profits at the expense of every man, woman and childs health in the country.

You''re greed is endless and disgusting, and I sure hope the representation don''t think the voters aren''t watching. Not these days!!!

[afmca]

Yes, once again the huge polluting corporations run to Bush and the Repub party to save their precious profits while taking no responsibility for the human or ecological damage their plant''s pollution is causing. Profits - Yes; People - No! maybe we should pump that air into their homes and see how they like it.

[alphaa10-2009]

Most interesting-- observe "our" USDA, right in there with the polluters, working hard to uphold their interests against us, the people without lobbies.

Science and medicine is not on their side, but eleven congressmen are. And that is all they need to give them a sense of purpose.

And as if that were not enough, business lobbies bring out the holy mantra of Needless Expense, as though USDA were in charge of helping them make a profit.

Somehow, it almost always works out that business survives and thrives after regulatory actions. Conservatives say it''s a credit to the ingenuity of businessmen. (But the more polite never ask, "Well, how did such geniuses fall into these practices, anyway?")

[alphaa10-2009]

cbscrash07 said, "So I guess children and the elderly should stay away from spas and laser printers..."
---
Yeah, right. Pesky medical people just live to make your life more miserable than it already is, with their stupid regulations and worries. They call that epidemiology, but if you ask me-- and I never went to medical school-- it''s a crock...

Worse than a bunch of little old ladies... yeah, crying like the children they claim to defend. Just look at them-- tree huggers, Sierra Club, Nature Conservancy types, all with one sinister political agenda-- making the air fit to breathe.

Disgusting...

[watcher269-2009]

If you want more of the "McSAME" vote for John McCain!

[michellem99-2009]

WA state has a clean air act.. The nation should as well.

[michellem99-2009]

The problem is all them cars running the roads as they make the air dirty as well as businesses do. The glean air act. People add to it.

[neobrian-2009]

GOP Idiots would uphold Charles Manson,.
If Shrub said " He was acting in our national interest "..These Nuts will eat anything,Greed,Oil,Perverts,..Only ones Worse are The Ones Who Uphold the garbage!

[jimfinster]

This is stupid. I bet the laser printer on my desk or the photo copier down the hall emit higher concentrations of Ozone than this. I know my spa does since it has a built ozonator. So I guess children and the elderly should stay away from spas and laser printers.

Posted by cbscrash07



The only thing stupid is your post.

[turn_2_jesus]

ig industries are waging an intense lobbying effort to block new, tougher limits on air pollution that is blamed for hundreds of heart attacks, deaths and cases of asthma, bronchitis and other breathing problems.

Now they are doing something?