American Air Quality Standards - Essay Example

Air Quality Standards American Air Quality Standards Compared to European Union Air Quality Standards The United s began its efforts to study and understand the complexity of air pollution problems and create an effective air pollution management system, in the wake of increased negative impacts of air pollution on ecosystems, public health, and economy, in the 1950s. The federal government formulated the Air Pollution Control Act of 1955, in order to provide funds to the state and local agencies for training and research (Chow, 2005). The Air Quality Act and the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1963, was meant to create Air Quality Control Regions (AQCRs), set Air Quality Criteria, and the stages for State Implementation Plans (SIPs). This guideline was further refined with the implementation of the CAA, in 1977 and 1990 (Chow, 2005). The Clean Air Act provided a complex set of relationships and responsibilities among local, tribal, state, and federal agencies. The federal government was the chief coordinator of the implementation process through the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). It was also charged with the responsibility of setting national air quality approaches and standards to pollution mitigation to provide basic standards, of environmental protection, to all Americans. Local and state agencies then create, implement, and enforce control measures and strategies to achieve national standards and goals (Chow, 2005). The European Union air quality management began in 1980 under the efforts of Directive 80/779/EEC (Beattie et al. 2001). This Directive set quality limit values (AQLVs), and a quality standard values for suspended particles and Sulphur dioxide gas (SO2). The Directive later set limit values for nitrogen dioxide, lead, and ozone. The quest to control air pollution dates back in 1956, however; taking specific actions, which are intended to manage and protect the environment began later in 1970s. During this period, a number of EU states had already developed air quality standards, but the EU faced the challenge of harmonizing these air quality standards into a single AQ standard (Beattie et al. 2001). The Air Quality Frame Work Directive (AQFD) of 1996, including its daughter agencies, aim at developing harmonized framework for managing and assessing air quality throughout European Union. The duties of the European Commission include enforcing actions when a member state fails to comply with its provisions under the EU legislation Treaty, and supervising the implementation of the EU legislation (Beattie et al. 2001). The European Environment Agency is also responsible for collecting data on air quality from its member states, through CORINAIR programme, and then publishes the findings. Air Quality Framework Directive permits EU member states to establish their own strategies for achieving air quality standards within their territories. In spite of this, they are required to implement the overall EU air quality standards and management system (Beattie et al. 2001). Overall EU system includes controlling stationary air pollution sources like emissions from factories such as industrial installations, facilities using solvents and large combustion plants. In addition, EU air quality control also focuses on controlling mobile sources such as road traffic. The air quality standards, in both the U.S. and EU, determine the planning requirements. The EU’s Air Quality Framework Detective and its subsidiary Directives create guidelines for meeting standard values and setting air quality limit values (AQLV) for specific air pollutants. AQLVs are specifically focused on controlling emissions and air particle suspensions such as Sulphur dioxide gas, carbon monoxide, ozone, nitrogen oxides, benzene and lead. It is also being developed and refined to control the amount of polyaromatic hydrocarbons, nickel, mercury, arsenic, and cadmium, in the air (Chow, 2005). The degree of monitoring air pollution depends on a zone’s Air Quality compliant with the AQLVs. Agglomerations and zones with air pollutants levels more than the margin of tolerance and AQLV are reported to the Environmental Commission at the end of the calendar year. The U.S. air quality control system is linked to the NAAQS. This is a U.S. agency that establishes national air quality standards to be met by all states. It currently focuses on six criteria pollutants, which include sulphur oxides (SOx), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), lead (Pb), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) (Chow, 2005). Air quality control regions (AQCRs), in the U.S., are determined based on areas, which are designated as “unclassified”, “attainment”, and “nonattainment”. Each AQCR is required to develop (SIP). There are two types of SIPs; an attainment-demonstration SIP, which is developed when AQCR is designated as nonattainment, and attainment-maintenance, when the AQCR is designated as attainment (Chow, 2005). Under the European Union AQFD, air pollution control plans are required only if the zones are proved to exceed the set quality level values. In this case, the planning is viewed as a type of sanction. In contrary, in the U.S., planning requirements focuses on all regions of their degree of attainment. Even regions, which are designated as attainment, must be covered with plans in order to establish how the attainment status will be maintained (Beattie et al. 2001). The EU Air Quality Framework Directive (AQFD) and its subsidiary Directives do not provide clear guidelines for solving AQ problems found in cross-border zones, but it requires its member states to consult with one another whenever such air pollution cases arise along the borders. The U.S. AQ managing system has efficient guidelines for addressing cross-border cooperation. The federal government is capable of establishing regional emission control programs or regional planning organizations to develop coordinated efforts, for example, addressing regional haze and ozone formation problems (Chow, 2005). Unlike the U.S. system, the European Union system does not provide a clear differentiation of zones in relation to their degree of air quality problems. While AQFD is providing basic differentiation of zones based on exceedence with respect to the “margin of tolerance”, the U.S. uses a system that is more comprehensive in differentiating the zones. Differentiation of zones is based on the intensity of the air quality problem such as serious and moderate (Chow, 2005). The EU should adopt U.S. system in order to address air pollution problems based air quality problems. Both EU and U.S. have a frame work of addressing regional transport of emissions. For example, the EU’s national emissions ceilings set for its member states emission standards that the Environmental commission regularly monitors. However, the U.S. system has legal mechanism, where a state can request the federal government to assess emission level of another state or region (Chow, 2005). Additionally, both nations have developed mechanisms for encouraging and enforcing significant development of programmes and plans by states, and monitor Air Quality standards. However, in comparison, the U.S. mechanisms are stronger that EU’s. For example, the federal government has the mandate to punish a state for failing to comply with NAAQS requirements. The EU system depends more on persuasion and pressure through things like reviewing implementation status, prospecting additional measures, and reporting of findings (Beattie et al. 2001). References Beattie C. I, Longhurst S. W, Woodfield S. K. (2001). Atmospheric Environment. Airquality management: evolution of policy and practice in the UK as exemplified by the experience of English local government , 1479–1490. Chow J. C. (2005). Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association. Measurement Methods to Determine Compliance with Ambient Air Quality Standards for Suspended Particles , 320-382. Read More