President Obama announced Saturday at the conclusion of the G8 Summit at Camp David, Maryland that the G8 leaders have committed to cutting short-lived climate pollutants to mitigate near-term climate change, save lives, and improve crop yields, and have joined the new Climate and Clean Air Coalition for Reducing Short Lived Climate Pollutants (CCAC).

The U.S. Department of Energy recently released calculations stating that the total global carbon output in 2010 was the biggest increase ever recorded. The world pumped about 564 million more tons of carbon into the air in 2010 than it did in 2009, an increase of 6% with China, and the U.S. responsible for half the increase and India in 3rd place. According to two combined land and sea surface temperature records from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) and the US National Climatic Data Centre (NCDC), the first six months of 2010 were the hottest on record. According to GISS, four of the six months also individually showed record highs.

There is an urgent need to decrease man carbon emissions.  Policy, practice and life style changes are tepid at best and must be exponentially increased to meet the growing challenge.

 

So What Can You Do About It?

 

As someone who now realizes the urgency of our global warming dilemma, what can you do on a personal level to help lower carbon emissions?

 

1.     Coal is the biggest carbon source worldwide and emissions from that jumped nearly 8 percent in 2010. We can support government efforts to limit coal as a fuel, learn more about “clean” coal and if that is a real option, support energy development and companies moving away from coal to cleaner fuels. And limit our own consumption of energy, especially fossil fuel energy.

2.     We can support companies that use “green fuel.” This means companies that are powered by wind, solar, bio-fuels like algae and battery power. These companies often put this information on the label of their product. Buying green products including those using alternative fuels is powerful.

3.     Buy local! When things don’t have to travel hundreds or thousands of miles to reach your hands, they didn’t use as much carbon emissions to get to you.

4.     If you’re not already recycling and/or composting, start now! Disposing of your trash takes energy, often fossil fuel energy.

5.     Don’t drive your car more than you have to. Group your trips taking the most efficient route and take the bus, carpool, bike or walk when you can!

6.     Turn off lights and appliances when not in use and keep the thermometer down and the air conditioning off as much as you can.

 


 

I installed solar panels on my roof in September. I made my decision after my monthly energy bill hit an all-time high, and then exceeded it the next month. But perhaps my most compelling reason to go solar is the least intuitive: I want to help stamp out asthma.

As a hospital-based pediatrician at Dell Children's Medical Center of Central Texas, I treat hundreds of children with asthma each year. In fact, asthma is the most common chronic disease of children, affecting nearly one in 10, and costing Americans an estimated $56 billion annually. During attacks, children gasp for breath and wheeze. An unfortunate handful of kids do not survive. And what might seem to be a case of genetic bad luck is only partly so; our air quality, which is dramatically worsened when fossil fuels are burned, has a profound impact upon asthma as well.

On Friday, September 2, 2011, the White House directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to withdraw and reconsider a proposal to strengthen National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone, the primary ingredient in smog. The announcement marked the first time that the Obama Administration formally returned one of its own agencies proposals, and it could indicate heightened executive scrutiny of forthcoming rules economic impacts. The heart of the Clean Air Act, NAAQS set maximum levels for six criteria pollutants at levels necessary to protect public health and welfare, implemented through State Implementation Plans covering a broad range of  sources. The ozone NAAQS were last revised in 2008, when the Bush Administration set a primary standard of .075 parts-per-million (“ppm”�) — more lenient than the .06-.07 ppm range recommended by EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee.In response to a lawsuit filed against the 2008 standards, the Obama administration agreed to reconsider the ozone NAAQS in September 2009 and proposed adopting a standard with the .06-.07 ppm range shortly thereafter. EPA held three public hearings on its proposal, and as recently as July 26, 2011, EPA stated that it "look[ed] forward to finalizing this standard shortly.".

Living in stressful homes increases the effects of outside air pollution in children, resulting in greater pollution-related lung damage, U.S. researchers say.

Lead researcher Talat Islam of the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, says psychosocial stress appears to enhance the lung-damaging effects of traffic-related pollution in children.

by Greg Lavery, Ph.D.

Yesterday (17 May) the UK government committed to a 50% reduction on 1990 greenhouse gas emission levels by 2025. This is very good for the development of the UK’s green economy and honours the recommendations of the Independent Committee on Climate Change. It represents another solid step towards the UK leading the third industrial revolution.

May ushered in smog season and metro Atlanta had its first code orange alert Monday. We’ve made tremendous progress improving our air quality, but serious challenges remain, particularly with respect to elevated ozone levels.

March 24, 2011

The Kansas House has approved a resolution saying the Environmental Protection Agency air-quality regulations are hurting the national economy.

Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced a supplemental proposal to reduce emissions from the Four Corners Power Plant. The new proposal will reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from approximately 45,000 tons per year to 5,800 tons per year, 3,200 tons less than EPA’s initial proposal. The proposal will also work to protect public health in the area by ensuring residents have cleaner air with fewer harmful pollutants.
Today’s action follows EPA’s initial October proposal to require pollution controls at the Four Corners Power Plant. In response to that proposal, Arizona Public Service put forward an alternative requiring plant operators to install Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) on two of the five coal-fired boilers and shut down the three older ones. SCR is the most stringent pollution control technology available for this type of facility.

“The new proposal controls emissions better, while costing less and preserving jobs,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. “This plant is the nation’s largest source of nitrogen oxides. By reducing its emissions by 87% - rather than our initial proposal of 80% - we will all be able to see the results and breathe cleaner, healthier air.”