Page21

Update item information
Title Let's Clear the Air
Subject Air--Pollution
Description The Thirty-Sixth Annual Frederick William Reynolds Lecture.
Creator De Nevers, Noel, 1932-
Publisher The Frederick William Reynolds Association
Date 1973-02-20
Date Digital 2008-05-29
Type Text
Format image/jpeg
Digitization Specifications Original scanned on Epson Expression 10000XL flatbed scanner and saved as 400 ppi uncompressed tiff. Display images generated in PhotoshopCS and uploaded into CONTENTdm Aquisition Station.
Resource Identifier http://content.lib.utah.edu/u?/reynolds,1266
Source TD883 .D45 1973
Language eng
Relation Digital reproduction of "Let's clear the air," J. Willard Marriott Library Special Collections
Rights Digital Image Copyright University of Utah
Metadata Cataloger Seungkeol Choe; Ken Rockwell
ARK ark:/87278/s6ht2m87
Setname uu_fwrl
Date Created 2008-07-29
Date Modified 2008-07-29
ID 320531
Reference URL https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s6ht2m87

Page Metadata

Title Page21
Description "LET'S CLEAR THE AIR" 21 The conservationists were successful in their suit, and EPA was enjoined from approving any state plans which did not protect those areas with air cleaner than the standards from having their air degraded to the level of the standards. This court decision poses a real dilemma for EPA. If interpreted in the strictest way this could mean that areas which now have no industry and/or no significant urban or suburban population could never have these, because there is no known way that farmland, grazing land, or forest can be converted to industrial or residential areas without some increase in the rate of emissions of pollutants. Clearly, the problem hinges on the meaning of "significant deterioration." I do not think there is any chance that the final judicial outcome will be one which truly prohibits further suburban development, or the creation of new cities, or the creation of new industrial plants in previously non-urban or non-industrial areas. But the current court ruling, which has been accepted for review by the Supreme Court could be construed that way. What are the motives of the conservation organizations in bringing such a suit? As a Sierra Club member, I must make clear that I do not speak for all members, and my analysis of motives may be faulty. But, I believe that the conservationists assumed that if EPA were steadily and regularly attacked by industry, trying to force them to a more lax interpretation of the law without offsetting legal attacks from the other side to try to force them to a stricter interpretation of the law, then EPA would inevitably take the course of least resistance â€" a more lax interpretation of the law. By adopting a legal "hard-line" position the conservationists may prevent such a drift by EPA to a more lenient course. Modelling An additional controversy which raged within EPA and between EPA and other government agencies and industry during this whole period was over air pollution modelling. Congress required the states to enact and enforce the laws which would clean up the worst air polluted areas to meet the national standards, and required EPA to decide whether those state laws would indeed accomplish that result, and if not, to promulgate laws which would accomplish that result. But how should EPA decide whether the proposed state laws would do the job? In this case, EPA informed the states that it would compute the concentrations of pollutants to be expected after the new state regulations went into effect by one of two mathematical models. Let me digress a moment and discuss mathematical models. A model is an intellectual construct which represents reality and which can be manipulated to predict the consequences of various actions. Most of
Format image/jpeg
Identifier 023-RNLT-DeNeversN_Page21.jpg
Source Original Manuscript: Let's Clear the Air by Noel de Nevers.
Setname uu_fwrl
Date Created 2008-07-29
Date Modified 2008-07-29
ID 320523
Reference URL https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s6ht2m87/320523