air purifiers

Activists back in court to challenge EPA's latest refusal to control toxic
                             mercury emissions

    WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Environmentalists
challenged the Environmental Protection Agency's latest refusal to limit
cement kilns' mercury emissions late last week in a federal lawsuit against
the EPA. Earthjustice is representing Sierra Club, Downwinders At Risk
(Texas), the Huron Environmental Activist League (Michigan), Friends of
Hudson (New York), Desert Citizens Against Pollution (California) and
Montanans Against Toxic Burning in the lawsuit. New York State is also
expected to challenge this rule in a separate lawsuit today.
    The groups filed the lawsuit February 16 in the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit.
    In December 2000, a federal court found that EPA's refusal to control
cement kilns' mercury emissions violated the Clean Air Act, and ordered the
agency to set the missing standards. Six years later, EPA has issued only
do- nothing housekeeping requirements that will have "essentially ... zero"
impact on the kilns' toxic pollution. The agency estimates that
approximately 118 cement kilns emit over 11,000 pounds of mercury each
year, making cement kilns one of the largest sources of mercury pollution.
The nation's single largest mercury polluter of any kind is a cement kiln
in southern California, which emitted over 2,500 pounds of mercury in 2004.
    "Once again the EPA has failed to put public health first," said Carl
Pope, Sierra Club executive director. "The agency ignored the law. They
have ignored the courts and they have ignored public health for too long.
It's time for the EPA to do what they should have been doing all along --
reducing the toxic mercury pollution that is harming our health and the
health of our children."
    In addition to defying the Clean Air Act and repeated court orders,
EPA's refusal to set mercury standards ignores the pleas of more than
20,000 people who wrote to the agency urging EPA to finally bring cement
kilns' mercury pollution under control.
    "Under this administration, EPA's disregard for Congress and the courts
has hit a new low," said Earthjustice attorney James Pew. "The Clean Air
Act required EPA to set mercury standards for cement kilns almost a decade
ago. A federal court ordered EPA to issue those standards six years ago.
Still it refuses. This is an agency that thinks it is above the law."
    Mercury is a dangerous and powerful neurotoxin that can cause
developmental problems in newborns and young children. Mercury pollution is
deposited in waters and eventually ends up in our food supply. People are
exposed to unhealthy levels of mercury when we eat mercury-contaminated
fish. EPA estimates that 15% of women of childbearing age, or one out of
every six, have enough mercury in their blood to put a baby at risk of
cognitive and developmental damage.
    "There is a very real, very sad human cost to not cutting toxic mercury
emissions at these cement plants," said Kathy Flanagan, a member of
Downwinders At Risk and stepmother of an 18-year old ADHD/autistic son.
"You hear a lot about the cost to industry to install new controls, but the
human cost, the cost to families, and a clean future never seem to make it
onto EPA's ledger when the government is deciding what to do about so much
mercury coming out of cement plant smokestacks."
    The EPA has been under fire recently for its failure to implement
required rules to reduce toxic air pollution from a variety of industrial
pollution sources. In July 2006, the Government Accountability Office
issued a report that blasted EPA for failing to take action on scores of
specific pollution control measures that Congress required the Agency to
complete years ago. Later that summer, a federal court found that EPA's
implementation of key toxics requirements in the Clean Air Act has been
"grossly delinquent" and that, "EPA ... currently devotes substantial
resources to discretionary rulemakings, many of which make existing
regulations more congenial to industry, and several of which since have
been found unlawful."
    Just this month, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public
Works held an oversight hearing on EPA, where chairwoman Sen. Barbara Boxer
(D-CA), said in a statement that, "The pattern of these year-end actions is
striking - - the public interest is sacrificed and environmental protection
compromised. Who gains from these rollbacks? Just look at who asked for
them, like Big Oil and the battery industry. EPA's actions and proposed
actions make it clear who EPA is protecting."

Smog Rules Illegally Weakened, Court Says; EPA Must Reinstate Pollution Limits
on Factories, Trucks, and Cars

    WASHINGTON, Dec. 22 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A federal appeals court
today struck down an attempt by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to
weaken national rules limiting smog linked to asthma attacks, increased
hospitalizations, and that puts millions of Americans at risk for
respiratory problems. In a unanimous ruling, the Court held that EPA
violated the Clean Air Act in relaxing limits on smog-forming pollution
from large power plants, factories, and other sources in cities violating
health standards. Earthjustice brought the court challenge on behalf of the
American Lung Association, Environmental Defense, Sierra Club, and Natural
Resources Defense Council.
    Also challenging the EPA rules as too weak were the Clean Air Task
Force (on behalf of the Conservation Law Foundation and Southern Alliance
for Clean Energy), Louisiana Environmental Network, South Coast Air Quality
Management District, and a coalition of states including Massachusetts,
Delaware, Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia.
    "This decision is a victory for clean air," said Earthjustice attorney
David Baron. "The air in some cities is sometimes so dirty that kids can't
safely play outside. Health experts say we need stronger, not weaker limits
on smog."
    Earthjustice argued that EPA's action made no sense because it came
after the agency found that the previous ozone standard was too weak to
protect public health. "The rule allowed more pollution in cities where the
air was already unhealthy to breathe," said Baron. Cities that were at risk
for increased pollution under EPA's action included Chicago, Houston,
Milwaukee, New York, Atlanta, Baltimore, Baton Rouge, Philadelphia,
Sacramento, Washington (DC), Beaumont-Port Arthur, Boston, Dallas,
Providence, and San Joaquin Valley, CA, among others.
    "Tens of millions of Americans in the nation's most polluted urban
areas will be able to breathe easier because the courts continue to reject
this administration's agenda to protect polluters at the expense of the
rest of us," said John Walke, Director of the Air Program at the Natural
Resources Defense Council.
    The 1990 Clean Air Act required stronger anti-smog measures in cities
violating ozone standards, including limits on pollution from new and
expanded factories, requirements for annual cuts in smog-forming emissions,
and caps on truck and car exhaust. In 1997, EPA found that the
then-existing "1-hour" ozone health standard wasn't strong enough to
protect health, and adopted a new "8-hour" standard to provide greater
protection. But paradoxically, the agency in 2004 adopted rules that
weakened pollution control requirements for areas violating both the old
and the new standard. That triggered the court challenge leading to today's
decision.
    "The court's decision to uphold the Clean Air Act is a victory for
human health, not just the rule of law," said John Balbus, MD, MPH, the
Health Program Director at Environmental Defense, and former Director of
the Center for Risk Science and Public Health at George Washington
University. "As a doctor, I know that enforcing this provision of the Clean
Air Act will save
    lives and prevent suffering by protecting millions of children and
seniors from ozone-triggered illnesses."
    "This is a splendid holiday present for the nation," said John L.
Kirkwood, President and Chief Executive Office for the American Lung
Association. "The Court has given children and adults long burdened by
dangerous, smoggy air the gift of breathing easier."
    The Court also rejected EPA's decision to exempt many cities violating
the new standard from the law's most protective requirements. EPA argued
that it should have discretion to apply weaker protections to these areas,
but the Court held that Congress -- frustrated with past failures to meet
standards -- required a stronger approach.
    "EPA has a responsibility to protect our health and our environment
from dirty, polluted air," said Marti Sinclair, chairperson for Sierra
Club's Air Quality Committee. "Millions of Americans breathe air with
unsafe ozone levels, and they deserve stronger, not weaker protection under
the law."
    Ozone is associated with asthma attacks, coughing, wheezing, and other
respiratory illness. Higher smog levels in a region are frequently
accompanied by increased hospitalization and emergency room visits for
respiratory disorders. Hundreds of counties across the country currently
have unhealthful levels of smog, which limits outdoor activities, increases
hospitalizations, and puts millions of Americans at risk for respiratory
problems.
    A copy of today's decision is available at:
http://www.earthjustice.org/library/legal_docs/dc-circuit-court-decision
-favoring-environmentalists-in-8-hour-ozone-implementation.pdf

Articles

Global Warming

DENTISTRY
Los Angeles

SPAS
Los Angeles
Washington

MEDICATIONS
Instant Meds

KIDS
My Troubled Teen

DIABETES
Normal Sugar Levels
Juvenile Diabetes

SLEEP
Quiet Night Sleep
Sleep Worx

SENIORS
Senior Krafts

HAPPINESS
True Bliss
Truth
Up To You
To Dei

PREVENTION
Sanitation

FORENSICS
What Do They Do?
What is it?