Smoke in your Eyes….

On March 8, YOU need to defend your right to breathe clean air.

If you thought our federal government was on the case, ensuring your health is protected and that how much air pollution you’re exposed to everyday is set on the best science available, well, you’d be wrong. Welcome to the brave new world of global warming inaction, faith-based biology curriculums, and just simply not believing the most respected air pollution scientists in the country when they tell you air pollution can sicken or kill you. Are you surprised?

Fine particle pollution from power plants and diesel engines is the nation’s deadliest air pollutant. Particles can lodge deep within the lungs and even enter the bloodstream, causing serious respiratory and cardiovascular problems, such as asthma attacks, heart attacks, lung cancer, and strokes. Fine particle pollution is so dangerous that it contributes to tens of thousands of premature deaths every year, including hundreds here in Illinois alone. Ironically, although the entire Chicago metropolitan and Metro East areas still FAIL to meet the current federal air quality health standards for particle pollution set back in 1997, reams of science and health studies (over 2000 and growing) are now showing that the health standard for this particle pollution needs to be much, much tighter to protect the public.

But, the head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) disagrees, apparently with everyone else who has any credibility on this topic. A new U. S. EPA proposal to revise the national air quality health standard for particle pollution is weaker than recommended by EPA’s own staff scientists, the EPA’s own Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (made up of the best air pollution scientists in the U.S.), and over 100 independent air quality researchers and doctors. Strangely, the Republican-appointed scientist leader of CASAC is actually now one of the many people leading the charge against the EPA’s largely ‘do nothing’ proposal. This is the first time EPA has ever simply ignored the recommendation of its own hand picked clean air committee.

As you might suspect, power plant, refinery, and other large polluters are happy with this political science based policy trend. By saying air pollution really isn’t as dangerous as the experts say it is, the EPA will be protecting the industries actually responsible for a lot of that pollution. If you ignore the health science, there simply is no problem, and you don’t have to clean up.

SO WHAT CAN “YOU” DO?

On March 8, 2006, the EPA will hold a public hearing in downtown Chicago from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m on its proposal to revise the particle pollution standards. EPA says it wants to hear what the public thinks of their proposal before it makes final changes to the health standard this fall. You might want to let them know, as it will be another SEVEN years before any changes will even be considered again.

HOW TO GIVE EPA A PIECE OF YOUR MIND
1) To register to speak please contact Tricia Crabtree with USEPA
( crabtree.tricia@epa.gov Phone: 919-541-5688). Please let her know you want to talk in Chicago and your time preference. Don't harrass her, she's just the scheduler. (The hearing is at the Hyatt Regency 151 E. Wacker Dr. 312-565-1234).

2) If you register – PLEASE tell Brian Urbaszewski at the Lung Association (burbaszewski@alamc.org Phone: 312-628-0245) what time slot EPA assigned you.

Comments can focus on your personal views, experiences or concerns regarding how air quality affects your life or the life of a family member. EPA is trying to limit comments to about 5 minutes. Brian at the Lung Association can provide background information and speaking points to help you craft your statement. (General background information and as much detail as you want is available at www.cleanairstandards.org)

Global Warming Made Local

The Union of Concerned Scientists has updated its April 2003 report, Confronting Climate Change in the Great Lakes Region. The region, it concludes, has already seen the effects of global warming. Heavy precipitation, both rain and snow, is becoming more common in the region, as are extreme heat events. Consequences of continuing in this direction include strained storm sewer infrastructure, depressed crop yields (Illinois' soybeans are particularly vulnerable to climate variability), and various serious effects on human health.

The report also includes a state-by-state breakdown for the Great Lakes Region. "Highlights" for Illinois include a projected rise in temperature of 9-18° F in summer and 7-13° F in winter. Small streams would dry up and the amount of wetlands would be reduced, resulting in poorer water quality and less habitat for wildlife. The water supply, as well as public beaches, will likely be at risk from the spread of parasitic and pathogenic microorganisms. Higher temperatures and more electricity generation for air conditioning increase the formation of ground-level ozone, likely exacerbating asthma and other respiratory diseases.

A recent UCS analysis noted that clean energy solutions can help curb these impacts. And a national renewable standard requiring that 10 percent of U.S. electricity come from renewable resources by 2020 would benefit Illinois with an estimated 4,200 new jobs, $590 million in capital investment and $175 million in payments for bioenergy and wind land leases.

The discussion of global climate change is usually (appropriately) framed in terms of national and international policy and impact. Reading the massive, broad changes that would be visited on our state, however, really brings the issue home. Thanks to IEC board member Ann McCabe for bringing the report to our attention.