EPA JOURNAL
-------
Our Fragile Atmosphere:
The Greenhouse Effect
and Ozone Depletion
Seldom have
environmental issues
brought such a chilling
awareness of the
vulnerability of the human
race as the; "greenhouse:
effect" and depletion of the
planet's layer of protective
ozone in the stratosphere.
This EPA journal explores
these problems and their
implications for the future.
EPA Administrator Lee M.
Thomas sets a perspective
and presents the Agency's
ideas on how to approach
these two problems.
One of the originator:, »i
the oxone depletion theory
explains that theory in
layman's terms. A physician
discusses the threat of skin
cancer posed by a depleted
o/.oiie layer. A representative
of an industrial organi/ation
looks at possible action that
might he taken to limit
certain chemicals that are
useful to industry and
consumers, but which may
contribute to o/.one
depletion.
The theory behind the
greenhouse effect—the other
suspected atmospheric
danger to earth's
environment is explained
by a leading researcher. The
awakening of the public to
the greenhouse issue is
chronicled. A major
consequence ol the
greenhouse effect a rise in
sea levels is explained by
an 1'IPA specialist on the
problem.
Dr. Mustafa K. Tolha. head
oi the U.N. Knvironmeiit
Programme, discusses the
global challenges that the
greenhouse effect and
depletion of the o/.one layer
are presenting. U.S. Senator
lolm II. Chafee, R-K.L who
recently chaired Senate
subcommittee hearings on
these planetary problems,
offers a key Congressional
view.
"The picture's pretty bleak, gentlemen
. . . The ivoild's climates an; clumging,
(he mammals are Inking over, und ive
(ill have o brain ubuut the sixe of u
walnut."
Closing the presentation is
an article on the
sophisticated,
precedent-setting science; that
is making it possible to
understand the phenomena
of the greenhouse effect and
o/.one layer reduction.
In an unrelated article, a
U.S. environmental leader
discusses some new turns
being taken by
environmentalism in this
country. A historical feature
reports on two little-noticed,
but major smog episodes in
New York City in 1953 and
. And a final article
presents some recent
findings about the effects on
the economy of spending for
environmental cleanup.
This issue of EPA Journal
concludes with two regular
features. D
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Public Affairs (A-107)
Washington DC 20460
Volume 12
Number 10
December 1986
vvEPA JOURNAL
Lee M. Thomas, Administrator
Jennifer Joy Wilson, Assistant Administrator for External Affairs
Linda Wilson Reed, Director, Office of Public Affairs
John Heritage, Editor
Susan Tejada, Associate Editor
Jack Lewis, Assistant Editor
Margherita Pryor, Contributing Editor
EPA is charged by Congress to pro-
tect the nation's land. air. and
water systems. Under a mandate of
national environmental laws, the
agency strives to formulate and im-
plement actions which lead to a
compatible balance between hu-
man activities and the ability oi
natural systems to support and
nurture life.
The EPA journal is published by
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. The Administrator of KPA
has determined that the publica-
tion of this periodical is necessary
in the transaction of the public
business required by law of this
agency. Use of funds for printing
this periodical has been approved
by the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget. Views
expressed by authors do not neces-
sarily reflect KPA policy. Contribu-
tions and inquiries should he ad-
dressed to the Editor (A-107).
Waterside Mall. 401 M St.. S.W..
Washington, DC 204(iO. No permis-
sion necessary to reproduce con-
tents except copyrighted photos
and other materials.
Global Challenges
at EPA
by Lee M. Thomas 2
A Threat to Earth's
Protective Shield
by Dr. F. Sherwood
Rowland 4
Skin Cancer:
The Price for
a Depleted Ozone Layer
by Meclwin M. Mintzis.
M.D. 7
Ozone Protection:
The Need for
a Global Solution
by Richard Harriett 10
The Greenhouse Effect:
An Explanation
by Dr. David Rind 12
The Dangers from
Climate Warming:
A Public Awakening
by Rafe Pomerance 15
Rising Sea Levels:
The Impact They Pose
by James G. Titus 17
111 Winds
Carry No Visas
by Dr. Mostafa K. Tolba 21
Finding Answers
by John H. Chafee 22
The Science
of Global Pollution
by John S. Hoffman,
John Bruce Wells,
and Stephen R. Seidel 24
Viewpoint:
New Thinking
in American
Environmentalism
by Frederic D. Krupp 20
Environmental Annals:
Two "Killer Smogs"
the Headlines Missed
by Roy Popkin 27
Is Environmental Control
an Expense
or an Investment?
by Don Bronkema 30
Update 3]
Awards and
Appointments 32
Front Cover: Sun at horizon,
Ccisco, ME. The greenhouse effect
and depletion of the stratospheric
ozone foyer iJluslrale the fragility
of our atmosphere and (he
vulnerability of lilt- on !/ic plane!.
Photo bv Dean Aoramson, Kolio.
Inc.
Design Credits:
Robert Flanagan;
lion l-'tirmh:
Donna IVasylkiwskyj.
The annual rate for subscribers in
the U.S. for the KPA join-mil is
$20.00. The charge to subscribers
in foreign countries is $25.00 a
year. The price of a single copy of
the KPA /oiu-mi/ is $2.00 in this
country and S2.50 if sent to a for-
eign country. Prices include mail
costs. Subscriptions to the 1-,'PA
Journal as well as to other federal
government magazines are handled
only by the U.S. Government Print-
ing Office. Anyone wishing to sub-
scribe to the EPA jounid/ should
fill in the form at right and enclose
a check or money order payable lo
the Superintendent of Documents.
The requests should be mailed to:
Superintendent of Documents.
GPO, Washington. DC 20402.
EPA Journal Subscriptions
Name - First. Last
PLEASE PRINT
Company Name or Additional Address Line
Street Address
City
Zip Code
| | Payment enclosed (Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents)
Charge to my Deposit Account No
-------
Global
Challenges
at EPA
by Lee M. Thomas
Americans enjoy one of the world's
highest standards of living. Our
technological achievements during the
past half century are unequalled. They
have contributed significantly to
improvements in our overall quality of
life.
Today, we live longer and better than
ever before. We have more
conveniences. More labor-saving
devices. More products and services
designed to make our lives comfortable.
Unfortunately, the advances that
contributed to the standard of living we
enjoy today carried with them hidden
costs. This is particularly true when we
consider the environmental costs. As we
improved our material well-being, the
quality of our environment suffered
from smokestacks, discharge pipes, and
clumps that contaminated our air, water,
and land.
Since 1970. we have made
tremendous progress in addressing and
remedying our past environmental
mistakes. The air in our cities is far
cleaner today than it was 20 years ago.
The quality of thousands of miles of
rivers and streams has improved. And
our hazardous waste and toxics
programs are protecting our land and
ground-water resources.
But the job of managing and
improving the quality of our
environment is far from finished.
Despite our successes with traditional
pollutants, new challenges are at hand.
These new challenges are significantly
different from those we have already
met. They are more subtle and more
complex. No longer are we fighting
gross emissions from obvious sources.
Rather, we are confronting trace toxics
in our air. water, and food.
We are dealing with the cross-media
effects of pollution control — the
movement of contaminants from one
environmental medium to another. For
('/'ho/mis is Administrator of h'PAJ
.,
example, pollutants removed from the
water and incinerated may threaten the
air. If we place them on the land, they
may ultimately contaminate our ground
water.
We are learning, too, that some of the
challenges we face today are global in
nature, Both the sources of problems
and the solutions to them are
international in scope. Depletion of the
stratospheric o/.one layer is one
example. The phenomenon of global
warming — the so-called greenhouse
effect — is another.
We do not fully understand either.
Uncertainties exist concerning the
causes of ozone depletion and
greenhouse warming. The complex
processes that lead to both are not fully
defined.
There is consensus, however, that
both are due to increased industrial and
agricultural activity over the past 200
years, and particularly since the end of
World War 11. The burning of coal, oil,
and natural gas today adds about five
gigatons of carbon dioxide to the
atmosphere each year. Combustion of
these same fossil fuels and increased
uses of fertilizers add substantial
quantities of nitrous oxides as well.
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs),
discovered in the 1930s, are widely
used as refrigerants, aerosol propellents,
foam-blowing agents, and solvents. The
atmospheric levels of CFCs are growing
at a rate of five to seven percent
annually.
And methane from a variety of
sources, many of them agricultural, has
also been added to the atmosphere in
substantial quantities during recent
decades.
Many scientists believe that these
chemicals are causing important
changes in the chemical composition of
our atmosphere. Some are ozone
EPA JOURNAL
-------
.Sunset nvcr the Atirmtic ()c etui. The
future ivdnnm.u of fhe picnic! the
greenhouse effect JKIS serious
implications for rising .sen levels urn)
cluniging ivecithcr pcitlcnis,
depleters. Others partially offset
depletion. But there is growing concern
that increased use of CFCs could lead to
net ozone depletion.
Stratospheric ozone acts as a shield
against harmful solar radiation. A
significant reduction of ozone in the
upper atmosphere could mean long-term
increases in the incidence of skin cancer
and cataracts worldwide. It could also
have significant impacts on our
terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.
At the same time, the gases affecting
ozone also exhibit greenhouse
properties. That is, they trap solar
energy in the atmosphere. Thus, they
could contribute to future warming of
the earth.
The effects of global warming over the
long term go well beyond higher
temperatures. The greenhouse effect
could also result in substantially altered
rainfall patterns, increases in sea level,
loss of soil moisture, and changes in the
movement of storms. These shifts could
affect agriculture, forests, wetlands,
water resources, and coastal areas.
While concerns about these problems
are urgent, we do not believe that harm
can yet be attributed directly to them.
On the other hand, the nature of both
ozone depletion and global warming are
such that if we wait until health and
environmental impacts are manifest it
might be too late to take adequate steps
to address these problems.
As we look at solutions, we must
recognize the unusual nature of these
new challenges. For both ozone
depletion and the greenhouse effect we
are faced with problems where the
sources of pollution, as well as the
potential impacts, are distributed
unevenly throughout the world — not
just between two countries or within
one region. Furthermore, in neither case
will the impacts for a particular country
necessarily be proportional to its level
of emissions of the gases in question.
Thus, traditional approaches to
problem solving — domestic legislation,
rulemaking, and enforcement — are
inadequate to deal with this new class
of problems. The United States has
taken some important regulatory steps
to control CFCs (we banned their use in
aerosols in 1978), and we are committed
to a decision on the need for additional
rules by November 1987. But more will
have to be done beyond these unilateral
actions.
Recognizing this, EPA's stratospheric
ozone protection program incorporates
concurrent domestic and international
efforts leading to a coupled decision
during the next year on an international
protocol and possible domestic
regulations. We initiated the program
over a year ago.
Since then, we have held a number of
domestic public workshops, participated
in two international workshops
sponsored by the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), and
co-sponsored a major scientific.
conference on the effects of ozone
depletion and climate. In addition, we
have conducted a major scientific risk
assessment, which has just been
reviewed by the EPA Science Advisory
Board.
More recently, the U.S. played a
leading role in the first round of
international negotiations on an ozone
layer protocol, held in Geneva during
the first week of December. With EPA
assistance, the U.S. delegation was a
strong advocate of the view that
meaningful near- and long-term
measures are needed to protect the
ozone layer. Although there is still a
long way to go, I am hopeful that we
will see an international protocol
adopted in 1987.
Our experiences with the ozone
problem have helped us to identify a
number of elements that I am convinced
will come into play as we strive to
address this new generation of
international environmental challenges.
First, we must understand the
magnitude of global environmental
challenges. Our goal, of course, must be
to safeguard human health and the
environment.
Second, we must realize that there
will always be scientific uncertainty
associated with these complex
problems. We will have to be prepared
to act despite these uncertainties.
Third, if we are to succeed in
addressing global issues, we must deal
with them in a global context. UNEP
has shown strong interest in the area of
ozone depletion. We will work with
them to provide the leadership needed
to move forward.
Fourth, we must conduct our work in
a way that reflects the urgency of the
problems we face but that does not
create undue alarm. We do not believe
we face imminent dangers. Our
approach to solving these problems
should be one of orderly and
cooperative action that gets the job done
in a way that will protect human health
and the environment and miniini/.e cost
and disruption.
Fifth, wherever possible, our actions
should be technology-forcing. We need
strong incentives for the development
and use of substitute chemicals that are
both acceptable to industry and
consumers, yet benign to human health
and the environment.
Finally, we must devise solutions that
are equitable to all nations, including
our own. The United States has led the
way in regulating CFCs, but we cannot
solve international environmental
problems alone. All nations and their
industries should help shoulder the
economic burdens of protecting the
global environment.
Dealing with global environmental
problems like ozone depletion and
greenhouse warming will be one of this
Agency's most difficult challenges in
the years ahead. 1 believe we are well on
our way to establishing the international
framework of scientific research and
cooperative actions that will be critical
to our success. D
DECEMBER 1986
-------
A Threat to Earth'
Protective Shield
by Dr. F. Sherwood Rowland
"-fancy
The recent discovery that an "ozone
hold" has developed over Antarctica
has once again focused public attention
and concern on this critical
component ol tin: earth's atmosphere.
Based on extensive measurements from
both ground- and satellite-based
instruments, we can state with certainty
that very large decreases in ozone have
occurred above Antarctica over the past
decade during the months of September
through mid-November. O/.oiio is the
key atmospheric gas which shields
us—and all other biological
species—against damaging solar
ultraviolet radiation. While the causes
of the massive seasonal loss of o/.one
over Antarctica are not yet fully
understood, and its implications for the
o/one layer above the rest of the earth
are also uncertain (see box on page 6),
there can be no doubt that the gases
released from certain human activities
are threatening the integrity of this
protective o/.one layer.
Yofessor ol Chemistry,
Jr.. h'ndunvd (,'luiir,
I Mr. Rowland is
i 'uiiii'l (.'. AJdnV
I'Diversity ol California, Irvine, mid is
one ot the originators of the O/OIH
depletion theorr.f
A
The Role of Ozone
Unlike the abundant atmospheric gases
oxygen and nitrogen, o/.one (0;))
represents only a tiny fraction of the
total atmosphere, with an average global
concentration of about 300 parts per
billion in volume (SOOppbv). If all of the
ozone were compressed into a band of
pure gas, the layer around the earth
would be only three millimeters thick.
Despite its limited quantity, ozone
plays a critical role in absorbing
incoming solar radiation. The sun gives
off radiation across a broad spectrum.
The light detectable by the human eye
covers the range from approximately
400 to 700 nanometers in wavelength,
or from violet to red in color. Much of
the "near" ultraviolet radiation (320-400
nanometers) also readies the ground
and can be tolerated by biological
species at the surface. In contrast, the
adjacent segment of the ultraviolet
spectrum (UV-I3, 290-320 nanometers)
has been shown to be biologically
damaging. Fortunately, most of this
radiation is absorbed by ozone high in
the earth's atmosphere. However, some
does penetrate to the earth's surface,
with larger quantities of UV-B near the
Equator than at the poles. This natural
variation in exposure to UV-B provides
a real-life experimental setting which
has supplied ample evidence of the
potential damage from UV-B radiation
to human health (e.g. skin cancer) and
to the environment.
Complex natural forces are
continually at work creating and
destroying ozone in the atmosphere.
This dynamic; equilibrium involves first
the breakdown of individual molecules
of oxygen (O^) into atomic: oxygen (O)
through its absorption of ultraviolet
radiation. In turn, each atomic oxygen
normally combines with an additional
molecule of O2 to form ozone C):l.
Destruction of ozone can be caused by
the occasional recombination of o/one
with atomic oxygen to form two
molecules of diatomic oxygen. As long
as the earth's sunlit atmosphere
contains molecular oxygen, as it has for
more than one billion years, o/.one will
be maintained in this dynamic balance
between formation and destruction. This
balance can be altered, however, by the
introduction into the atmosphere of
additional ozone destroying chemicals,
EPA JOURNAL
-------
0
which shift the equilibrium toward
smaller average concentrations of ozone.
1974 saw the first suggestion that a
group of chemicals known as
chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, could be
a major avenue for adding chlorine to
the atmosphere and disturbing the
ozone balance.
CFC's were first developed by
General Motors in the 1930s, after a
deliberate search for an ammonia
substitute in refrigeration uses. The
results of this search produced a family
of chemicals with properties ideal for
many applications beyond refrigeration.
Chemically inert, nontoxic, and easily
liquified, CFCs are now used in air
conditioning, packaging, and insulation.
as a solvent for cleaning electronic:
circuit boards, and as aerosol
propellants.
It is this very absence of chemical
reactivity that makes CFCs so dangerous
to the; ozone layer. Unlike less inert
compounds. CFCs are not destroyed or
removed in the lower atmosphere by
rainout, oxidation, or sunlight. Instead,
they drift into the upper atmosphere
where their chlorine components
are released into the atmosphere
under the effects of ultraviolet
radiation, and where they encounter
and destroy ozone. Almost all of
these freed chlorine atoms find
:\ proJeetire Jnyer of o/nne in the upper
atmosphere normally prevents luirmfu/
ullniviolel nnlmh'nn from n.'urliing l/ie
eur'h's surliice. (/otverer, CFCs emiffed
/mm (lie production and use oi
solvon/.s. n'fn'grnilor.s. air conditioners,
(Hid foam-blowing (incuts drill inlo the
tipper atmosphere l
ti/tnivio/et rudmtion. The chlorine
released in this process rends ivilJi unit
destroys ozone in a confirming cve/e o|
reiielion.s tlinl rimy hist up In o hundred
yctii's or more. The restiJl could he n
thinning til (he n/ono /aver ami mi
eventual increase in ultraviolet
radiation ul (he eurlh's surface.
Stratospheric
Ozone Layer
and react with the ozone in one to two
seconds, creating chlorine oxide as a
by-product. In a subsequent reaction,
the chlorine oxide releases its oxygen
atom to form molecular oxygen, and the
chlorine atom is freed once again to
repeat the process of destroying ozone.
Through this continuing cycle of
reactions, each chlorine atom acts as a
catalyst destroying about 100.000
molecules of ozone before the chain
reaction is permanently ended. The
atmospheric lifetimes for the most
commonly used CFC compounds
(CFC-11. CFC-12, and CFC-13), in fact,
have been estimated to be from 75 to
110 years.
The chemistry of the atmosphere is
far more complicated than just these
simple reactions involving chlorine.
Current atmospheric: models require
more than 160 chemical reactions to
simulate observed chemical features in
the atmosphere. Despite this
complexity, however, a clear link exists
between the introduction of chlorine
from CFCs and the destruction of ozone
in the upper atmosphere;.
Because the widespread use tit CFCs
by industry and consumers is
essentially a post-1970 phenomenon.
with yearly releases since 1974
approaching one million tons
worldwide, the observed atmospheric
concentrations of all three major CFCs
have risen sharply. The "natural" level of
chlorine in the atmosphere before 1900
is believed to have been about ().(> ppbv,
almost entirely from methyl chloride.
The present chlorine level is
about 3.5 ppbv, and is increasing by
more than 1.0 ppbv per decade. The
excellent correlation between the
increase in atmospheric; chlorine and
the ozone losses during the Antarctic:
spring (see box) provides strong
circumstantial evidence that CFCs are
involved in this process.
Continued to n<;.\t page
• 1IJ));| Ultraviolet Radiation o0o°o°o Chlorine
-CFC's
DECEMBER 1986
-------
Safeguarding Our Atmosphere
CFCs have a long record as very useful
chemicals, contributing across a broad
range of products to our current
standard of living. At the same time,
they present a grave environmental risk
which can seriously affect the basic
conditions of life for both current and
future generations. The risks from ozone
depletion have been described in
reports from the National Academy of
Sciences since 1976 and include not only
the increased UV-B effect on humans in
the form of skin cancer, but also UV-B
attack on many other biological systems.
Over a decade of research has
substantially improved our
understanding of all aspects of the
ozone layer. All of the evidence
produced to date continues to implicate
the CFCs as possessing severe potential
for ozone depletion. Despite this
growing scientific record against CFCs,
world use continues to increase as more
and more nations seek to improve their
living standards using CFC-based
products.
Industry's search for less harmful
chemicals a half century ago led to the
discovery of the current family of CFCs,
and that same kind of ingenuity must
now be harnessed to find new solutions.
For example, hydrogen-containing
CFC-22 has long been in major use in
home air conditioners and represents a
much lesser threat to stratospheric
ozone because the molecule is strongly
susceptible toward oxidation in the
lower atmosphere. Further, past
research by several companies has
already led to a number of patents on
Fluorocarbon-134a, which has many of
the same industrial properties found in
CFC-12. This compound has a negligible
potential for ozone depletion because it
does not contain chlorine, but is not yet
in large-scale manufacture.
Alternatively, industries can begin to
design closed industrial processes with
recycling which could dramatically
reduce emissions by using these
potentially harmful chemicals more
efficiently.
Research into reducing the global use
of CFCs cannot wait for the final
definitive answers from the scientific
community. Because of the very long
atmospheric lifetimes of CFCs, any
damage clone to the atmosphere will
persist throughout the entire 21st
century and on into the 22nd. The costs
of moving expeditiously away from
these suspect chemicals is a very small
price compared to the large potential
damages if we fail to act now. D
The Ozone Hole Over Antarctica
In May 1985, scientists from the
British Antarctic Survey
published data which have sent
shock waves throughout the
scientific community. These data
showed that a 40 percent loss in
total ozone has occurred since the
1960s over Halley Bay, Antarctica,
during September to
mid-November. These findings
were totally unpredicted and
unexpected. No such losses had
previously been reported, either
from ground-based instruments in
operation since 1957 or from the
extensive satellite measurements
initiated in the 1970s. However,
both U.S. and Japanese scientists
quickly began sorting through their
data sets and have confirmed that
this phenomenon in Antarctica is
indeed real.
With the existence of the ozone
hole now thoroughly established,
the research community has
quickly come forth with a variety
of possible explanations. Was the
phenomenon part of a natural
cycle linked to solar activity? Was
it caused by meteorological
conditions specific to the region?
Why did the existing atmospheric
models fail to simulate such
losses? Are chlorine chemistry and
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) the
lone culprit, or do they act in
combination with other chemicals
or conditions?
As part of the search for
scientific clues, an urgent research
effort was quickly put together,
and four different U.S. scientific
teams were sent to Antarctica in
1986 to gather more extensive
measurements of ozone and other
chemical compounds as the ozone
hole reappeared during September.
This expedition was very
successful, and the scientists held
a live press conference from the
McMurdo station in Antarctica in
late October. They reported that
evidence produced to date was
inconsistent with proposed
theories linking the ozone hole to
solar activity or solely to
meteorological forces. While
stating that a chemical cause of the
ozone hole was likely, they
stopped short of pointing the
finger at CFCs. Since their return
to the United States, more detailed
analyses of the data have been
possible and have begun to appear.
In addition, precision studies of
the Antarctic phenomenon will
continue for several years or more,
seeking quantitative interpretations
of all of the data.
//! satellite i>h
-------
Skin Cancer:
The Price for
a Depleted Ozone Layer
by Medwin M. Mintzis, MD
Skin cancer has reached epidemic
proportions in the United States. It is
the most common of all cancers.
affecting one out of seven Americans.
One-third of all new cancers affect the
skin; upwards of a half million new
cases are treated each year. This is a 30
percent increase in just 10 years.
The chief culprit in causing this sharp
increase seems to be the sun, rather
than chemicals and X-rays, and
depletion of the stratospheric ozone
layer would dramatically exacerbate this
disquieting trend in the years ahead.
The ozone layer screens out much of
the harmful ultraviolet B light (UV-B)
from the sun and prevents it from
reaching the earth's surface. But when
the ozone layer is depleted, even a one
percent increase in UV-B would result
in a two percent increase in the number
of skin cancers. According to a new
EPA study, the number of cases of skin
cancer in the next 88 years would total
40 million, with as many as 800,000
deaths if the current trends in use of
ozone-depleting chemicals continues.
Skin cancer types are usually
categorized in terms of melanoma and
non-melanoma. The most dangerous
form of skin cancer is malignant
melanoma, which arises in the
pigment-forming cells (melanocytes).
When a melanoma reaches a certain
thickness, it spreads rapidly to the vital
organs of the body.
In 1986, 23,000 Americans will be
diagnosed as having malignant
melanoma, and another (i.OOO will die of
its effects. An individual's lifetime risk
(Minf/i's is n member ol tin' Medical
(,'oiinri! o| The Skin ('.Linear Foimdud'on
(ind Assislonf Profi-ssor u!' Dermatology
at iNf(!iv York I'Diversify School ul
Medicine.)
for melanoma has soared by 1,000
percent since the 1930s. Currently, one
in 150 Americans is expected to
develop the disease.
Non-melanoma skin cancers—mainly
basal cell and squamous cell
carcinomas—affect the skin's surface
cells. Though often considered
"harmless" annoyances, such cancers
are far from trivial in their advanced
forms. They can result in great
disfigurement—the loss of an eye, ear,
lip, or nose. And close to 2,000
Americans will die this vear because of
In 1986, 23,000 Americans will
be diagnosed as having
malignant melanoma, and
another 6,000 will die of its
effects.
non-melanoma cancers that spread—or
metastasi/.e—throughout the body.
This human devastation need not
occur. These cancers are largely
preventable. No one should die of skin
cancer. The warning signs are there for
us to see. When recognized early and
treated promptly, skin cancer is 100
percent curable.
The connection between skin cancel'
and excessive exposure to the sun's
damaging rays has been clearly
established. In the case of
non-melanoma skin cancer, the link is
direct. With malignant melanoma,
exposure to ultraviolet light is a
causative factor, although its precise
role is not well understood at this time.
Other factors such as chemical
carcinogens, oncologic viruses, and
genetics may also be involved.
The incidence of non-melanoma skin
cancer among the white population in
the United States increases as one
travels from North to South (that is,
closer to the Equator where the daily
hours of sunlight are greatest). Studies
in Europe and Australia indicate similar
patterns. The number of cases of skin
cancer doubles with every eight degrees
latitude nearer the Equator.
Altitude is also a factor. At greater
heights, more UV-B light penetrates the
thinner atmosphere. The highest rates of
skin cancer incidence in the United
States have been found in Albuquerque,
New Mexico, which has both a low
latitude and a high altitude.
Over 90 percent of all skin cancers
occur on those parts of the body
normally unprotected by clothing—the
face, ears, neck, and backs of the hand.
Protruding lower lips, lower eyelids,
and ear rims are particularly vulnerable
sites.
In temperate zones, people who spend
a great deal of their time
outdoors—fishermen, farmers, sailors,
construction workers, athletes, for
example—are the more likely candidates
for skin cancer.
Of course, the darker a person's skin,
the less likely he or she is to get skin
cancer. Blacks and Hispanics are seldom
affected; their highly pigmented skin
(containing more melanin) is a natural
sunblock, Overall, fewer women than
men develop basal and squamous cell
carcinomas. But among younger people,
women develop the disease almost as
frequently as men.
The sexes differ somewhat in terms of
where skin cancer occurs. Men
frequently develop skin tumors on the
tips of the ears and on the scalp, areas
unwittingly exposed to sunlight by the
balding process. On the other hand,
women get more cancers on the lower
legs—exposed when they wear skirts or
dresses—then men. (One may wonder
DECEMBER 1986
-------
whether current styles of dress will
afi'e:c:t the locations of skin cancers in
the future.)
Another interesting confirmation of
the cancer-causing power of sunlight is
that in the U.S., skin cancer is found
more often on the left side of the face
and arms of men drivers, but in Britain,
it typically occurs on the right side of
the face. This corresponds to the
opposite driving sides in force in the
two countries and the amounts of
sunlight coining through (he open car
windows.
Unlike basal and squamous cell
carcinoma, melanoma i.s thought to be
related more to intermittent, but intense,
bursts of sunlight, than to the total
amount of sunlight received over a
lifetime. Recent evidence suggests that
getting one or more severe
sunburns—particularly as a child or a
teenager—may increase a person's
potential chance of getting melanoma.
As with the other skin cancers,
malignant melanoma occurs most often
in fair-skinned individuals. Caucasians
are affected 10 times more often than
blacks. Interestingly, the incidence of
melanoma on blacks' non-pigmented
skin (the palms of the hands and the
soles of the feet) is identical to those
areas in whites.
Studies of the influence of latitude on
skin cancer in Caucasians reveal, once
again, an increased incidence of
melanoma closer to the Equator. OIK;
study found a connection between the
rise of melanoma cases in
Scandinavians and the number of cheap
charter flights to the south of Spain.
Other research has linked the rise in
women's hemlines to the development
of more melanomas on their legs. On
the other hand, melanomas appear more
frequently on the diesis and backs of
The sun hoofing doivji on his ixii'k. ti
voimgsfer poddies cm inner tube on
Green Jitiv in Wisconsin.
Ozone Depletion: Other Health Effects
The link between ultraviolet
radiation (UV-B) from the sun's
rays and certain skin cancers is
well known. As concern has grown
release of the science assessment
by NASA and the World
Meteorological Organization on
stratospheric ozone was an
important event with regard to our
own continuing evaluation process.
Laboratory evidence and case
studies demonstrate that exposure
to UV-B can harm our immune
systems. This finding developed
almost inadvertently. Researchers
trying to transplant a skin cancer
from one laboratory mouse to
another found that the cancer
would not grow following
transplant. However, the scientists
found that if they irradiated the
second mouse be/ore transplanting
the tumor, it would take hold and
spread. This surprising discovery
suggested that UV-B radiation was
interfering with the mouse's
immune system.
Although we do not understand
the exact mechanism by which
UV-B suppresses the immune
system, further experiments
suggest that the implications may
extend well beyond skin cancer.
Increases in UV-B from ozone
depletion may increase the
frequency of herpes outbreaks.
Leishmaniasis, a disfiguring
disease caused by parasites which
is widespread in the tropics, may
spread more rapidly and heal more
slowly. Other diseases may also be
affected.
Because the human eye is
sensitive to sunlight, we
involuntarily blink when we look
at the sun. This instinct may be
quite protective; laboratory and
epidemiological studies show that
UV-B is a major cause of cataracts.
Cataracts are treatable when caught
early, but even in the United
States they remain the third
leading cause of blindness. In
developing countries, they are an
even greater cause of blindness.
EPA JOURNAL
-------
men than they do in women. The
protection against ultraviolet rays
provided by different kinds of clothing
seems to be a factor.
However, most skin cancers can be
prevented if people choose to use a few
simple precautions that will minimize
the sun's impact on their skin.
In the past, avoiding overexposure to
sunlight involved using cosmeticaliy
unacceptable opaque barriers or, even
worse, resigning oneself to an indoor
life style—unacceptable for most people.
Today's sunscreen products, developed
within the last 10 years, are both
effective and cosmeticaliy pleasing. The
typical number 15 sunscreen allows for
exposure up to 15 times a person's
ordinary tolerance to skin reddening.
In addition to regular sunscreen use, a
very effective measure is limiting one's
time outdoors during the hours of the
sun's peak intensity (10 a.m. to 2 p.m.
Standard Time or 11 a.m. to 3 p.m.
during Daylight Saving Time.) Hats,
umbrellas, long pants and sleeves, and
tightly woven fabrics are all helpful.
These and other simple steps
will allow people to protect
themselves from skin cancer
while enjoying their time outdoors.
Protection from the sun should be
practiced from the earliest stages of
one's life. All those responsible for the
well-being of children and young
people—parents, relatives, teachers,
babysitters, camp directors, scout
leaders, Little League coaches—have a
critical role to play in minimizing
harmful exposure to the sun's strongest
rays.
But for adults with years of chronic,
heavy sun exposure, preventing steps
may come too late. For this reason, the
second major thrust in the war against
skin cancer is early detection. In
Australia, where a national education
campaign against skin cancer was
implemented, the debilitating and
sometimes lethal effects of skin cancer
have been greatly reduced because of
widespread public awareness of what
warning signs to look for.
The connection between skin
cancer and excessive exposure
to the sun's damaging rays has
been clearly established.
The most common warning sign of an
early basal cell carcinoma is a
non-healing sore that remains open for
several weeks or more. It also frequently
resembles a pearly bump, which may
eventually develop an ulcer in the
middle. At first it may look like a
pimple, but unlike a pimple, it dons not
go away. Sometimes, it appears as a
reddish patch or even a scar-like area.
Squamous cell carcinoma, which has
somewhat similar warning signs,
usually appears red and scaly from the
start. In time it too may ulcerate in the
center.
Malignant melanoma may start in a
pre-existing mole or birthmark, or it
may develop as a new blemish.
Melanomas have four distinct
characteristics in contrast to common
(benign) moles:
Asymmetry. Some forms ol early
malignant melanoma are asymmetrical,
meaning that a line drawn through the
middle will not create matching halves.
Common moles are round anil
symmetrical.
Border. The borders are frequently
uneven, often containing scalloped or
notched edges. Common moles have
smooth, even borders.
Color. Different shades of brown or
black are often the first sign of a
malignant melanoma. Common moles
usually have a single shade of brown.
Diameter. Common moles are usually
less than 6 mm. in diameter ('/V'), the
size of a pencil eraser. Early melanomas
tend to be larger than 6 mm.
In addition, melanomas can appear
flat on the skin as well as raised. They
may also bleed easily.
Itching, pain, or other discomfort is
rare with skin tumors, which in part
explains why so many people ignore
them or delay seeking help.
When detected early, non-melanoma
skin cancers are successfully treated
with one of several surgical techniques,
and less often with freezing of tissue or
with radiation therapy. More
complicated cases are best treated with
microscopically controlled surgery
(MC)HS surgery), a technique in which
each layer of tissue in the removal
process is microscopically checked for
malignancy.
Malignant melanoma is usually
treated by aggressive and extensive local
surgery. If, however, it has spread
beyond the skin, chemotherapy and or
immunotherapy may be used, although
with limited success. Newer
experimental immunotherapies such as
interleukin-2 and interferon have shown
some promise in initial trials in patients
with advanced melanoma. Their
long-term effectiveness has yet to be
shown.
But with skin cancers, as with most
diseases, the best treatment is
prevention. And that means avoiding
the harmful effects of sunlight. ED
DECEMBER 1986
-------
Ozone Protection:
The Need for
a Global Solution
by Richard Barnett
Some products found in u grocery store,
like these foam egg cartons ami cups.
oltcn on1 produced using
chloro/luorocarbons. (.'F(.'.s an1 also used'
in refrigerators, air conditioners,
automobiles, un
-------
processes that control it. Practically all
we know about the stratosphere has
been learned in the last 10-15 years.
Furthermore, intensive programs to
study climate and possible modifications
are continuing.
Although the scientific: scrutiny has
provided considerable information,
some of it conflicting, it has also
highlighted the many continuing
scientific uncertainties. We believe the
scientific research must continue.
Additionally, the Alliance has been
an active participant in efforts to
promote greater international
cooperation, as exemplified by our
support for the Vienna Convention for
Protection of the Ozone Layer, and our
participation in such domestic and
international efforts to address ozone
protection issues as the recently
concluded series of workshops
sponsored by EPA and the United
Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP). Given the enormous
complexities of the issue,
progress—from the scientific and
international policy development
perspectives—has been remarkable.
In 1980, the Alliance urged that at
least three to five years were necessary
to allow scientific research to gather
critical monitoring information
regarding the projections being made by
computer models. Therefore, the 1986
release of the NASA/WMO science
assessment on stratospheric ozone was
an important event with regard to our
own continuing evaluation process.
In general, the Alliance does not
believe that the scientific information
demonstrates any actual risk from
current CFC use or emissions. We
recognize, however, the growing
concern for potential ozone depletion
and climate change in the future as a
result of large continuing growth of CFC
emissions and the buildup of many
other trace gases in the atmosphere, and
the concern generated by the discovery
of unexplained phenomena such as the
large reductions in ozone levels during
the Antarctic spring.
Scientific progress is not sufficiently
developed to tell us that there is no risk
in the future. In fact, all of the computer
models calculate that large future
growth in CFC emissions may
contribute to significant ozone depletion
in the latter half of the next century.
Therefore, we support further
scientific research and believe that
regulatory policies should be
periodically reexamined in the light of
additional research findings.
On the basis of current information,
we believe that large future increases in
The Saga of Spray Cans
Most people probably associate
ozone depletion with aerosol
spray cans. They remember back to
the mid-1970s when public
concern peaked that the chemicals
given off by hair sprays, underarm
deodorants, and shaving creams
would deplete the earth's
protective ozone shield, leading to
increases in skin cancers. Front
page stories, editorials, and
political cartoons decrying the use
of aerosols were widespread. Even
Archie Bunker's son-in-law,
Michael, in an episode of AIJ In The
Family, berated his wife Gloria
about her continued use of this
threat to our well-being.
A decade later, consumers in the
United States can go into stores
and purchase the same personal
products without concern for their
effects on ozone depletion.
In fact, it was not the aerosols
themselves, but their use of
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) as the
propellant which raised concern.
Most aerosols contain a statement
that they "contain no
fluorocarbons." Manufacturers
have reformulated their products
to use a hydrocarbon propellant
system which is safe to the ozone
layer.
In response to scientific
evidence and public concern, EPA
moved to ban CFCs in nonessential
aerosols in 1978. But, even before
then, the public and manufacturers
had shifted rapidly away from
these perceived dangerous
products. In 1974, CFCs in
aerosols accounted for over half of
total consumption; by 1978. this
use constituted less than five
percent. Moreover, consumers still
had access to quality aerosol
products which, in fact, were less
expensive to manufacture than
their CFC-propelled counterparts.
By taking action to reduce CFC
use in aerosols, the United States
and several other nations which
followed suit effectively bought a
low-cost insurance policy,
providing time during which
scientific efforts could focus on
resolving some of the remaining
uncertainties. But, although this
action granted some needed
breathing room by reducing the
rate of growth of CFCs in the
atmosphere for almost a decade,
that reprieve is over; CFC use has
rebounded to match the peak
amounts of 10 years ago. This fact,
coupled with the recent discovery
of the ozone "hole" over
Antarctica, has renewed the
scientific and the public attention
to this issue.
fully halogenated CFCs (the most
durable ones, thought to contribute most
to ozone depletion) would be
unacceptable to future generations. In
our view, it would be inconsistent with
the goals of the CFC Alliance to ignore
the potential for risk to those future
generations.
In furtherance of this position, the
Alliance recently issued a policy
statement which included support for a
negotiated global limit on the future rate
of growth of fully halogenated CFC
production capacity; the development of
voluntary programs by industries to
conserve CFCs and reduce CFC
emissions; and the continuation of
research to develop acceptable
substitutes for the fully halogenated
CFCs.
This policy is significant because it
eliminates the "worst case" scenarios
being discussed; fosters a continued
international cooperative spirit;
recognizes the value of CFCs to present
day health, safety, and economic
concerns of workers and consumers;
and will provide some stimulus lor the
development of CKC alternatives.
The using and producing industries <>l
the CFC Alliance are committed to
being active participants in the
exploration and the successful
resolution of these serious
environmental issues; in the promotion
of greater global cooperation in
conducting the necessary scientific
research and monitoring; and in
developing coordinated, effective and
equitable global policy decisions. D
DECEMBER 1986
i 1
-------
Poulson, Dal/as Morning News
The greenhouse effect has caught tin;
imagination of th«! general populace
in the las! decade, and the respected,
generally conservative scientific
establishment lias become associated
with relatively dire predictions of future
climate change. I low much is actually
known about the greenhouse effect? Can
we really establish how climate will
change, and when':1 By separating "hard"
science that which can be verified and
is considered well understood—from
scientific theory or estimate we can
investigate how likely a near-term
alteration in climate really is. We
explore this subject through responses
to a series ol questions.
(Dr. Him/ is iuiiilic.s (i;id Spcice Administration.
lie is ii lending rcsi'drcher on aspects of
(In- grccnliousf1 theory of atmospheric
iv
-------
On a hot summer day, youngsters cool
off in [lie fountuin in front of Dallas
(j'ty /frill. Dallas currently experiences
afiuut I<» d(i\ ir of teniperalurrs
over ]()() )•'. One csliimite indicates-
that, if current wcirming trends
continue, tluit mmilier ivill rise to 7<'(
duvs fiv (lie rear 2020.
Can we use the
temperatures on other
planets to determine what
the feedbacks cf the system
will be?
The atmospheres of other nearby planets
validate the general concept of the
greenhouse theory, especially in a
qualitative sense, but they cannot tell us
what the magnitude of the changes on
earth will be. Venus, with a massive
atmosphere composed essentially of
carbon dioxide, has a surface air
temperature almost 50()°C warmer than
would be expected without a
greenhouse effect. Mars, with a very
thin atmosphere and thus little
greenhouse capacity, has an observed
temperature close to the expected; and
Earth, with intermediate amounts of
greenhouse gases, is about 30°C warmer
than it would be otherwise. The
differences among the planets are very
large, and cannot really he used to
estimate sensitivity to small changes in
greenhouse capacity. Furthermore, as
noted above, the big uncertainty lies in
the magnitude of the system response;.
or its "feedbacks"— the most important
feedbacks all involve the reaction of
processes having to do with water, and
the other planets have no freestanding
water.
Are greenhouse
gases increasing?
An atmospheric monitoring system
established in 1958 has measured
systematically increasing concentrations
of carbon dioxide over the; last 28 years.
We also believe that concentrations
have increased since the turn of the
century, although we are less certain
about the magnitude of that change.
Chlorofluorocarbons are artificially
generated gases with greenhouse
capacity which are known to be
increasing; they have no natural
sources, and probably did not exist in
the atmosphere prior to the last few
decades. Recent measurements indicate
that other greenhouse gases, such as
methane and nitrous oxide, also are
increasing, although we are not sure
how long this has been happening. As
we are not sure of the reason for their
increase, we have less confidence in
their long-term trend. In addition,
greenhouse gases of which we are only
now becoming aware may be increasing,
such as some of the more exotic
man-made chlorine-fluorine
compounds.
Is the temperature
record of the past century
consistent with this
greenhouse gas increase?
Estimates are that the global average
surface air temperature has increased by
about 0.6°C in the past 100 years:
available records are uneven.
Temperature recording stations were
much less abundant 100 years ago, and
large portions of the globe were poorly
sampled, especially in the Southern
Hemisphere. Even today, full global
coverage is not available. The record,
such as it is, does not indicate a
ubiquitous warming since that time,
since the Northern Hemisphere has
apparently cooled from the 1940s into
the early 1970s. This cooling is
inconsistent with the concept of
greenhouse wanning, but it may be due
to other climate perturbations (such as
variations in the solar constant or
volcanic aerosols) or simply represent
internal variability within the system.
The overall wanning for the past
century is the right order of magnitude
of the expected greenhouse effect;
however, due to uncertainties in the
actual temperature change, in the
climate feedback factor, in the actual
CO;, amount in 1880. and in the rate of
ocean heat uptake (which slows down
the atmospheric: warming), we cannot be
more precise in determining what the
expected warming should have been.
Similarly, due to the other uncertainties,
we cannot use the record to establish
what the climate feedback factor really
is.
Are current
models adequate to allow us
to forecast climate change?
Numerical models, called general
circulation models, calculate the
response of the climate system to the
increases in trace gases. The three
current models all estimate that the
doubled CO-, climate will have a global
average temperature 4°C warmer than
today. They are thus all calculating
similar climate feedback factors, but as
the different models handle many
processes similarly, the unanimity does
not guarantee accuracy. The treatment
of cloud cover in all the models
represents a major uncertainty. The
models also show differences in the
seasonal and latitudinal distributions of
the calculated warming. It is unlikely
that the models could be wrong by more
than a factor of two, but this cannot be
proven.
In addition, a climate change forecast
should indicate when the warming
would be expected to be evident. Only
one model (the Goddard Institute for
Space Studies [GISS| model) has been
used in a time-transgressive mode to
calculate the climate for the next 50
years. The results indicate substantial
warming in the next decade. This
calculation is affected to some extent by
uncertainties in ocean heat uptake and
the true climate feedback factor. By
providing an estimate of how much
warming should be observed in the
relatively near future, we will have a
chance to test the accuracy of these
models.
How "dire" is the
forecast of coming climate
change?
Ice covered what is now Now York City
during an ice age climate estimated to
be some 4°C colder than today's.
Considering that the doubled CO.,
climate is estimated to be warmer by the
same amount, large changes in the
climate system may well he expected if
this comes to pass. The forecast for the
next 50 years from the C1SS model gives
changes of 2'C by the year 2020, which
would make the earth warmer than it is
thought to have been at any point in
historical time. Estimates for summer
temperatures in the doubled CO..
climate indicate that Washington, DC,
which currently experiences lifi days of
temperature above 90'T', would
routinely have 87 such days; Dallas
would go from 19 days with
temperatures above 100 !•' to 78 days.
Sea level rise due to thermal expansion
of the oceans would cause severe
problems in many coastal cities, and
this effect would be exacerbated if
additional glacial melting occurred.
Rainfall patterns would likely be
substantially altered, posing the threat
of large scale disruptions of agricultural
DECEMBER 1986
13
-------
and economic productivity. The impact
of the climate changes predicted by the
current models would be immense, and,
if the timing is correct, they will corne
quickly.
Is there any way to
prevent these changes from
occurring?
The climate is being altered by the
release of trace gases due to fossil fuel
consumption and industrial processes.
These are factors inherent to our current
civilization, It is hard to visualize
changes sufficient to influence the
overall trace gas trend, short of a major
catastrophe, although it may be possible
to limit specific trace gas increases
(such as the chlorofluorocarbons). Our
ability to manipulate the climate system
deliberately, so as to offset the warming
by some oilier process, is nonexistent. It
is likely that the additional greenhouse
capacity which has been added during
the past 50 years has already built
considerable warming into the system,
which has not yet been reali/.ed due to
the slow response of the ocean.
The climate of the next century will
very likely be substantially different
from today's, and uncertainties in our
knowledge of the true climate
sensitivity prevent us from knowing
exactly how different it will be. The
consequences of the estimated climate
change would be enormous. With that
in mind, it is worthwhile tor us to factor
climatic changes into our
decision-making process, while
appreciating the uncertainties that still
exist in our understanding. D
Carbon Dioxide Concentrations
340
310
1955 1960
1965
19/0
197b
19HU
1985
Meusuiemenls o/atmospheric levels <>i
('().. slum' (i sleadv sensmml ujnvon/
trend over the jxisl .'<() veurs. ('lunl
shows levels measured in purl> pec
miJJion in volume.
Hotter or Colder?
Occasionally, predictions have
been made that the increasing
CO;, in the atmosphere will lead to
another ice age, or that another ice
age is coming in any case. Dr. Rind
responds:
Most suggestions about
increasing CO2 leading to an ice
age involve the effect of climate
change on the ocean. Perhaps the
presence of warmer ocean water at
high latitudes will provide for
more precipitation, more
snow cover, and the growth of
glaciers. Or perhaps the "color" of
the ocean will change as ocean
warming causes changes in algae
concentration, which might
increase ocean reflectivity and cool
the planet. Or maybe the entire
ocean circulation will change, with
reductions in the North Atlantic
production of "deep water," which
is cold salty water that sinks to the
bottom. This could force the water
that stays on the surface to remain
cold.
What all these suggestions have
in common is that they are highly
speculative. The growth of glaciers
in a warmer climate, for example,
is unlikely because glacial buildup
occurs only when temperatures
remain below freezing. In most
regions of the Northern Hemisphere
this does not happen today; and it
would be less possible in a wanner
climate. If some feedback process
initiated by the warming, such as a
change in cloud cover or ocean
reflectivity, acted to cool the
climate, its importance would
probably diminish as the warming
diminished (for example, cloud
cover would return to its current
level), and so end the cooling.
Finally, while there is some
evidence that climate has cooled
rapidly in the past during warming
episodes, perhaps because of
changes in ocean circulation, the
event(s) seemed to have occurred
when much more extensive land
ice already existed, providing cold
fresh meltwater runoff for the
ocean. Future ocean circulation
changes cannot be ruled out, but
there is little evidence that they
are probable, especially in the near
future.
On longer time scales, the
likelihood of another ice age is
based on the current
understanding that ice ages result
from variations in the earth's orbit
around the sun. At certain periods
the earth receives less solar
radiation during Northern
Hemisphere summer, which would
aid in allowing snow cover to
persist. The direct solar variation
forcing is too small by itself to
produce an ice age; the climate
system would have to enhance the
initial effect in order to produce an
ice age. For example, analysis of
gas bubbles trapped in ice cores
indicates that during ice ages
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
is lowered by about 25 percent
(about 70 ppm), which would cool
the planet. Currently, the orbital
variations are such that the solar
radiation received in the Northern
Hemisphere during summer is
decreasing, although it will be
several thousand years before it
reaches the minimum values
which occurred during the last ice
age. In this sense we are "going
into" an orbital configuration that
is more favorable for ice ages.
But the climate change that is
our present concern is anticipated
to be evident in the next decade.
and to reach major proportions
during the next one hundred years.
Ice ages are lengthy phenomena,
occurring over thousands of years,
and it is unlikely that major effects
would appear on the short time
scales of interest here.
Furthermore, with a warmer
climate it is uncertain whether ice
ages could occur: a reduction of 70
ppm of CO-2 today would simply
bring the COZ level back to what it
was normally in the past, well
above the ice age values. If
minimal CO2 amounts are
necessary for the orbital
configuration to generate an ice
age, such an occurrence may well
be less likely in the future.
14
EPA JOURNAL
-------
The Dangers from
Climate Warming:
A Public Awakening
by Rafe Pomerance
Mauna Loe Qbservaiory, NQAA
"A Dire Forecast for Greenhouse
^ The Washington Posl
"Swifter Warming of Globe
Foreseen" The New York Times
"The Silent Summer, Ozone
Loss, and Global Warming:
A Looming Crisis" Newsweek
(Pomeranre is .Senior Associate for
Policy All'dirs (if tin- IVorJiJ Hesourres
Institute.)
f (nnhe greenhouse effect"...this term
J. is part of the public vocabulary
now. In just a few years, it has changed
from a scientific curiosity to a major
policy issue for industries and
governments all over the world.
Why? How did a question of
seemingly academic interest suddenly
become the subject not only of
headlines and talk shows, but of
government hearings and international
negotiations?
Simply put, the greenhouse effect is
the process in which heat radiating from
the earth's surface is trapped by gases,
such as carbon dioxide and methane, in
the atmosphere. The increased heat
results in a rise in global temperatures
which may significantly alter climate
patterns. Scientists have known and
studied this effect for decades, but only
recently have they reached the
fundamental consensus that rising levels
of greenhouse gases may threaten the
future of our planet. Now the
implications of that possibility are
reaching governments.
The greenhouse elfect reached .1 new
stage in its evolution as a policy issue in
Tin; Mumui Lou Observatory nrur Ililu.
/fuivuii. is part of'the Geophysical
Mom'formg lor Climatic Cha
program run by Jlir Xatioiuil Ocrunic
and Atmospheric Administration, The
Observatory's rurfioii dio.\ii/r
monitoring records dute back to ni.'iM.
1979, when four eminent scientists
reported to the Council on
Environmental Quality (GEQ) that
"...man is setting in motion a series of
events that seem certain to cause a
significant wanning of world climates
unless mitigating steps are taken
immediately." The authors wore
geologist George Woodwell, OIK; of the
first to examine the role of deforestation
in the buildup of carbon dioxide;
geophysicist Gordon MacDonald, one of
CEQ's original members; David Keeling
of the Scripps Institute of
Oceanography, who coordinated
continuous measurements of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere; and
oceanographer Roger Revelle, who
established the carbon dioxide
monitoring station at Mauna Loa in
Hawaii in 1957 and who chaired the
DECEMBER 1986
15
-------
1977 National Research Council report,
"Energy and Climate."
At about the same time, the National
Academy of Sciences also began a study
of the greenhouse effect. After reviewing
available atmospheric models and
analyses of past climates, the study
chaired by meteorologist Jule Charney
concluded that "We have tried but have
been unable to find any overlooked or
underestimated physical effects that
could reduce the estimated global
warming due to a doubling of CO2
(carbon dioxide) to negligible
proportions or reverse them altogether."
The study estimated that a doubling of
CO;, in the atmosphere would raise
global temperature by 3°C, plus or
minus 1 1/2°C.
The greenhouse problem was debated
in yet another forum that year when the
Carter administration proposed a major
synthetic fuels initiative. In The
Washington I'oat. Cordon MacDonald
argued that synthetic fuels produced
even more carbon dioxide per unit of
energy than coal, oil, or natural gas.
MacDonald warned that subsidizing
synthetic fuels was a mistake that
would only increase U.S. dependence
on C();, intensive energy systems.
The controversy attracted the interest
of Ihefi U.S. Senator Abraham Ribicoff,
who had recently been warned of the
greenhouse effect by West German
Chancellor Helmut Schmidt. Ribicoff
convened a Senate symposium on the
subject. The result was an amendment
In tin; synthetic fuels legislation of 1980
mandating that the National Academy of
Sciences undertake another.
comprehensive, review of the problem.
Also in HJHO. the National Commission
on Air Quality held a workshop on the
greenhouse effect as part of its review of
the Clean Air Act. Thai workshop may
have been the first study to concentrate
solely on public policy issues rather
than science aspects of the problem.
In January 1981, under the leadership
of (ius Spctb, the Council on
Environmental Quality released its
report on the CO;, problem. After
the reductions in CO-.
emissions that would be needed to keep
levels belcnv i 1/2 times preindustrial
levels, CKQ concluded that "the
potential risks from oven moderate
increases in the burning of tossil
fuels...underscores the vital need to
incorporate the CO2 issue into the
development of United States and global
energy policy." Adding a major
dimension to the problem, scientists at
the Coddard Institute of Space Studies
concluded later that same year that COj
was not the only problem gas; methane,
tropospheric ozone, nitrous oxides, and
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) could also
contribute significantly to warming the
atmosphere.
The Environmental Protection Agency
made its first contribution to the debate
in 1983, when it released its report "Can
We Delay a Greenhouse Warming?"
EPA's report concluded that levels of
atmospheric greenhouse gases were
already high enough to trigger a global
warming, and that economic momentum
would ensure even further warming.
Based on his climate models,
Hansen projected that
significant warming might be
observed within five to 15
years.
The report further concluded that global
temperatures would rise by 2°C within a
relatively short time, even with major
reductions of COZ emissions, although
such reductions could have an impact
in the long run.
EPA's report was followed shortly by
Changing Climate, the greenhouse study
of the National Academy of Sciences. In
contrast to EPA's conclusions about
fossil fuel use and COZ buildup, the
Academy judged that "We do not
believe that the evidence at hand about
CO2-induced climate change would
support steps to change correct fuel use
patterns away from fossil fuels."
Perhaps the Academy report calmed
public fears. At any rate, the issue faded
from the public eye until 1985, when
new scientific information, a key
international conference, and a series of
Congressional hearings combined to
return the greenhouse effect to public:
awareness.
Early in 1985, scientists V.
Ramanathan and Ralph Cicerone and
their colleagues from the National
Center for Atmospheric Research
announced that not only were other
greenhouse gases contributing as much
to global warming in the 1980s as CO;.,
but also that these gases could
eventually surpass carbon dioxide in
their contribution to the greenhouse
effect. These findings reinforced the
growing consensus that some global
warming was inevitable and that it
would occur rapidly.
An international meeting in October
1985 came to the same conclusion.
Under the auspices of the United
Nations Environment Programme and
the World Meteorological Organization.
scientists from 29 nations met in
Villach, Austria, and agreed that "some
warming of climate now appears
inevitable; the rate of future wanning
could be profoundly affected by
government policies on energy
conservation, on use of fossil fuels, and
emission of some greenhouse gases."
Following on the heels of the Villach
conference was a Senate hearing
convened by Senator David
Durenberger, as well as a call by Senator
Albert Gore for an international "Year of
the Greenhouse" to focus attention on
the problem. Gore was not new to the
issue, having conducted hearings on the
greenhouse effect in 1982 and 1984
while he was a member of the U.S.
House of Representatives. The pace
quickened in 1986, when the World
Meteorological Organization, the
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and numerous other
agencies issued a three-volume report
on atmospheric ozone. The report
detailed the rapid atmospheric changes
occurring as a result of human activity,
particularly the greenhouse effect and
the depletion of the protective ozone
layer in the stratosphere. Concluded the
report, " There is now compelling
evidence that the atmosphere is
changing on a global scale." Finally,
Senator John Chafee's hearings in June
of 1986 brought together key scientists
and government officials to discuss the
problem. Perhaps the most significant
testimony came from Dr. James Hansen
of the Goddard Institute for Spaa'
Studies. Based on his climate models,
Hansen projected that significant
warming might be observed within five
to 15 years.
This was a surprise to many
observers. The greenhouse problem had
been viewed as taking decades to
develop, and, indeed, doubled levels of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere were
still projected to occur decades from
now. It was the possibility that warming
could occur at much lower levels of CO2
that suddenly became a serious issue for
government policymakers to address.
The Chafee hearings raised the
visibility of the greenhouse issue,
making it a more likely factor in policy
discussions. Senator Chafee moved the
issue another step by asking EPA to
develop a set of policy options for
stabilizing the level of greenhouse gases
in the atmosphere. When completed,
this study should mark the beginning of
another era for the greenhouse effect
and the problem of global warming. D
16
EPA JOURNAL
-------
Rising
Sea Levels:
The Impact They Pose
by James G. Titus
Sreve Delaney
(Titus is Pro/erf Mdiiuger lor Seo Level
Ifj'.se in (he Ollice ol Police Annlrsis in
h'P.l's Ol'Jiee o| P(jlicy. /'Idiming, (ind
Evaluation.]
High-rise condominiums line (he beach
in Ocean (,'itv. All), Hrueli erosion due
to rising se
-------
ages much of the northern hemisphere
was covered with ,111 ice shoot
thousands oi foot thick. As those
glaciers melted at the end of the ice
ages, tin: water flowed hack into the
oceans and tlio sea rose. From around
15,0(10 B.C. until around 5,1)00 B.C., sea
level rose ahotil throe feet per century.
Since then, the sea has risen only an
inch or two per century on average.
However, tidul records show that in the
last hundred years it has risen lour to
six inches.
Although most of the ice sheets
covering North America during the last
ice age have melted, the expected glohai
wanning could raise sea level for a
number of reasons:
• Thermal expansion. Ocean water
expands when it is heated, which could
raise the sea level a foot or two in the
next century.
• Alpine glaciers. The snow covering
various mountains throughout the world
could melt, adding another foot to sea
level,
• Greenland. Polar scientists estimate
that glacial melting there could add
another loot to sea level in the next
century.
• Antarctica. Over the next two
hundred to five hundred years, it is
possible that the West Antarctic Ice
Sheet could completely disintegrate,
which would raise sea level 20 feet.
Fortunately, polar scientists generally
believe that Antarctic glaciers are
unlikely to contribute more than three
feet to rising sea level in the next 100
years.
Several scientific groups—the U.S.
National Academy of Sciences, the
Environmental Protection Agency, and
an international conference in Austria
sponsored by the United Nations
Environment Programme—have
estimated the future rise in worldwide
sea level. The consensus for the most
likely rise in the next century is in the
range of between two and six feet, with
a one-foot rise possible in the next 40
years. Because much of the U.S. coast is
sinking, the rise along most of the
Atlantic and Gulf coasts in the next
century will be six to eight inches
greater.
The major anticipated impacts of sea
level rises are inundation, erosion,
increased flooding, and saltwater
intrusion. Areas that are now just above
Fanners tninspldiil shoots in
-------
Along the open coast, a rise in sea
level causes the shore to retreat
considerably beyond the part of the
beach that is inundated. Higher water
levels enable storm waves to strike
further inland to erode more of the
beach, and decrease the ability of calm
waves to rebuild the beach. Along most
of the U.S. coast, a one-foot rise in sea
level will erode 100 to 200 hundred feet
of beach. This could threaten many
resorts that have buildings within 100
feet of the shore.
A rise in sea level could increase
coastal flooding for three reasons. First,
during hurricanes and northeasters,
"storm surges" can raise water levels
five to fifteen fee't higher than normal,
providing a higher base for these surges
to build upon. For example, in
Charleston, SC, areas that
today are flooded only once a century
would be flooded every 10 years if sea
level rises five feet. Second, erosion can
leave particular properties closer to the
shore and thus more vulnerable. Finally,
higher water levels decrease the
efficiency of natural and artificial
drainage systems, causing backwaters
that can increase flooding from
rainwater.
Sea level rise also increases the
salinity of ground and surface waters in
coastal areas; this can cause important
shifts in coastal ecosystems. Although
fresh water marshes may be replaced by
salt marshes, freshwater cypress
swamps are generally converted to
shallow lakes when exposed to
excessive salinity levels, which is
already occurring in Louisiana.
Saltwater intrusion also threatens
drinking water supplies. A two-foot rise
in sea level would result in
Philadelphia's Delaware River water
supply being too salty to drink during
droughts when streamflow is
diminished. Moreover, because the
aquifers on which suburban New jersey
relies are recharged by the
[currently fresh) Delaware River,
increased river salinities could result in
salty river water contaminating the
aquifers.
How can the impacts of rising sea
level be prevented or at least
ameliorated? Society can respond to
these problems either by reacting to
them as they occur or by anticipating
them as part of the planning and design
of coastal communities and other
long-term projects. The most general
response to ameliorating the problem of
sea level rises would be to limit
emissions of greenhouse gases and limit
the acceleration of sea level rise. But
DECEMBER 1986
Greenhouse Effect:
Other Impacts
The greenhouse effect may well
shift our climate to conditions
unknown in recorded human
history. While our ability to
predict the full implications of this
shift is limited, one approach is to
study the earth's past for clues to
its future. Based on geological
studies of life thousands of years
ago, we know that many aspects of
our environment are intertwined
with climate. They have
undergone dramatic changes,
particularly compared to 18,000
years ago when the earth was
about five degrees Centigrade
cooler.
As the earth warms, we may see
changes in all aspects of our
climate: changes in rainfall
patterns, more frequent storms,
and more extreme temperatures.
As a result, agriculture and natural
ecosystems will be affected.
Important changes in farm
productivity can be expected
throughout the world. Crops that
now prosper may not grow, and
today's breadbaskets may become
tomorrow's dust bowls. The need
to develop new agricultural
methods and crops, perhaps
through advances in
bioengineering, will pose a critical
challenge to future generations.
The makeup and extent of our
natural ecosystems, including
wetlands and wilderness areas,
may shift. As mild-latitudes warm,
evergreen forests may be forced to
shift north. If human development
blocks this migration, the entire
ecosystem may be at risk. The
implications for endangered
species, many of which are
adapted to specific environmental
niches, may also be severe.
Climate change will affect the
availability of water for industrial
and agricultural uses, and for
drinking. As rainfall patterns shift,
reservoirs may dry up, or dams
become overburdened. The water
projects we build today will last
50 years or more. They are
designed with the assumption that
tomorrow's climate will be the
same as today's—an assumption
that may not hold as greenhouse
gases build up in the atmosphere.
The implications of climate
change are broad. The weather, a
mainstay of conversation today, is
likely to take on a growing
importance as the world warms.
such a policy is only likely to be
effective if implemented long before
problems emerge, because it would take
a few decades to carry out. Even if all
emissions were curtailed, the earth
would continue to warm for at least a
few decades as the oceans came into
equilibrium, after which the sea would
continue to rise for at least a few more
decades as glaciers came into
equilibrium with the higher
temperatures. By the time the sea rises
one foot, it would be too late to prevent
a several-foot rise in sea level.
Therefore, coastal communities must
also look at ways of adapting to
whatever rise does take place. Possible
responses to inundation, erosion, and
flooding will fall broadly into three
categories: building walls to hold back
the sea, raising the land surface, and
retreating from the shore.
Levees and dikes are already used to
hold back the sea to protect areas below
sea level in the Netherlands and
adjacent countries, as well as such U.S.
cities as New Orleans and Texas City.
This option will probably be the
preferred response for most major
low-lying metropolitan areas. However,
it will not be appropriate for coastal
barrier islands whose recreational beach
economies require that the shore be a
beach, not a wall. Moreover, this option
can result in a complete loss of coastal
wetlands. For communities built on
coral reefs, levees may not be able to
keep the water out.
Raising the land surface may be the
preferred option for coastal barrier
island resorts such as Miami Beach,
where property values are
high and there is a need to maintain a
recreational beach. For communities on
coral reefs, this may be the only option.
This method may also be the only way
to simultaneously protect wetlands and
coastal property; however, technologies
to accelerate the ability of wetlands to
grow upward are expensive and not
entirely proven. Nevertheless, raising
the land surface is already employed in
many coastal areas where dredges pump
sand from offshore to rebuild eroding
beaches.
In some cases, property values may
not be great enough to justify
construction of a levee or raising the
land. In other cases, defending the shore
may be economically viable, but the
social goal of protecting natural
shoreline environments may preclude
those options. In these instances, the
only alternative will be to adapt to a
retreating shoreline.
If the current shoreline is to be
19
-------
Flood damage- in Virginia Hcuch. V.V .\
rise in sea level could increase flooding
in cotistfjJ areas like (his.
maintained, there is little advantage to
defending it before the sea rises enough
for defensive efforts to be necessary,
However, retreating from the shore
would require considerable lead time.
since coastal structures can last 50 to
100 years and their owners would he
reluctant to move or abandon them.
This need lor advance planning has
been incorporated into many state
coastal /one plans, which require that
new construction be set back from the
ocean shore a distance equal to the
erosion expected in a given number of
years. North Carolina requires houses
that can be subsequently moved to be
set back Irom the shore to a point
approximately "30 years worth" of
erosion and large buildings to he set
back "(SO years worth." In Maine, the
set-back requirement is lOO years.
However, these regulations do not yet
incorporate the degree of shore retreat
that might be necessitated by (lie
accelerated rates ot sea level rise that
are now expected.
The need tor advance planning max
be even greater in the case of wetland
protection. If the problem is not
addressed until the sea has risen
significantly, it may be too late to
require development to retreat without
costly purchases of land and structures.
By contrast, long-term planning could
help ensure that new structures are not
built in areas where new wetlands are
likely to form.
Long-term planning for saltwater
intrusion into water supplies may also
be useful. For example, in the case of
the Delaware River, the water
authorities maintain reservoirs and
release fresh water when salinity levels
increase. Sea level rise may require
more reservoirs in the future. While
there is no need to build those dams
today, now is the time to identify the
locations where they would be built if
needed. Otherwise such sites may be
developed for other uses precluding the
options by which future generations can
address the problem.
Fortunately, most of the consequences
from the expected rise in sea level are
still decades in the future. Why should
we focus on these future problems when
we are faced today with more
immediate problems such as toxic waste
dumps, urban smog, and dying
estuaries? Former EPA Administrator
William Ruckelshaus offered this
perspective:
Our system of government
has traditionally been biased
toward a sort of institutional
inertia, which is eventually broken
by development of a massive
consensus. The problem is thai in
oui- ultimate haste, ive may not
give adequate attention to all the
options. Whether we can continue
in such a manner is a subject open
to question...in an era producing
catastrophes of a magnitude
greater than in the past, ive can
place our institutions in situations
where precipitate action is the sole
option—and it is then that our
institutions can be imperiled and
individual rights overrun.
When, as in the case of the greenhouse
effect and the rising seas, a period of
several decades must pass between
cause and effect, the future
environmental problems should be
addressed as they are being created,
rather than waiting until their
consequences are upon us.
Other nations are also beginning to
examine the implications of future sea
level rise. For example, in August 1986,
a conference of 50 scientists and
officials from around the Soviet Union
sponsored by the Estonian Academy of
Sciences recommended that decision
makers be informed about "the cost of
designing new facilities for a future rise
compared with the cost of rebuilding
the facilities if such a rise takes place."
Professor Eric Bird, an invited observer
from Australia, expects these
recommendations to be acted upon:
"The Soviets have a track record of
implementing the recommendations of
this panel."
Addressing the causes of sea level rise
will require nations to work together.
But individual nations and
communities and individuals can
decide for themselves whether and how
to prepare for and react to the effects
and, in so doing, will help create the
understanding and public awareness
necessary to address the causes. D
20
EPA JOURNAL
-------
Ill Winds Carry No Visas
by Dr. Mostafa K. Tolba
Dr. Mostdfu k, Tolbci
It took just one "isolated" incident
recently to bring this moral home to
the world public. The Chernobyl
catastrophe showed us that nuclear
accidents do not discriminate in their
terrible costs. Fallout respects no
national boundaries when it follows the
winds, and radioactivity obeys no laws
but those of science. Never has the need
for international cooperation on global
environmental problems been more
graphically illustrated.
The growth of technology in the past
50 years has brought us—indeed, bound
us—together through international trade,
travel, and communications. But these
same advances also have entirely new
environmental consequences, including
major impacts on the earth's protective
blanket of atmosphere. Along with its
benefits, technology has the power to
alter Earth's conditions to something
never experienced in human history. A
single nation's activities may now
directly affect not just global politics or
economics, but also the very biological
and atmospheric bases of the planet.
Nobody knows how these modifications
will ultimately shape our planet, but
they surely will change our lives.
The "greenhouse effect," for example,
is already altering world climate by
trapping heat within the atmosphere, a
phenomenon with serious implications
for rising sea levels and altered weather
patterns across the globe. And in the
upper atmosphere, emissions of
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other
compounds may be destroying the
protective layer of ozone that shields
Earth and its inhabitants from harmful
solar radiation. Scientists predict a
(Dr. Tollui is Executive Director nl' the
! 'nilcd \dlimis h'nvironim'nl
ProgmmnH! mid a /ending ligim: on
glofxjl environmental issues. |
DECEMBER 1986
staggering rise in fatal and other skin
cancers because of increased ultraviolet
radiation over the next century, as well
as other impacts on human health and
damage to agriculture, water resources,
forestry, and wetlands.
Not all the winds of technological
change need be ill winds. Someday, we
may be able to use our newly
recognized power over the climate and
atmosphere in constructive ways,
perhaps by preventing droughts or by
diverting typhoons away from inhabited
areas. But that is a distant prospect. We
must first begin to repair the damage
that is occurring already. And we can
only hope to succeed in that task by
working together.
First Steps
Although most of the world's people are
not responsible for the technologies that
cause problems such as ozone layer
depletion, the majority of them have
benefited to some extent from the
products of such technologies. And
everyone shares the risks posed by their
byproducts. These risks may vary with
many factors, but the fact remains that
we must all share equally the
responsibility for protecting the world's
environment from further damage.
The 1985 Vienna Convention for the
Protection of the Ozone Layer is one of
the first fruits of this global
environmental ethic. By calling for an
international framework for controlling
CFCs, the signatories not only agreed to
work on problems which only a handful
among them had caused; they also
established a model for anticipating and
avoiding other worldwide
environmental problems.
The road to Vienna was not entirely
smooth. By all conventional tests. CFC.s
appear unimpeachable. They are
non-toxic, non-flammable, and among
the most useful and least wasteful
refrigerants and foam-blowing agents
available to modern industry. It required
careful monitoring and study by UNEP
(the United Nations Environmental
Programme) and others to make the case
for the role of CFCs in o/one depletion.
And without the research and action
that led to Vienna, CFC emissions might
still be increasing without the slightest
suspicion of their damage to the ozone
layer and hence to human health. How
many millions of people might have
suffered skin cancers and eye damage
before the connection with CFC
emissions was made?
Nor is the Vienna Convention the end
of the road. The details for controlling
CFCs internationally still need to be
hammered out, and it is still difficult
even to measure changes in the ozone
layer. The only certainty is that
concentrations of trace gases in the
atmosphere are increasing. It is not
impossible that the consequences of
CFC emissions may be less disastrous
than we fear. But only time will tell.
In the meantime, the Vienna
Convention provides an international
legal instrument to ensure that
appropriate action is being taken. LJN'EP
is guiding negotiations to decide how
best to protect the ozone layer, for
example through production quotas.
emission reductions, or end-use controls
on manufacturing processes. By
mid-1987, we hope these negotiations
lead to provisions in the Convention
that incorporate fair and effective, yet
flexible channels for limiting ozone
damage.
The Next Challenge
The next great challenge for I'XHP is to
convince the international community
to apply the lessons of the Vienna
Convention to the related issue of
greenhouse gases and their impact on
world climate.
It will be difficult. We already know
that this impact varies far more from
region to region, or latitude to latitude,
than does that of ozone depletion. There
will be winners and losers because ot
this variation, but winning and losing
will be unrelated to polluting activities.
Like ozone depletion, the problem is
irrefutably a world problem.
UNEP has already taken the vital
preliminary stops lor a global solution.
We are seeking the support of other
United Nations agencies and other
governments and non-government
organizations tor a more responsible
attitude towards the environment, a
commitment to development without
destruction. Achieving this will require
the timely assessment ot potential
impacts, and the development ol
frameworks for international
collaboration to reduce or eliminate
damage through swift, practical action.
We may be able to save the o/.one
layer now, thanks to tin; Vienna
Convention and the fusion of will.
effort, and resources thai made it
possible. International cooperation for
the environment has gained a solid
precedent, a now assurance that it can
be done.
The hopeful future opened up by this
achievement offers a breath of fresh air
after the ill wind of Chernobyl. We may
even take some strength from it. For the
sake of the victims of that tragedy and
their grieving families, let us hope .so. _J
21
-------
Finding Answers
by John H. Chafee
A .spaceship rieiv (if KartJi. Problems <>l
o/one depletion ami (he greenhouse
eMecf "(in' dramatic nen reminders ihut
we live on (i vidnernMe planel."
(Senator (,'halec. H-H.J., is a senior
memlier ol !lie t'.S. Seimle Knviromnenl
and Public U'orks C.'ommiilee and from
I'liU la /uiiifiiry 1997 chaired !he
Subcommittee on Bnvironmentai
Pollution, in June JWJIi, lie chaired a
series ol hearings on tipper atmosphere
problems.J
Although the; problems of
stratospheric ozone depletion, the
greenhouse effect, and climate change
have not yet reached the same level of
public: recognition as toxic waste or acid
ruin, more and more people are
becoming aware of and concerned about
them. The coverage that these issues has
received in the past few months is
evidence of this. Across this country,
Canada, and Europe, there have been
stories and editorials in newspapers, on
national television and radio, and in
maga/.ines such as Newsweek and The;
New Yorker.
These problems—and the
international interest in them—are
dramatic new reminders that we live on
a vulnerable planet, and that, if we do
not think and act in consort, we may
indeed perish in consort.
In June 1986, the Senate
Subcommittee on Environmental
Pollution conducted two days of
hearings to explore the nature of these
problems and to examine what is being
done by the U.S. government,
domestically and internationally, to
both improve our understanding of
these matters and to respond to them.
Why did we decide to spend time on
these problems? Why is all of this so
important? Why are policymakers
demanding action before scientists have
resolved all of the questions and
uncertainties?
We are doing so because there is a
very real possibility that man—through
ignorance or indifference, or both—is
irreversibly altering the ability of our
atmosphere to perform basic life support
functions for the planet.
This is not a matter of Chicken Little
telling us the sky is falling. At our
hearings, we heard graphic, powerful,
and disturbing testimony from
distinguished scientists. The scientific
evidence and the international
consensus is that we have a problem, a
serious problem. We already know a
great deal, and there is a great deal more
that we can predict with relative
certainty.
It is true that we lack the tools to
close all of the scientific gaps. We don't
completely understand our climate
systems, nor can we predict precise
regional outcomes. But we will always
be faced with a level of uncertainty.
Scientists have characterized our
response to the greenhouse effect as a
global experiment. It strikes me as a
form of planetary Russian roulette.
We should not be experimenting with
Earth's life support systems unless we
are sure that the results will be benign.
In a statement that serves as a powerful
reminder of a basic concept, Russell
Peterson, chemist and former chairman
EPA JOURNAL
-------
of the President's Council on
Environmental Quality, has said, "we
cannot afford to give chemicals the
same constitutional rights that we enjoy
under law...chemicals are not innocent
until proven guilty."
By not making policy choices today,
sticking to a "wait and see" approach,
we may in fact be choosing by default.
By allowing the so-called "greenhouse"
gases to continue to build up in the
atmosphere, this generation may be
committing all of us to severe economic
and environmental disruption without
ever having decided that the value of
"business as usual" is worth the risks.
Those who believe that these are
problems to be dealt with by future
generations are deluding themselves.
Our activities may already have
committed us to some level of
temperature change. If historical
evidence is any guide, even a slight
warming may be enough to turn
productive, temperate climates into
deserts. To quote from a recent
Department of Energy report, "large
changes in both precipitation and the
extent of deserts and grasslands can be
associated with relatively small
variations in the global mean
temperature."
Society's course today is much like a
car being driven towards the edge of a
cliff. We can go ahead, take no action,
and drive off the edge, Or we can put the
brakes on now, before the car gets any
closer to the edge of the cliff and before
momentum takes us over the side. We
have a choice.
The question is: How do we make it?
First, it is important to focus attention
on the potential effects of ozone
modification and climate change.
Simply telling people there will be a
change is not enough. They need to
understand how they will be affected by
it.
In addition, we must begin to consider
the choices that must be made if we are
going to avoid further buildup of
harmful gases in the atmosphere. All of
us must recognize that these are no
longer just science issues. They are now
policy issues. They demand solutions.
Many of the government witnesses
who appeared before my Subcommittee
last summer argued that we need more
studies. They contend that there are too
many scientific: uncertainties to warrant
action.
Sure, we can continue to study
the problem—and we should
continue our studies—but we
cannot wait until these studies
are completed. We need
action.
Only Lee Thomas recognized what is
at stake here. He was the only
decisionmaker from the government
who appreciated the fact that there will
always be scientific uncertainty and that
policymakers and those who make
regulatory decisions cannot allow
themselves to be paralyzed by these
gaps in knowledge.
Sure, we can continue to study the
problem—and we should continue our
studies—but we cannot wait until these
studies are completed. We need action.
Those who argue against action like to
recite the caveats, uncertainties, and
margins of error that accompany
scientific reports and projections. But
the margins of error usually associated
with the greenhouse effect are in terms
of mere decades. Disagreements over the
accuracy of projections obscure the real
issue: Do we have the right to pollute
the atmosphere today in a manner that
will wreak havoc in as few as 100 to
300 years?
Obviously, no one step is going to
solve the multitude of problems
associated with these matters. But we
must not let the enormity of the task
keep us from taking a series of small
steps.
Controlling chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs) is a prime example of an
important initial step. CFCs are not the
only source of the problem, but they are
a significant factor: controlling them
would represent a major
accomplishment. Given the risks
associated with ozone modification and
climate change, a treaty that
immediately limits and ultimately
eliminates the availability of harmful
CFCs would seem to be a sensible
course to pursue. The good news is that,
under the leadership of the United
Nations Environment Programme,
international negotiations to control
CFCs are currently under way. The not
so good news is that we don't have an
agreement yet.
The need for international
cooperation in addressing these matters
is obvious. We are dealing with
-------
The Science
of Global Pollution
by John S. Hoffman,
John Bruce Wells,
and Stephen R, Seidel
Stratospheric ozone protection and the
greenhouse effect represent complex
scientific challenges to the global
community. The scientific theory
behind global warming from the
buildup of greenhouse gases dates back
well over a century. In Uifil, the Irish
physicist Tyiulall conducted a series of
experiments which in effect first
demonstrated the greenhouse theory by
showing that water vapor absorbs
infrared radiation—the heat energy
which escapes from earth. Soon after
Tyndall'.s discovery, the Swedish
physicist Arrhenius went straight to the
heart of the issue by positing that
carbon dioxide, another atmospheric
gas, would absorb enough infrared
radiation to warm the earth by several
degrees,
Kvidonce concerning the existence
and role of the ozone layer can be traced
to the work of Chapman in the 1930s.
is Director of the
.s-ftn/ifs sluil in EPA's Office of Policy,
I'lmming. lint! hYuhnilmn. und muiui.gr
(he stratospheric o/onc progrum in (lie
..\<.>,<'iir\ 's (lll'irr ol Air
-------
(,'omputer mor/cJs help scii'nfisls study
the cycling o(' cm-bun timni»/i oceans.
(ifniosphrn1. and biosphere and its
pos.sib/r H'!t!( ts on
scientist's findings were not accepted
until others had repeated and verified
the experiment. Science was not a
mental exercise, but one that bloomed
in the laboratory. As the laboratory tools
became more powerful, the grasp of
scientific understanding reached further
and further.
The greenhouse effect and o/one
depletion represent questions which
stretch the scientific process to its
limits. Because we have only one earth,
we cannot design an experiment which
scientists can study, understand, and
reproduce. As oceanographer Roger
Revelle pointed out in 1957, we "are
now carrying out a large-scale
geophysical experiment of a kind that
could not have happened in the past,
nor be repeated in the future".
Development of
Models
Laboratory analysis and physical
measurements provide important pieces
of the complex puzzle that i.s the
greenhouse effect, but many aspects of
the overall design remain a mystery. To
address this problem, scientists have
developed computer models that
simulate the millions of interactions
that constitute the operation of the
natural world. Using models, scientists
can study the cycling of carbon through
oceans, atmosphere, and biosphere
under various conditions. To keep them
from being paper exercises, they can
also test these models against historical
data. For example, the trapped air
bubbles in deep ice cores can be studied
to reveal the composition of the
atmosphere thousands of years ago. The
geographic dispersion of fossilized tree
pollen can yield clues to the location of
forests in the same geologic era,
allowing biologists to test whether a
climate-biomass model using historical
atmospheric conditions would
reproduce known forest locations.
Another test involves simulating the
conditions of other planets. For
example, NASA scientists know the
temperatures and atmospheric:
compositions of Venus and Mars. Given
the composition of greenhouse gases in
their atmospheres, climate models for
these planets can be tested to see if they
can reproduce known temperatures. The
success of this comparison is one
method used to establish the existence
of the greenhouse effect and to support
the predictive capability of computer
models.
Interdisciplinary
Approaches
The complexity of these studies
demands an interdisciplinary approach.
Emissions of trace gases into the
atmosphere are not only changing the
radiative balance of the earth's surface
and affecting its o/.one layer: they are
also influencing the oceans and
biosphere, which in turn will change
the composition and climate of the
atmosphere. For example, scientists
believe that increased carbon dioxide
will affect plants in very complex ways.
Higher levels of the gas may directly
increase photosynthesis and plant
growth. Indirectly, climate change
related to carbon dioxide and other
greenhouse gases might alter
precipitation, length of growing season.
the life cycle of pests, and competitive
balances among plants. Even to begin to
understand this interaction between the
atmosphere and biosphere requires
scientists to cross their often
compartmented boundaries. For
example, while some researchers are
now investigating the influence of
climate change on natural vegetation
and others are studying tin: effects of
ultraviolet radiation on these same
ecosystems, no one has vet attempted to
study the joint effects of climate change
and ultraviolet radiation.
For scientists to investigate
successfully the earth's systems for
clues to its future, they must continue
to develop new research methods and
engage in cooperative efforts. We have
reached a stage in human society where
our capacity to understand the natural
world has never been greater, but where
our tendency to inadvertently, perhaps
irreversibly, alter that world is also
unparalleled. We now face a race
between our scientific advances and the
changes towards which we are
propelling the world, and our ability to
respond to these advances and changes.
It i.s with optimism about our
resourcefulness that we move forward
in addressing these issues. LJ
DECEMBER 1986
2b
-------
VIEWPOINT:
New Thinking in American Environmentalism
by Frederic D. Krupp
Ten of the country's largest national
environmental groups have chosen
new leaders in the past two years. As
one member of that incoming class, I
see not only new faces, but also the
beginnings of a new strategy in the
movement, one that may make obsolete
some of the hard-cast assumptions about
environmentalism's role and limits.
The first stage of the movement,
represented by President Theodore
Roosevelt and the early Sierra Club, was
a reaction to truly rapacious
exploitation of natural resources in the
wake of the industrial Revolution. The
early focus was on conservation,
stemming the loss of forest lands and
wildlife, especially in the West,
In the HKiOs, people began to realize
that they, too, were becoming victims of
environmental abuse, that the
environment at risk was not just the one
in Yellowstone Park but also the one we
all live; in every day. This second stage,
often assumed to have begun with
Rachel Carson's Silent Spring,
recognized that the contamination of
water, land, and air had sown seeds of
destruction for both wildlife and
humans.
'I'he strategy in this .second phase has
been to try to halt abusive pollution.
just as the early conservationists tried to
end the over-exploitation of resources.
Federal laws such as the Clean Air Act
and Clean Water Act and agencies like
the Environmental Protection Agency
reflect this approach.
Second-stage environmentalism has
long since earned wide acceptance by
the public. By now, it is also stirring
SOUK; restless comment, not only from
those who think it goes too far. but also
from those who think it doesn't go far
enough. Some believe that
environmentalists an; relentlessly
negative, opposing industry by reflex.
standing in the way of growth and
driving up costs. Another school of
thought, known by the term Deep
Kcology (from the hook by Bill Devall
and Ceorge Sessions), worries that
today's environmentalists have been
co-opted by the political system and
have become too willing to compromise,
too concerned with reform at the margin
instead of root change.
(K'rupp is Kxrculive /Jirertoi1 of the
Environmental ndriisc Fund. This
(irticlr origiiKillv
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL ANNALS:
Two "Killer Smogs"
the Headlines Missed
by Roy Popkin
Unlike those who died in the choking
smogs of London or in the gas
clouds in Bhopal or Cameroon, the
victims of two of New York City's
"killer smogs" went to their deaths
unnoticed by local health authorities or
the public. Nevertheless, the tragic
incidents, in 1953 and 1966, ultimately
produced a legacy of cleaner air for the
city's millions of residents.
Both of New York's "killer smogs"
occurred in late November as Indian
summer heat inversions trapped the
chemicals and particulates from
industrial smokestacks, chimneys, and
vehicles that crammed the city streets,
keeping the pollutants from rising.
It was years before anyone knew that
New Yorkers had died because of the
1953 incident. Ten years after the
episode, a Senate Public Works
Committee report stated that, "while the
air pollution problems of the United
States differ from those in Great Britain,
similar calamities such as killer smogs
have occurred in this country. Until
recently, the one usually mentioned was
that which struck Donora, PA, in
October 1948, where one third of the
population of 14,000 became ill and 17
died. This episode was recognized
immediately as a disaster. In contrast,
an episode that occurred in New York
City was not recognized until statistical
evidence, presented almost nine years
later, disclosed that during a brief
period of weather stagnation at the time,
in which unusually high levels of sulfur
dioxide and smoke shade had been
recorded, the number of deaths in New
York City had been approximately 200
in excess of normal."
Although New York City's original
smoke abatement laws were enacted in
the first decade of the century, New
Yorkers had grown accustomed to
smoke and grit and soot from power
fPupkiii i.s (i Writer/Editor in I/H; KPA
Office of Public Aflm'rs.J
plants, factories, incinerators, ships in
the harbor, motor vehicles, and
apartment house furnaces. The city was
just beginning to deal with the problem.
Its fledgling air pollution control agency
had opened its first laboratory in a
dusty high school classroom on 101st
Street on October 13, 1953, less than six
weeks before the disaster.
On November 18, laboratory staff
observed that concentrations of sulfur
dioxide were rising beyond the range
considered normal for the city's air. At
the same time, a number of New
Yorkers were telephoning the lab to
complain about eye irritation and
It was years before anyone
knew that New Yorkers had
died because of the 1953
incident.
coughing. On November 17, the sulfur
dioxide level ranged from 0.07 to 0.17
ppm (parts per million). On the 18th. it
rose as high as 0.65 ppm; on the 19th to
0.86, not dropping back to "normal"
until the 22nd. At the time, SO;, was the
only pollutant measured, but
subsequent studies were able to
calculate smokeshade values (the degree
of haze and rnurkiness of the air) for the
same period with comparable results. A
study of concurrent meteorological
conditions showed warm, light air
trapping cooler, denser air near the
ground for several days. This prevented
contaminants from rising and
dispersing.
Most of New York was unaware of
what was happening. On November
20th, New York Daily News homemaker
columnist Sally Joy Brown wrote,
"Don't let mild weather fool you. It's
time to think Christmas celebrations."
The weather forecast was hazy and
mild. The first news stories on the smog
appeared the following day but did not
note the serious dangers involved.
Headlined the New York Times: "Smog
is Really Smaze! 4-Day Concentration of
Smoke and Haze Causes Optical
Illusions and Discomfort. Two Airports
Close as Fog is Around. Animals at Zoo
Restless. Attendance at Empire State
Down."
The tabloid Daily News said, "Smog
Lingers on In Summer Dividend." Wrote
a News reporter, "The heavy smog and
chemical concentration in the air
lingered on yesterday in New York, to
make the fourth day in a row in which
local folks suffered from eye and throat
irritations. The unseasonable warmth
continued also The Health
Department yesterday received many
calls on hoiv to treat eye irritations."
The newspaper coverage gives no
indication of any major health
problems, except for an increase in
highway and harbor accidents attributed
to poor visibility. Any reported increase
in hospital admissions seemed to relate
to accidents. The study released years
later about the actual death toll
indicated that checking hospital
admissions would not have shown the
reason for what amounted to an almost
ten percent increase in the city's
mortality rate.
New York City Commissioner of Air
Pollution Leonard Greenburg was one ui
the few public officials to take (he
situation very seriously from a health
point of view. On the third day of smog
attack the Times reported. "Air
pollution commissioner Leonard
Greenburg warned that continued
pollution during an extended condition
of inversion could contribute to sickness
and deaths, as in London last
December." However, no one suspected
that New Yorkers were suffering
aggravated pulmonary, heart, or other
serious health conditions, or that they
were dying as a result. The city's health
commissioner even said there had been
no significant increase in deaths during
the smoggy spell. Mortality figures were
not immediately available, and it would
DECEMBER 1986
27
-------
l)o;vrtfoivii Manhattan looks like (,'fuud
(,'ity in this surrealistic vieu oi a IfJfifi
smog attack. Headings nl sulfur dio\nl<\
carbon monoxide, and hn/c reached
record levels, and 200 deufh.s ivrre Idler
attributed (o the smo».
he a long time belnre anyone knew what
had really happened.
First published notice of the tragic
mill utne appeared in Public Health
Hepurfs in January 1902. The authors
included former commissioner
Greenburg, by then a professor at the
Albert Einstein College of Medicine; Dr.
Morris Jacobs, former director of the air
pollution control laboratories; and M.M.
Bravennan, former chief chemist in the
laboratories and now director. They
reconstructed the development of the air
pollution situation day by day. Then,
following the advice of a British
physician who had done comparable
studies after Midland's 1948 and 1952
killer smogs, they applied statistical
methods used in mortality and
morbidity studies to determine the daily
increase in death rate as compared to
normal rates for the month of
November. These statistics showed a
cumulative increased death toll of
between 170 and 200. Studies of the
causes of death showed an increase in
pulmonary and heart ailments related to
the smog, especially in the very young
and those over 45.
Their report attracted little notice;
outside of technical publications until it
was used by New York newspapers in
background stories (luring the
Thanksgiving weekend smog attack in
1966,
Ironically, on November 23, 1900, a
,\'eiv York Times story told of
Consolidated Edison's hopes to reduce
the amount of sulfur dioxide its plants
would be putting into New York's
atmosphere during the coming decade.
The story noted that New York's
atmosphere bad the highest
concentration of SO-, in the nation, an
average of 0.10 ppm. that high levels of
;i.5 ppm had been recorded in
Manhattan, and that a level of 1.2 ppm
for eight hours is considered fatal.
According to the article, the big utility
hoped to reduce its annual SOv. output
from 340,000 tons in 19(iO to 100,000 in
1970.
Thanksgiving Day 1900 was mild, but
the skies were murky gray and
low-lying dirty clouds obscured the
view of mid-Manhattan streets from the
top of the Empire State Building. A
million people lined Central Park West
and Broadway to watch the traditional
Macy's parade. A check with Macy's 20
years later showed no mention of the
smog in the store's historical records.
Nevertheless, the city's air laboratory,
which by now had moved to an old
courthouse in Harlem, was recording
very high SO2, particulate, and other
pollution levels.
"We came close to closing the
city down," he recalls.
The tabloid Daily News, which
normally would have front paged a
parade picture, instead headlined:
"Smog Reaches Danger Mark." Inside,
the big type read, "Smog Threatens A
City Emergency." The New York Times
added, "Smog Here Near to Danger
Points. Patients Warned. Air Gets Purer
During Day But Pollution Rises Again to
a High in Evening. City Officials
Concerned. Night Meeting Held to
Weigh Steps If Condition Persists.
Utilities' Help Asked."
Austin Heller, the city's
Commissioner of Air Pollution, said the
pollution index had reached a high of
00.0, more than 10 points over the
health danger mark, between eight and
nine p.m. on Thursday. The index
figures represent a formula based on
measuring the combined amount of
sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and
haze or smoke in the air. He said the
readings may have been the highest in
New York's history, and. in spite of late
night declines, the levels were expected
to rise dangerously when rush hour
traffic began in the morning and
businesses began opening up. For the
first time in the city's history, air
quality measurements showed that
carbon monoxide emissions presented
the most significant health threat.
Surprisingly, neither in this nor the
earlier episode did ozone play a
significant role.
Heller put the city on an alert basis.
The city's coal burning municipal
incinerators were shut down, setting off
a mad scramble for garbage scows to
move Gotham's holiday garbage
accumulation out to sea for dumping.
The power companies were asked to
switch from coal to gas and oil. The
Health Commissioner warned people
with chronic lung and heart diseases to
stay indoors.
The day after Thanksgiving, Deputy
Mayor Robert Price issued what was
believed to be the first appeal ever made
to New York's citizens in connection
with a smog problem. He and Heller
asked that all apartment houses and
commercial users of heating oil reduce
the indoor temperatues to 60", that
apartment houses stop using their
incinerators, that the use of personal
automobiles be limited, and that
trucking companies curtail deliveries as
much as possible. At the time, Conrad
Simon, now Director, Air and Waste
Management Division, in the
Environmental Protection Agency's
Region 2 Office in New York, was a
New York University scientist. He acted
as liaison between the city
administration and the scientists during
the emergency. "We came close to
closing the city down." he recalls.
Even though some hospitals did
report an increase in clinic and
emergency room visits by persons
suffering from lung and heart ailments,
and the Daily News headlined a story.
"How Gray Death Fells Old And
Young,"there was still no reported
increase in the city's death rate. (Oddly,
it was during this incident that the
people of New York learned for the first
time of the 1953 deaths, ami one public
official said that, had the smog reached
28
EPA JOURNAL
-------
^ «
Donora levels, 11,000 people might have
been killed.) Again, it was not until Dr.
Greenburg and his colleagues did a
morbidity study and published their
findings in the Archives of
Environmental Health a year after the
event that another daily death rate
increase attributed to the smog was
made public. It was comparable to the
one 13 years earlier, with a total of
about 200 fatalities.
There was a fortunate aspect to both
the 1953 and the 1966 incidents. Each
occurred on a weekend when traffic: was
relatively light and businesses and
factories were closed, and the Indian
summer weather reduced the demand
for heat. Had the episodes occurred on a
weekday, pollution levels—and also,
probably, the death toll—would have
been even higher.
Public officials began almost
immediately to attack the problem. In
December 1966, the city's administrative
code section on air pollution was
strengthened insofar as pollutant levels
were concerned. But the persistent
presence of nitrogen oxides from power
plants and automobiles and of unburnt
hydrocarbons was a continuing concern.
The evolution of new federal and state
pollution standards, combined with this
concern, led to the enactment of the
New York City Air Pollution Control
Code in 1971. According to the New
York City Department of Environmental
Protection, it is one of the "strictest and
most comprehensive in the nation."
Has it produced the desired results?
In 1969, Norman Cousins, chairman of
the Mayor's Task Force on Air Pollution
in the City of New York, wrote then
Mayor John V. Lindsay:
"... New York City's air is cleaner
and more breathable today than it was
in 1966 . . . We can take a reasonable
degree of pride in the fact that no major
city, either in the United States or
abroad, can show a comparable gain in
the fight against air pollution.
"Stagnation conditions existed during
four days in September 1909. It is
important to ask what would have
happened on those days if the pollution
levels had continued to worsen at the
same rate of deterioration that occurred
from 1964 to 1966. The answer is that
there could have been a substantial
number of casualties. The fact that an
episode did not occur attests to the
capability of the City's programs to
protect its air resource."
The 1984 air quality trends published
by EPA show New York City within
tolerance levels for the six major
pollutants regulated under the Clean Air
Act. State of New York statistics show
that SO2 emissions have dropped from
786,000 tons to 83,000 in 1975, and
another 20 to 30 percent since then.
Particulate emissions are down from
193,000 tons in 1966 to 35,000 in 1975:
Nitrous oxide is down from 272,000
tons to 207,500. Carbon monoxide
levels, however, have remained about
the same and it is this pollutant and
ozone (formed in the ambient air
through the reaction of other pollutants)
which remain a problem.
The CO figures may be misleading.
Both the city and EPA attribute current
problems to hot spots caused by
collection of autmobile and truck fumes
in building canyons in areas like the
midtown garment and printing trades
districts. In these congested traffic areas,
every effort is made to keep traffic
moving even faster than on other streets.
and extra policemen on the street deal
with double parking and problems like
large trucks delaying traffic: while they
negotiate difficult intersections.
EPA's Simon says that the air in New
York City is "much better today." By
1972. he says, the city's air pollution
problems in terms of SO2 and
particulates had been halved. Current
reports, which may make people think
the city is not keeping up with other
major metropolitan areas are, in Simon's
view, misleading because more than
half the needed improvements had
already been accomplished before the
current monitoring began,
The one potentially serious threat
today from the six major pollutants in
the New York area would come trom
ozone.
There have been no more killei-
smogs. In fact, Simon thinks the only
way one could happen now is as the
result of a single source explosion or
extraordinary situation. These
improvements are the legacy of concern
that emerged after the 1966 Thanksiving
Day smog disaster. [ ]
DECEMBER 1986
29
-------
Is Environmental Control
an Expense or an Investment?
by Don Bronkema
No social protest movement of the
post-war era came of age as swiftly
as environmental protection. Once the
province of eccentrics, it became almost
overnight the cause and commitment of
the vast preponderance of the American
people. Expenditures for pollution
control soared as wo tried to restore the
bright skies and sparkling waters of
pre-industrial times.
This commitment has never faltered.
Between 1970 and 1984, we spent an
estimated $433 billion in public and
private funds to clean up our air and
water. These billions have already paid
substantial dividends. The major
atmospheric contaminants have been
dropping steadily—in some cases,
dramatically—over the last decade. We
have, at the. very least held our own, and
in places even made great headway in
cleansing our rivers and lakes of the
so-called classical pollutants. We have
laid a foundation for detoxifying
abandoned waste dumps and for
controlling active dump sites.
However, some still believe that
pollution control is more of an expense
than an investment and that we just
can't afford to spend so much in this
otherwise commendable effort. They
blame environmental management for
lowering the standard of living.
throwing thousands out of work, raising
the cost of products, cutting into
productivity, driving some companies
out of business, pushing entire
industries over the brink, and giving an
advantage to ruthless foreign
competitors.
But, according to Management
Information Services, Inc. (MISI), these
arguments are essentially false. In a
report published in January 1986, MISI
concluded that pollution abatement has
not only provided environmental
benefits, it has also provided the
[Hronkfiimi is u Writer/Editor in the h!V\
Office of Public Affuirs.j
impetus for a multi-billion dollar
industry. If the industry
were concentrated in one company, it
would rank near the very top of the
Fortune 500.
Last year, for example, managers
invested $8.5 billion in abatement and
control equipment. This in turn created
$19.3 billion in sales and 167,000 jobs.
The MISI report identifies the
beneficiaries of these outlays by
industry, occupation, and geographic
region. It rebuts the notion that
environmental programs are nothing but
regulations, standards, compliance
monitoring, and such-like bureaucratic
paper pushing. In fact, some 80 percent
of pollution-related spending is
attributable to business activity,
consumer goods, construction, and
research and product development.
The MISI report confirms that some
industries and communities have been
gravely disrupted by pollution control,
especially old-line heavy industry in the
rust belt. But control expenditures also
provide contracts for certain mature
companies that have fallen on hard
times due to competition from other
materials, poor sales, and foreign
competition. They stimulate frontier
companies in high-tech sectors that can
help restore the balance of payments,
and they have opened up broad
opportunities for science, engineering,
and technical personnel.
Total business investment in
pollution control since the early 1970s,
MISI estimates, is now over $100
billion, with much more still to come as
the international market for control
equipment expands.
The MISI report recognizes that
generous spending on the environment
probably reduces spending for some
popular consumer items. But it notes
that a clean and enjoyable environment
is an essential feature of the modern
standard of living and of contemporary
expectations. Indeed, some observers
insist that it is a precondition for the
survival of the human race.
But what about the jobs and
companies and industries that go down
the drain? What about the towns and
cities and states that can't afford to
retrofit for environmental controls and
get back into the mainstream? Again,
MISI has come up with some surprising
facts.
Take a state like Ohio, one beset with
adversity as heavy industries like steel,
industrial machinery, petrochemicals,
and utilities have faced changing market
demand, recession, technical
obsolescence, and stiff competition from
abroad. Ohio industry has doubtless
been a major polluter, and it has had to
pay out a lot of money for federally
mandated improvements. But more
often than not, says MISI, those very
same industries have also been called
upon to produce pollution control
equipment and services.
In addition, industrial polluters
confronted by tough standards not
infrequently come up with innovations
that not only help themselves, but
inadvertently assist others as well. And,
whenever new equipment and processes
must be introduced in response to the
aforementioned economic conditions,
industry can wrap pollution controls
into the system at lower cost than likely
under complex retrofitting. In that case,
cleaner air and water are a collateral
benefit of investments that would have
had to be made anyway.
The results, in any event, are
beneficial. Pollution abatement and
control created 8,577 new jobs in Ohio
in 1985 and generated additional
industrial sales of $963 million.
MISI estimates that in 1985 U.S.
business spent $4.2 billion on
air-pollution control equipment, $3.2
billion on water-pollution control
equipment, and $1.1 billion on
equipment for disposal of solid waste.
Some $10 billion in industry sales, $1.3
billion in corporate profits, and 85,000
jobs were produced by investments in
air-pollution abatement. Water-pollution
control expenditures resulted in $7.1
billion in sales, $900 million in profits,
and 59,000 jobs. Waste disposal created
$2.5 billion in sales, $300 million in
profits, and 22,500 jobs.
The study analyzes the economic and
employment benefits resulting from
each type of control investment, with
direct and indirect effects on 80
industries and 475 occupations for the
nation as a whole and for various states
30
EPA JOURNAL
-------
and regions. MISI reports that
air-pollution control creates the most
sales and profits per dollar of
expenditure, while investment in
solidwaste disposal technology
generates the most jobs.
The MISI findings are by no means
unique. The U.S. Department of
Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis
has just reported that pollution control
investments in 1984, their latest record.
amounted to $69 billion—three-quarters
of it private money for expenditures
ranging from stack-gas scrubbers to
catalytic converters for cars. The Bureau
estimates that such expenditures had
risen from about 1.5 percent of GNP in
1972 to 1.8 percent in 1984.
The conclusion seems inescapable:
environmental management is a major
positive element in the American
economy. It is setting an example that is
occurring in other developed countries
and that is beginning to occur in
developing countries. It is often at the
cutting edge of technical innovation. It
boosts productivity and will help make
possible the preservation of the global
ecosystem upon which life and
civilization depend. It is one of those
realities of the marketplace that is
unlikely to go away. D
Update
A review of recent major EPA activities and developments in the pollution control program areas
AIR
Emissions Trading Policy
EPA has completed a
seven-year effort by issuing
new, final guidelines on the
use of emissions trading, or
the "bubble," to meet
pollution reduction
requirements under the Clean
Air Act. The Agency's final
policy continues to authorize
use of environmentally sound
bubbles in all areas of the
country and is expected to be
widely used by states and
industry to save
pollution-control costs while
ensuring continued progress
toward clean air.
The bubble allows
managers of existing plants to
treat all stacks and vents as
though they are enclosed by
a giant bubble and control
less where control costs are
high, in exchange for extra.
compensating emission
reductions where control
costs are relatively low, so
long as equal or better
reductions are achieved at
the top of that bubble.
Milton Russell. Assistant
Administrator for Policy,
Planning and Evaluation,
said, "the bubble offers
needed flexibility, the ability
to respond to changing
circumstances, and stronger
incentives for environmental
progress...."
ENFORCEMENT
Lead Standard Violations
The Agency announced that
it is seeking over $40 million
in penalties from four
corporations involved in an
illegal leaded gasoline
operation.
EPA alleges in separate
citations that the four
corporations produced lead
gasoline at a Carteret, N.J.,
facility from Nov. 1, 1982, to
Dec. 31, 1985, that greatly
exceeded Agency standards
on the amount of lead
allowed in gasoline. Named
in the citations are Will
Petroleum, Inc., of Houston,
TX; Triad Petroleum, Inc., of
New York; A. Tarricone. Inc.
(ATI), of New York; and E.I.
Dupont DeNemours & Co..
Inc.
EPA claims that the four
parties are responsible for
one of the largest single
leaded-gasoline blending
operations in the United
States. According to the
Agency, they produced over
800 million gallons of leaded
gasoline.
TOXICS
$1.5 Million Penalty
The Agency has issued an
administrative civil
complaint and assessed a
$1.5 million penalty against
De'Longhi American, Inc., for
importing for domestic sale
radiator heaters that
contained oil contaminated
with low levels of
polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs). De'Longhi also
exported the PCB-containing
heaters without EPA
authorization. Both actions
are in violation of the Toxic
Substances Control Act.
EPA was first notified in
April 1986 by the Canadian
government of the presence
of PCB-contaminated oil in
De'Longhi radiators. After
collecting oil samples, EPA
found that up to 50 percent
of the De'Longhi heaters with
the model numbers 5108.
5108T,and 5307 may be
contaminated with low
concentrations of PCBs.
Only a small number of
De'Longhi heaters have
leaked, and manufacturers
claim that the chance of an
oil leak is small since oil in
this type of heater is
permanently sealed in copper
tubing and therefore isolated
even when a heater becomes
hot.
HAZARDOUS WASTE
Land Disposal Restrictions
EPA has proposed to restrict
the land disposal in
hazardous waste facilities of
12 classes of hazardous
substances, starting in July
1987. The substances include
liquid hazardous wastes
containing cyanides, metals,
polychlorinatecl biphenyls
(PCBs), corrosive wastes, and
both liquid and solid
hazardous wastes containing
halogenated organic
compounds (HOCs).
EPA Administrator Lee M.
Thomas said, "EPA is
proposing to keep out of the
land more than 25 billion
gallons of some of the most
toxic, mobile, and persistent
chemicals and metals
produced each year." He also
stated that "this action will
reduce ... threats to the
public and the environment
posed by the substances."
These substances were
specifically targeted for land
disposal restrictions by July
1987 in 1984 amendments to
the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act. The law
sets specific levels above
which wastes containing these
substances must be treated
prior to any land disposal.
Last month, the Agency
restricted the land disposed
without prior treatment of
wastes containing dioxins
and solvents.
PESTICIDES
Fees for Registration
EPA is proposing to charge
pesticide manufacturers foes
ranging from $(K)0 to
$163,000 for the registration
of their products. These fees
will cover sonic of the costs
now incurred by EPA in
reviewing and registering
pesticides.
Currently, fees for
establishing tolerances or
permissible pesticide residue
levels are the only federal
costs incurred by companies
that register or license
pesticide products.
The $18 million in fees the
Agency expects to recover
annually under the proposed
rule is slightly more than one
quarter of all costs EPA
expended in fiscal year 1985
to conduct pesticide
activities.
DECEMBER 1986
31
-------
Awards and Appointments
Prestdenl I-ieugmt congratulates Hnivnnf Mrs.sner (li.'Hj
-------
Shore birds in /)ri»cinf ine, \J. Tin?
greenhouse effect ivill huve u major
ini/Kict on rofistd/ areas (see story on
pog<> 17).
Back Cover: Skiing of Aspen, (,'(). (J/io(o
b_y Michael Philip Manheim, f''oJio, Jin.1.
-------
------- |