We can avoid cost of dirty air
Print- •
-
Share
- Share this item
-
Grab the link
Copy and paste the link:
- Blog about it
- Close
- •
-
12 Comments
- •
Favorite- •
TIMELINE FOR SETTING OZONE STANDARD
The Environmental Protection Agency will make its proposal for stricter standards in December.
The Environmental Protection Agency will finalize its ozone standard by August 2010.
Tougher ozone standards for Victoria County and the city of Victoria would mean a loss of money to taxpayers and consumers. Why? We would be under government regulation of many items that would mean a great expense, including requiring a higher quality of fuel (a reformulated gasoline), continuous monitoring of ozone, deodorants, hair sprays, hair mousses, oven cleaners and charcoal lighter fluids, required exhaust inspections and more.
We would be urged to not drive during the middle of the day, do errands and shopping after 5 p.m., not mow lawns during the middle of the day and carpool when possible. Also, we would be encouraged to not let motors idle unnecessarily.
Ground-level ozone -- not the ozone in the upper atmosphere that acts as a protector from ultraviolet rays -- is a major component of smog, respiratory problems and a reason for eye irritation, irritation of mucous membranes, headaches and fatigue.
Back in the 1990s, the standard was 120 parts per billion and Victoria fought a long, hard battle with the Environmental Protection Agency over its designation as a "non-attainment" (high ozone) area to "attainment" (clean air). In 1977, the EPA designated Victoria as "non-attainment," but Victoria officials maintained for the longest time that the monitoring done by the EPA for the "non-attainment" designation was invalid. The EPA also indicated initially that there were no penalties attached to the designation.
However, in 1990, with the passage of the newly revised Clean Air Act, highway and housing funds were attached to the designation, meaning a loss of those funds if designated as a "non-attainment" county.
Sadly, the EPA does not consider where much of the ozone comes from. The battle in the 1990s determined that most of Victoria's ozone came from the Houston area because of air currents. However, that doesn't ease the EPA's standard.
In May 1995, Victoria County, the entities within it along with help from various state agencies won the battle, and we moved to the designation of "attainment."
Now, Victoria County is faced with a stricter standard of between 60 parts per billion and 70 parts per billion as a cap for ground-level ozone. Oddly, in 2008 the EPA set a stricter standard between 60 and 70 parts per billion, but President Bush pressured then EPA administrator Stephen Johnson to ease that to 75 parts per billion.
Today, Victoria County is hovering at 66 parts per billion, a far cry from the 120 parts per billion back in the 1990s.
"Yes, we have come down a long long way, and we could be still going down, down down,' said Marie Lester, Victoria's environmental programs coordinator.
The current level places us smack dab in the middle of a stricter standard. That's too close for comfort.
We urge all officials of our city, county, school district, industry, community groups and state to fight this now. Together, just as the first battle was won to reach attainment, we can maintain our clean air status by voluntarily finding ways to keep ozone levels down. In doing so, we will be helping to provide cleaner air for all, as well as keep dollars in our pockets.
This editorial reflects the views of the Victoria Advocate's editorial board.
Comments
All the gas powered lawn equipment probably contributes to the ozone but as a homeowner the only electric powered piece of lawn equipment that I have found can actually do the job is my blower. I replaced my electric mower and my electric trimmer and an edger because they just didn't do the job. The trimmer wouldn't cut butter on a hot August day. The edger could not adjust deep enough once my lawn grew too high for it so I had no choice but a gas powered trimmer/edger. Mower didn't have enough power if the grass grew too high, so unless I wanted to mow 3 times a week when it's max growing season I ditched the electric and went with gas.
November 25, 2009 at 10:51 p.m.Instead of forcing us to conform how about a little government pressure on Black and Decker and others to actually manufacture equipment that isn't a piece of crap. Give us a decent electric alternative and many would probably switch.
Would also cut down on the noise pollution.
But I must say I love firing up my gas powered trimmer and mower at 8 am on a Saturday when my neighbors partying has kept me up most of the night.
Payback's a $itch.
The blower works fine.
I don't think Alcoa and Formosa factor into the equation here. Yeah, they are south of us, but they are far enough East that whatever they turn loose would rarely if ever find it's way to Victoria.
Maybe BP, Koch, Dow, and even the Coleto Creek coal burner might contribute to our problems.
A few other contributers such as cars and gassing up those cars, lawn care, and whatever else we have that uses and burns gas. These are in fact probably a bigger contributer than those chemical plants 20 miles away. Invista could be a problem, more so than those further south.
Anyway try stopping the 5 or 6 thousand vehicles from noon till 6pm and see how that works after a few days. Or take measurements immediately after a rain shower or in the early morning hours.
November 25, 2009 at 9:41 a.m.Just another non revenue producing city department. How does does this bring in new jobs. Maybe that guy on yesterday's front page get a job via this article. You know, green shoots and all that. Anyone care to relate to this?
http://www.airvictoria.org/
November 24, 2009 at 7:01 p.m.I agree that blaming the "Big City" for our issue is a cop out at it's worse. Prevailing summer breezes what they are, one would hardly need to look further than Calhoun and Jackson County plants for the source of the alleged "high ozone" counts. The VicAd has played the coward in calling out "bogey man" as "Houston" instead of making enemies of local production facilities.
A call to action? What actions would you have us take on?
A taxpayer funded shut down of Alcoa? Bet they would love to have us pay for their shuttering that inefficient locale.
Pay Formosa to move back to Taiwan? Koch to go back to Corpus?
November 24, 2009 at 4:17 p.m.The deep linking didn't work for some reason?
If you change "time" in the link below to "t," it'll take you right to the clip.
November 24, 2009 at 12:52 p.m.Oh no, they'll cut the funding...
Good riddance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC8fRR...
November 24, 2009 at 12:50 p.m.AltonEaston nailed it. There is no conceivable way that local sources of ozone or any other atmospheric pollutant could result in our even approaching, much less exceeding, any sane EPA limit. Of course, that assumes that the rules emanating from the EPA are sane.
November 24, 2009 at 12:38 p.m.The argument put forth in this editorial to fight the enforcement of the Clean Air Act sounds like a defendant throwing himself on the mercy of the court. I read and reread this opinion, and I did not read a shred of scientific fact or other intellectually sound argument in defense of removing Victoria from the Clean Air Act. How does the editorial board propose for the city, county, school district, industry and community groups to argue the case for removing Victoria from the Clean Air Act?
This sounds like a classic example of scapegoating and a vain attempt to make the federal government the villain. While difficult to follow the logic of how and why, the suggestion is made that we are somehow being blamed for the poor air quality of Houston. Anybody can drive down US 59 near Fannin and see the great plumes of pollution streaming from the smokestacks. Anyone within miles of any of the local chemical plants can smell them from afar.
Whoever is responsible for the nebulous argument made here in this editorial should be ashamed. This fools errand you seek to send our elected officials on will only result in their ridicule as being the errand boy of some faceless higher power in Victoria. The argument that we should be exempted from the law is laughable. If you truly believe we should not be governed by the Clean Air Act you should lobby to have the law changed. I truly don't understand the logic of not complying with the act as it clearly is intended to be in the public interest. I remember the day when the horrendous smell from a rendering plant was just outside of town near Foster Field and how things were then. Is that what the Advocate seeks we return to?
November 23, 2009 at 9:01 p.m.I enjoyed this blog, because it just does not make sense that such a small non-industrial city (Victoria) would have ozone problems due to ozone production in the local area.
November 23, 2009 at 8:20 p.m.