Tags

, , , ,

http://www.airnow.gov/

QUICK LINKS

Air Quality Action Days / Alerts
AirCompare
Air Quality Index (AQI)
Calculator: AQI to Concentration
Calculator: Concentration to AQI
Canada Air Quality
EnviroFlash E-mail
FAQ’s
Health
Health Providers
International
Kids
Movies
NAQ Conferences
Older Adults
Ozone
Particle Pollution (PM2.5, PM10)
List of Partners
For Partners
Publications
Publicaçiones (En Español)
Smoke from Fires
Students
UV
Visibility Cameras
Weathercasters
What You Can Do

http://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.local_state&stateid=24&tab=1

Map of the United States showing particulate matter and other air quality – use tabs on top of map to see forecasts of and current PM2.5 levels.

**

Registration
2010 National Air Quality Conferences

Air Quality Forecasting, Mapping, and Monitoring
Communicating Air Quality

March 15-18, 2010
Raleigh Marriott City Center, Raleigh, NC

http://www2.ergweb.com/projects/conferences/airquality/2010/register-air10.htm

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its co-sponsor, the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA), invite you to attend this year’s National Air Quality Conferences, which will be held Monday – Thursday, March 15-18, 2010, in Raleigh, North Carolina. Air quality professionals from federal, state, local and tribal air pollution organizations, metropolitan and regional planning organizations, environmental and research organizations, and industry representatives are encouraged to participate to learn the latest information on air quality forecasting, mapping and monitoring, air quality and your health, and innovative outreach programs.

The conferences will feature optional sessions on Monday, including air quality forecasting training and a session on timely communications issues of interest to all air communicators. The general program will begin on Tuesday with an opening plenary session, followed by two days of focused breakout sessions; exhibits; and a poster session. Wednesday afternoon will feature a plenary session, and the conference will adjourn early afternoon Thursday. Optional field trips are being planned for Thursday afternoon. Come share your experiences and knowledge, network with colleagues, and learn about new and innovative projects at our exhibits and poster area.

Sponsorship Opportunities

We welcome inquiries regarding sponsorship opportunities. Please contact Erin Pittorino, ERG, 781-674-7260.

Conference Registration Form

Register online using the secure registration form below.
OR
Alternatively, print and complete the form and fax it to:

National Air Quality Conferences
ERG Inc.
781-674-2906

(Among the presentations – )

Communicating Air Quality Track 1:00 – 4:30pm

Greenhouse Gases

Whether it’s been on your radar for a while now or it’s just appearing as a blip for the first time, climate change and communicating its risks will soon be “front and center” for many of us. This training, split into two sessions, is designed to help you look at ways to integrate greenhouse gases into your existing air quality outreach programs and to look at federal, state and local climate change programs that might work for you as well. We hope you’ll be able to join us to explore the “intersection of air quality and greenhouse gases” and how to “get the word out on greenhouse gases.”

On Thursday, March 18th we are planning two field trips to tour either the National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory’s Human Studies Facility located at UNC Chapel Hill or the US EPA-RTP “Green” Campus. Transportation will be provided to and from the hotel.   Tour of U.S. EPA-RTP “Green” Campus

Tour highlights:

  • A 500 acre Federal Campus full of sustainable and green examples (from design, to construction and sustainment).
  • Partnerships with local universities and industries.
  • Energy reduction accomplishments of 40%, reducing energy costs by two million dollars.
  • How to keep your employees involved and interested.

Depart the Marriott at 1:30pm
Return to Marriott by 4:00pm   Tour of the National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory’s Human Studies Facility located at UNC Chapel Hill

This tour is at capacity. If you are interested in putting your name on the wait list, please send your request to meetings@erg.com

This facility carries out human-based research to help understand the exposure, deposition, and biological impacts of pollutants in exposed people. Features include:

  • Instrumentation to measure pollutant induced changes in lung function and heart rate.
  • Exercise equipment and pulmonary testing abilities in most exposure and test areas.
  • Two ambient-air-particle concentrators for studying the effects of concentrated particulate matter.
  • Specially designed systems for exposure to diesel exhaust and wood smoke.

ADA

If you have special needs and require auxiliary aids and/or services to fully participate in this meeting, please check this box and ERG will contact you.

Confirmation / Questions

You will receive confirmation of your registration when you select the “submit” button below.

Registration or logistics questions?
Call ERG’s conference line at 781-674-7374.

Technical questions about this year’s conference?
Contact Deborah Elmore, EPA/OAQPS/OID, Deborah Elmore (elmore.deborah@epa.gov).

(from)

http://www2.ergweb.com/projects/conferences/airquality/2010/register-air10.htm

**

EPA Strengthens Air Quality Standard for Nitrogen Dioxide/First new NO2 standard in 35 years will improve air quality for millions Details

Public Hearings on Proposed Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ground-level Ozone Details

EPA Strengthens Air Quality Standard for Nitrogen Dioxide/First new NO2 standard in 35 years will improve air quality for millions

Release date: 01/25/2010

Contact Information: Cathy Milbourn milbourn.cathy@epa.gov 202-564-7849 202-564-4355; En espanol: Lina Younes younes.lina@epa.gov 202-564-9924; 202-564-4355

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today announced a new national air quality standard for nitrogen dioxide (NO2). This new one-hour standard will protect millions of Americans from peak short-term exposures, which primarily occur near major roads. Short-term exposures to NO2 have been linked to impaired lung function and increased respiratory infections, especially in people with asthma.

“This new one-hour standard is designed to protect the air we breathe and reduce health threats for millions of Americans. For the first time ever, we are working to prevent short-term exposures in high risk NO2 zones like urban communities and areas near roadways,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “Improving air quality is a top priority for this EPA. We’re moving into the clean, sustainable economy of the 21st century, defined by expanded innovation, stronger pollution standards and healthier communities.”

The agency set the new one-hour standard for NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb). EPA also is retaining the existing annual average standard of 53 ppb. NO2 is formed from vehicle, power plant and other industrial emissions, and contributes to the formation of fine particle pollution and smog. Earlier this month, EPA proposed to tighten the nation’s smog standards to protect the health of all Americans, especially children.

EPA is establishing new monitoring requirements in urban areas that will measure NO2 levels around major roads and across the community. Monitors must be located near roadways in cities with at least 500,000 residents. Larger cities and areas with major roadways will have additional monitors. Community-wide monitoring will continue in cities with at least 1 million residents.

Working with the states, EPA will site at least 40 monitors in locations to help protect communities that are susceptible and vulnerable to elevated levels of NO2.

The new standard will help protect Americans from NO2 exposures linked to respiratory illnesses that lead to emergency room visits and hospital admissions, particularly in at-risk populations such as children, the elderly, and asthmatics.

EPA expects to identify or designate areas not meeting the new standard, based on the existing community-wide monitoring network, by January 2012. New monitors must begin operating no later than January 1, 2013. When three years of air quality data are available from the new monitoring network, EPA intends to redesignate areas as appropriate.

More information: http://www.epa.gov/air/nitrogenoxides

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/eb9d73686196b38e852576b60059fbd5!OpenDocument

**

03/10/2010 City, State and Federal Government Take Action for Cleaner Port of New York and New Jersey; Truckers Gain Access to Millions of Dollars to Slash Air Pollution
03/09/2010 Mid-Atlantic Region Gets First Certified Electronics Recycler
03/09/2010 EPA Seeks Public Comment on the 15th Annual U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory

EPA Seeks Public Comment on the 15th Annual U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory

Release date: 03/09/2010

Contact Information: Cathy Milbourn milbourn.Cathy@epa.gov 202-564-7849 202-564-4355 Dave Ryan ryan.dave@epa.gov 202-564-7827 202-564-4355

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking public comment on the annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2008 draft report. This report will be open for public comment for 30 days after the Federal Register notice is published.

The draft report shows that in 2008, overall greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions have decreased by 2.9 percent. This downward trend was attributed to a decrease in carbon dioxide emissions associated with fuel and electricity consumption. Total emissions from GHGs were about 6,946 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent. Overall, emissions have grown by 13.6 percent from 1990 to 2008.

The inventory tracks annual greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 to 2008 at the national level. The gases covered by this inventory include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. The inventory also calculates carbon dioxide emissions that are removed from the atmosphere by “sinks,” e.g., through the uptake of carbon by forests, vegetation, and soils.

This annual report is prepared by EPA in collaboration with experts from other federal agencies. After responding to public comments, the U.S. government will submit the final inventory report to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The report will fulfill the annual requirement of the UNFCCC international treaty, ratified by the United States in 1992, which sets an overall framework for intergovernmental efforts to tackle the challenge posed by climate change.

More information on the draft report and how to submit public comments:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html

**

. Total emissions from GHGs were about 6,946 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent. Overall, emissions have grown by 13.6 percent from 1990 to 2008.

(and)

The draft report shows that in 2008, overall greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions have decreased by 2.9 percent.

My Note – how could both be true? What kind of analysis did they do that showed an overall increase but came to the conclusions that in 2008, the emissions decreased? Were they simply comparing 2008 to the year before?

-          Cricketdiane

**

City, State and Federal Government Take Action for Cleaner Port of New York and New Jersey; Truckers Gain Access to Millions of Dollars to Slash Air Pollution

Release date: 03/10/2010

Contact Information: [MEDIA ONLY] Elias Rodriguez (212) 637-3664, rodriguez.elias@epa.gov or Truck Replacement Program Contact, (877) 309-1680, info@replacemytruck.org

(Elizabeth, N.J.) Leading the way to cleaner air and healthier communities, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (PANYNJ) unveiled a comprehensive agreement that will cut harmful pollution from the east coast’s busiest port.

The states launched a $28 million truck replacement program, partially funded by $7 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which will replace old trucks with vehicles that meet stricter pollution standards.

The agreement, signed by a wide array of federal, state and local partners, details the specific steps the partners will employ to reduce harmful diesel pollution from the Port of New York and New Jersey. EPA Regional Administrator Judith A. Enck, PANYNJ Chairman Anthony R. Coscia, PANYNJ Executive Director Christopher O. Ward and Robert Martin, Acting Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection were joined by other state and local partners as they put the final signatures on the milestone agreement today in Port Elizabeth.

The innovative pact outlines actions such as investing in pollution reduction technologies and developing air pollution inventories. The New York City metropolitan area has unhealthy air and does not meet air quality standards for ozone and fine particulate matter. Diesel exhaust particles can penetrate deep into the lungs and pose serious health risks, including aggravating the symptoms of asthma and other respiratory problems in healthy individuals.

To memorialize their goals, the milestone document was signed by EPA, PANYNJ, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, The City of New York Office of Long Term Planning and Sustainability, New York City Economic Development Corporation, New York Shipping Association and the cities of Bayonne, Elizabeth, Jersey City and Newark.

“Trucks and equipment used at ports are a significant source of pollution in the communities that surround them,” said Judith Enck, EPA Regional Administrator. “Efforts like the Port Authority’s new truck replacement program and the much broader sustainability agreement signed today will go a long way toward cutting this pollution and improving air quality and public health. Reducing dirty diesel emissions will protect the health of truck drivers and other workers at the port, along with the nearby community. I applaud the Port Authority for its leadership.”

Port Authority Chairman Anthony R. Coscia said, “The Clean Truck Program is the latest in our efforts to achieve cleaner air at and around our port. On top of our other investments — including $600 million to build on-dock rail and $60 million to acquire and preserve environmentally sensitive property — we believe this program will help build on our legacy as good environmental stewards.”

Port Authority Executive Director Chris Ward said, “We have worked closely with all stakeholders to make sure that this new program will help clean up the pollution at our ports, and, in the process, ensure that we do not overburden our already struggling port and trucking industry. I want to thank EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck and the entire EPA for their generous support of this program, and I want to thank all of the members of our Truck Working Group for coming together around such a critical initiative.”

The truck replacement program will replace about 600 model year 1993 and older trucks with cleaner, 2004 and newer trucks. Trucks manufactured in 2004 and later meet EPA’s later pollution requirements and are up to 98% cleaner than older trucks. Under the program, the PANYNJ will cover 25% of trucker’s costs for newer trucks. PANYNJ also plans to phase out additional older trucks serving the port as part of a broader strategy to reduce diesel emissions from their operations. Their phase out program consists of 2 steps: a ban on pre-1994 trucks beginning January 1, 2011 and a ban on pre-2007 trucks beginning January 1, 2017. There are more than 3 million truck trips to and from the Port of New York and New Jersey marine terminals each year, resulting in nearly 2,000 tons of nitrogen oxide and 55 tons of fine particle pollution. Nitrogen oxide is a precursor to smog, which can contribute to severe respiratory ailments. Likewise, fine particles are linked to lung and heart problems. Nationwide, diesel engines emit 7.3 million tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxides and 333,000 tons of soot annually. This pollution is linked to thousands of premature deaths, hundreds of thousands of asthma attacks and millions of lost work days.

The Truck Replacement Program is part of a broader Clean Air Strategy on which EPA and the Port Authority worked closely with a consortium of state and local government agencies and industry, labor and environmental groups to reach a broad consensus on a landmark agreement between EPA, PANYNJ, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the City of New York Office of Long Term Planning and Sustainability, New York City Economic Development Corporation, New York Shipping Association and the cities of Bayonne, Elizabeth, Jersey City and Newark. This diverse group worked together to reduce emissions associated with maritime operations – including ships, harbor craft, cargo handling equipment, locomotives and trucks – within the Port District. This agreement memorializes PANYNJ’s Clean Air Strategy for the Port of New York and New Jersey, which identifies measures to reduce maritime and port-related emissions such as by using cleaner fuels, supporting development of low emission warehouses on port fields, promoting shore power electrification (cold ironing) and other green ideas. The truck replacement program is a significant component of the port’s overall clean air strategy.

To learn more about EPA’s efforts to reduce air pollution in NY and NJ or to obtain the full text of the agreement, visit: http://www.epa.gov/region02/air.

To download an application for the truck replacement program, visit: http://www.replacemytruck.org.

Follow EPA Region 2 on Twitter at http://twitter.com/eparegion2 and visit our Facebook page, http://www.facebook.com/eparegion2.

10-032

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/204894bab3cd703c852576e20058a3af!OpenDocument

**

http://www.enviroflash.info/

**

http://www.epa.gov/aircompare/

How does the air quality in my city compare with other cities? What time of year has the best air quality? Has the air quality in my city improved? AirCompare provides local air quality information to help you make informed, health-protective decisions about moving or vacationing.

County Comparisons (Compare the air quality of counties within one or more states)

Summarize States (Choose up to 3 states)

Monthly Averages (Find the best time to visit)

Where is the best place in the United States to live to avoid air pollution? The best place to live may depend on whether you or your family have specific health concerns. People at greater risk from ground-level ozone are people with lung diseases, such as asthma, and children and adults who are active outdoors. At greatest risk from particle pollution are people with heart or lung disease, older adults (possibly because they may have undiagnosed heart or lung disease), and children. Learn more about how specific health concerns can affect the comparison. The links above provide health-specific air quality information in terms of the number of unhealthy days based on the Air Quality Index.

May 6, 2008 UPDATE: This site reflects the current Air Quality Index (AQI). The cut points for ozone were revised on March 12, 2008 along with the national ambient air quality standard for ozone. If you are a regular visitor to this site, you will notice the difference in the historical plots, specifically that there are more unhealthy days based on the revised ozone cut points. The current AQI does not yet account for the most recent PM2.5 standard which was revised on September 21, 2006.

http://www.epa.gov/aircompare/compare.htm

**

Particle Pollution (PM10) and (PM2.5)

Particle pollution (also known as “particulate matter”) in the air includes a mixture of solids and liquid droplets. Some particles are emitted directly; others are formed in the atmosphere when other pollutants react. Particles come in a wide range of sizes. Those less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10) are so small that they can get into the lungs, potentially causing serious health problems. Ten micrometers is smaller than the width of a single human hair.

  • Fine particles (PM2.5). Particles less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter are called “fine” particles. These particles are so small they can be detected only with an electron microscope. Sources of fine particles include all types of combustion, including motor vehicles, power plants, residential wood burning, forest fires, agricultural burning, and some industrial processes.
  • Coarse dust particles. Particles between 2.5 and 10 micrometers in diameter are referred to as “coarse.” Sources of coarse particles include crushing or grinding operations, and dust stirred up by vehicles traveling on roads.

For more information on particle pollution visit:

For more information on other common air pollutants please visit:

http://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=aqibasics.particle

**

“Particulate matter,” also known as particle pollution or PM, is a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets. Particle pollution is made up of a number of components, including acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles.

The size of particles is directly linked to their potential for causing health problems. EPA is concerned about particles that are 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller because those are the particles that generally pass through the throat and nose and enter the lungs. Once inhaled, these particles can affect the heart and lungs and cause serious health effects. EPA groups particle pollution into two categories:

  • “Inhalable coarse particles,” such as those found near roadways and dusty industries, are larger than 2.5 micrometers and smaller than 10 micrometers in diameter.
  • “Fine particles,” such as those found in smoke and haze, are 2.5 micrometers in diameter and smaller. These particles can be directly emitted from sources such as forest fires, or they can form when gases emitted from power plants, industries and automobiles react in the air.

Basic Information – Basics about particle pollution.

Health and Welfare – Effects of particle pollution.

PM Standards – Links to technical information related to setting the national air quality standards for particle pollution.

PM Designations – Regional, state and local information related to PM nonattainment.

PM Implementation – Programs and requirements for reducing particle pollution.

Regulatory Actions – Links to proposed and final rules, fact sheets, and other rulemaking documents.

PM Research – Links to PM research and development, monitoring, and daily reporting and forecasting.

Air Quality Trends – Progress made in reducing particle pollution.

Air Emission Sources – Summarizes particulate matter emissions by source at national, state and local levels.

Publications – Publications related to particle pollution.

Related Links – Other information related to particle pollution.

http://www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/index.html

**

This Web site provides information about EPA’s actions designating areas whose air quality does not meet the health-based standards established in 1997 and 2006 for fine particle pollution.

The Clean Air Act requires EPA to issue designations after the agency sets a new National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or revises an existing standard. EPA formally designates areas as “nonattainment” (not meeting the standard), “unclassifiable/attainment” (meeting the standard or expected to be meeting the standard despite a lack of monitoring data), or “unclassifiable” (insufficient data to classify).

Once nonattainment designations take effect, the state and local governments have three years to develop implementation plans outlining how areas will attain and maintain the standards by reducing air pollutant emissions contributing to fine particle concentrations.

EPA strengthened the air quality standards for particle pollution in 2006. Learn more about the 2006 fine particle standards.

The Agency expects designations based on 2006-2008 air quality data will take effect in 2009. Learn more about the area designations for the 2006 daily fine particle standards.

Area designations for the 1997 fine particle standard became effective in 2005. Learn more about the area designations for the 1997 fine particle standards.


This Web site contains the following information:

Area Designations for the 1997 Fine Particle (PM2.5) Standards: EPA issued these designations on December 17, 2004 and made modifications in April 2005. They are summarized here.

Area Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) Standards: EPA issued these designations on October 8, 2009. They are summarized here.

Air Quality Forecast: Links to the Air NOW Web site with PM2.5 air quality forecasts for dozens of cities around the country.

Basic Information: Background on PM2.5 attainment issues and EPA actions to address PM2.5 emission concerns.

Fine Particles & Health: Information about the health effects of fine particles.

Frequent Questions: Answers to common questions regarding fine particles and the designations process.

Related Links: Related sites offering further information and assistance.

Glossary: Explanations of the technical terms and acronyms used throughout the site.

A similar set of Web Pages exists for EPA’s designated 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas designated in April 2004.  Visit the 8-hour ground-level ozone designations page to learn more about the ozone designations.

October 8, 2009
EPA designates areas as attainment and nonattainment for the 24-hour PM2.5 National Air Quality Standards.

Learn more

(from)

http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/

**

http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/2006standards/regs.htm#4

EPA Designates Areas as Attainment and Nonattainment for the 24-Hour PM2.5 National Air Quality Standards

October 8, 2009 – EPA has issued a final Federal Register notice designating areas throughout the U.S. as “nonattainment” and “unclassifiable/attainment” for the 24-hour national air quality standards for fine particulate matter, also called PM2.5.

Federal Register Notice (PDF) (216 pp, 298KB)
Fact Sheet
Map of 24-hour PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas
Table Showing Final Nonattainment Counties by State
Timeline for Implementing the 24-hour PM2.5 Standard

http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/2006standards/documents/2009-10-08/map.htm

Non-Attainment Areas Map – Fine Particulate Matter 2.5 – (2008)

http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/2006standards/documents/2009-10-08/finaltable.htm

List of counties by state – Non-attainment areas of fine particulate matter 2.5 – 2008

Final Designations Comparison

State Area Name State Recommended
Nonattainment Counties
December 2007
(2004 – 2006 data)
EPA Recommended
Nonattainment Counties
August 2008
(2005 – 2007 data)
Final Nonattainment
Counties
October 2009
(2006 – 2008 data)
Alabama Birmingham, AL Jefferson Jefferson
Shelby
Walker (p)
Jefferson
Shelby
Walker (p)
Alaska Fairbanks, AK Fairbanks North Star (p) Fairbanks North Star (p) Fairbanks North Star (p)
Juneau, AK Juneau (p)
Arizona Nogales, AZ Santa Cruz (p) Santa Cruz (p) Santa Cruz (p)
California Chico, CA Butte (p) Butte Butte (p)
Imperial County, CA Imperial (p) Imperial Imperial (p)
Los Angeles, CA Los Angeles (p)
Orange
Riverside (p)
San Bernardino (p)
Los Angeles (p)
Orange
Riverside (p)
San Bernardino (p)
Los Angeles (p)
Orange
Riverside (p)
San Bernardino (p)
Sacramento, CA Sacramento El Dorado (p)
Placer (p)
Sacramento
Solano (p)
Yolo
El Dorado (p)
Placer (p)
Sacramento
Solano (p)
Yolo (p)
San Francisco Bay Area, CA Alameda
Contra Costa
Marin
Napa
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Solano (p)
Sonoma (p)
Alameda
Contra Costa
Marin
Napa
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Solano (p)
Sonoma (p)
Alameda
Contra Costa
Marin
Napa
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Solano (p)
Sonoma (p)
San Joaquin Valley, CA Fresno
Kern (p)
Kings
Madera
Merced
San Joaquin
Stanislaus
Tulare
Fresno
Kern (p)
Kings
Madera
Merced
San Joaquin
Stanislaus
Tulare
Fresno
Kern (p)
Kings
Madera
Merced
San Joaquin
Stanislaus
Tulare
Yuba City-Marysville, CA Sutter (p)
Yuba (p)
Sutter
Yuba
Sutter
Yuba (p)
Connecticut New York, NY-NJ-CT Fairfield
New Haven
Fairfield
New Haven
Fairfield
New Haven
Delaware Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE New Castle New Castle New Castle
Idaho Logan, UT-ID Franklin (p) Franklin (p) Franklin (p)
Pinehurst, ID Shoshone (p) Shoshone (p)
Illinois Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN Cook
DuPage
Grundy (p)
Kane
Kendall (p)
Lake
McHenry
Will
Cook
DuPage
Grundy (p)
Kane
Kendall (p)
Lake
McHenry
Will
Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL Rock Island
Paducah-Mayfield, KY-IL Massac
St. Louis, MO-IL Madison
Monroe
Randolph (p)
St. Clair
Madison
Monroe
Randolph (p)
St. Clair
Indiana Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN Lake Lake
Porter
Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Dearborn (p)
Evansville, IN Vanderburgh Dubois
Gibson (p)
Pike (p)
Spencer (p)
Vanderburgh
Warrick
Indianapolis, IN Marion Hamilton
Hendricks
Johnson
Marion
Morgan
Lafayette-Frankfort, IN Tippecanoe Tippecanoe
Louisville, KY-IN Clark
Floyd
Jefferson (p)
Vincennes, IN Knox Knox
Iowa Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL Scott
Muscatine, IA Muscatine
Kentucky Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Boone
Campbell
Kenton
Clarksville, TN-KY Muhlenberg
Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH Boyd
Lawrence (p)
Louisville, KY-IN Bullitt
Jefferson
Paducah-Mayfield, KY-IL McCracken
Maryland Baltimore, MD Anne Arundel
Baltimore City
Baltimore
Carroll
Harford
Howard
Anne Arundel
Baltimore City
Baltimore
Carroll
Harford
Howard
Michigan Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI Livingston
Macomb
Monroe
Oakland
St. Clair
Washtenaw
Wayne
Livingston
Macomb
Monroe
Oakland
St. Clair
Washtenaw
Wayne
Livingston
Macomb
Monroe
Oakland
St. Clair
Washtenaw
Wayne
Grand Rapids, MI Kent Kent
Ottawa
Missouri St. Louis, MO-IL Franklin
Jefferson
St. Charles
St. Louis
St. Louis City
Montana Libby, MT Lincoln (p)
New Jersey Allentown, PA Warren (p)
New York, NY-NJ-CT Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Mercer
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Mercer
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Mercer
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE Burlington
Camden
Gloucester
Burlington
Camden
Gloucester
Burlington
Camden
Gloucester
New York New York, NY-NJ-CT Bronx
Kings
Nassau
New York
Orange
Queens
Richmond
Rockland
Suffolk
Westchester
Bronx
Kings
Nassau
New York
Orange
Queens
Richmond
Rockland
Suffolk
Westchester
Bronx
Kings
Nassau
New York
Orange
Queens
Richmond
Rockland
Suffolk
Westchester
Ohio Canton-Massillon, OH Stark Stark Stark
Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Butler
Clermont
Hamilton
Warren
Butler
Clermont
Hamilton
Warren
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH Cuyahoga
Lake
Lorain
Medina
Portage
Summit
Ashtabula (p)
Cuyahoga
Lake
Lorain
Medina
Portage
Summit
Cuyahoga
Lake
Lorain
Medina
Portage
Summit
Columbus, OH Delaware
Fairfield
Franklin
Licking
Coshocton (p )
Delaware
Fairfield
Franklin
Licking
Dayton-Springfield, OH Greene
Montgomery
Clark
Greene
Montgomery
Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH Adams (p)
Gallia (p)
Lawrence
Scioto
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH Washington Washington
Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson
Youngstown, OH Mahoning
Trumbull
Mahoning
Trumbull
Oregon Klamath Falls, OR Klamath (p) Klamath (p) Klamath (p)
Oakridge, OR Lane (p) Lane (p) Lane (p)
Pennsylvania Allentown, PA Lehigh
Northampton
Lehigh
Northampton
Lehigh
Northampton
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York, PA Cumberland
Dauphin
Lebanon
Cumberland
Dauphin
Lebanon
Cumberland
Dauphin
Lebanon
York
Johnstown, PA Cambria
Indiana (p)
Cambria
Indiana (p)
Cambria
Indiana (p)
Lancaster, PA Lancaster Lancaster Lancaster
Liberty-Clairton, PA Allegheny (p) Allegheny (p) Allegheny (p)
Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE Bucks
Chester
Delaware
Montgomery
Philadelphia
Bucks
Chester
Delaware
Montgomery
Philadelphia
Bucks
Chester
Delaware
Montgomery
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA Allegheny (p)
Armstrong (p)
Beaver
Butler

Lawrence (p)
Washington
Westmoreland

Allegheny (p)
Armstrong (p)
Beaver
Butler
Greene (p)
Lawrence (p)
Washington
Westmoreland
Allegheny (p)
Armstrong (p)
Beaver
Butler
Greene (p)
Lawrence (p)
Washington
Westmoreland
Reading, PA Berks Berks
York, PA York York
Tennessee Clarksville, TN-KY Humphreys
Montgomery
Stewart
Knoxville-Sevierville-La Follette, TN Anderson
Blount
Knox
Loudon
Roane (p)
Anderson
Blount
Knox
Loudon
Roane (p)
Utah Logan, UT-ID Cache (p) Cache (p) Cache (p)
Provo, UT Utah (p) Utah (p)
Salt Lake City, UT Davis
Salt Lake

Utah (p)
Weber (p)

Box Elder (p)
Davis
Salt Lake
Tooele (p)
Utah (p)
Weber (p)
Box Elder (p)
Davis
Salt Lake
Tooele (p)

Weber (p)

Washington Tacoma, WA Pierce (p) Pierce (p) Pierce (p)
West Virginia Charleston, WV Kanawha
Putnam
Kanawha
Putnam
Kanawha
Putnam
Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH Cabell
Mason (p)
Wayne
Morgantown, WV Monongalia
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH Pleasants (p)
Wood
Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV Brooke
Hancock
Brooke
Hancock
Brooke
Hancock
Wisconsin Green Bay, WI Brown
Madison-Baraboo, WI Columbia
Dane
Milwaukee-Racine, WI Milwaukee
Racine
Waukesha
Milwaukee
Racine
Waukesha
Totals 147 counties 215 counties 120 nonattainment counties
46 areas 57 areas 31 areas
21 states 25 states 18 states

http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/2006standards/documents/2009-10-08/finaltable.htm

**

Particulate Matter (PM-10) Nonattainment Areas01-06-2010

“This is a list of nonattainment areas for particulate matter.”

http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/pntc.html (HTML)

Maintenance Particulate Matter (PM-10) Areas01-06-2010

“This is a list of maintenance particulate matter areas.”

http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/pmtc.html (HTML)

EPA – MOBILENEWS Listserver07-17-2007

“Provides information about the EPA – MOBILENEWS listserver.”

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/mobilelist.htm (HTML)

Development of a Continuous Monitoring System for PM10 and Components of PM2.5

“Describes a project developing a continuous monitoring system for PM10 and components of PM2.5.”

http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.abstr… (HTML)

An Evaluation of Confounders in PM10 Mortality Associations

“Describes a project for evaluating confounders in PM10 mortality associations.”

http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.abstr… (HTML)

More results from NCER abstracts »

PM10 NAAQS Implementation09-26-2007

“This page is a launch point for information on PM10.”

http://www.epa.gov/ttnnaaqs/pm/pm10_index.html (HTML)

Regulatory Announcement: Proposed Rule: Transportation Conformity Rule: PM2.5 and PM10 Amendments09-10-2009

“Provides information about PM2.5 and PM10 amendments for the Transportation Conformity Rule.”

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/regs/420f09005.htm (HTML)

Emissions Measurement Center01-13-2010

“This is the homepage for the Emissions Measurement Center.”

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc (HTML)

(from onsite search using term “PM10” -)

**

Emissions Measurement Center

The Emission Measurement Center (EMC) provides information on test methods for measuring pollutants from smokestacks and other industrial sources. This site compiles the test methods available for emission measurement, and EMC staff provide technical assistance in the use and application of the methods. For information on a specific test method or performance specification (method text, relevant documents, and frequently asked questions), use the pull-down menus below. For other information available on this site, use the links in the left margin of this page.

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/

**

http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/pntc.html

Particulate Matter (PM-10) Nonattainment Areas

As of January 06, 2010

Areas Listed Alphabetically Classification No.
Counties
NAA
Population EPA
Region
State
Ajo (Pima County), AZ Moderate 1 7,594 9 AZ
Anthony, NM Moderate 1 2,585 6 NM
Bonner Co (Sandpoint), ID Moderate 1 36,835 10 ID
Butte, MT Moderate 1 34,606 8 MT
Clark Co, NV Serious 1 1,375,765 9 NV
Coachella Valley, CA Serious 1 181,942 9 CA
Columbia Falls, MT Moderate 1 3,776 8 MT
Coso Junction, CA Moderate 1 7,000 9 CA
Eagle River, AK Moderate 1 195,499 10 AK
East Kern Co, CA Serious 1 99,251 9 CA
El Paso Co, TX Moderate 1 563,662 6 TX
Eugene-Springfield, OR Moderate 1 179,210 10 OR
Flathead County; Whitefish and vicinity, MT Moderate 1 5,027 8 MT
Fort Hall Reservation, ID Moderate 2 553 10 ID
Hayden AZ Moderate 2 6,045 9 AZ
Imperial Valley, CA Serious 1 119,825 9 CA
Juneau, AK Moderate 1 13,777 10 AK
Kalispell, MT Moderate 1 15,088 8 MT
Lame Deer, MT Moderate 1 536 8 MT
Lane Co, OR Moderate 1 3,423 10 OR
Libby, MT Moderate 1 3,232 8 MT
Los Angeles South Coast Air Basin, CA Serious 4 14,593,587 9 CA
Mammoth Lake, CA Moderate 1 6,455 9 CA
Miami, AZ Moderate 1 14,575 9 AZ
Missoula, MT Moderate 1 52,356 8 MT
Mono Basin, CA Moderate 1 258 9 CA
Mun. of Guaynabo, PR Moderate 1 92,439 2 PR
New York Co, NY Moderate 1 1,537,195 2 NY
Nogales, AZ Moderate 1 24,572 9 AZ
Ogden, UT Moderate 1 77,226 8 UT
Owens Valley, CA Serious 1 7,000 9 CA
Paul Spur/Douglas (Cochise County), AZ Moderate 1 15,685 9 AZ
Phoenix, AZ Serious 2 3,111,876 9 AZ
Pinehurst, ID Moderate 1 1,702 10 ID
Polson, MT Moderate 1 3,780 8 MT
Rillito, AZ Moderate 1 506 9 AZ
Ronan, MT Moderate 1 2,521 8 MT
Sacramento Co, CA Moderate 1 1,223,499 9 CA
Salt Lake Co, UT Moderate 1 898,387 8 UT
San Bernardino Co, CA Moderate 1 199,410 9 CA
Sanders County (part);Thompson Falls and vicinity,MT Moderate 1 1,180 8 MT
Sheridan, WY Moderate 1 15,782 8 WY
Shoshone Co, ID Moderate 1 10,455 10 ID
Trona, CA Moderate 1 3,500 9 CA
Utah Co, UT Moderate 1 368,536 8 UT
Washoe Co, NV Serious 1 339,486 9 NV
Yuma, AZ Moderate 1 82,333 9 AZ
47 Total Areas 40 25,539,532

http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/pntc.html

**

PM10 NAAQS Implementation


The term “particulate matter” (PM) includes both solid particles and liquid droplets found in air. Many manmade and natural sources emit PM directly or emit other pollutants that react in the atmosphere to form PM. These solid and liquid particles come in a wide range of sizes.

Particles less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10) pose a health concern because they can be inhaled into and accumulate in the respiratory system Particles less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5)are referred to as “fine”particles and are believed to post the largest health risks. Because of their small size, fine particles can lodge deeply into the lungs. Sources of fine particles include all types of combustion (motor vehicles, power plants, wood burning, etc.) and some industrial processes. Particles with diameters between 2.5 and 10 micrometers are referred to as “coarse.” Sources of coarse particles include crushing or grinding operations, and dust from paved or unpaved roads.

In 1997, EPA established NAAQS for PM2.5 for the first time as well as revised NAAQS for PM10. Because the monitoring and implementation plans for these two pollutants are different, separate sets of webpages have been created for them. This page is a launch point for information on PM10.

http://www.epa.gov/ttnnaaqs/pm/pm10_index.html

Standards

PM10Guidance Documents

PM10Technical Resources

PM10Nonattainment Information & Maps

Trends report

Links to Related sites

(from)

http://www.epa.gov/ttnnaaqs/pm/pm10_index.html

**


size=2 width=”100%” align=center>

PM10 NAAQS Implementation


size=2 width=”100%” align=center>

The term “particulate matter” (PM) includes both solid particles and liquid droplets found in air. Many manmade and natural sources emit PM directly or emit other pollutants that react in the atmosphere to form PM. These solid and liquid particles come in a wide range of sizes.

Particles less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10) pose a health concern because they can be inhaled into and accumulate in the respiratory system Particles less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5)are referred to as “fine”particles and are believed to post the largest health risks. Because of their small size, fine particles can lodge deeply into the lungs. Sources of fine particles include all types of combustion (motor vehicles, power plants, wood burning, etc.) and some industrial processes. Particles with diameters between 2.5 and 10 micrometers are referred to as “coarse.” Sources of coarse particles include crushing or grinding operations, and dust from paved or unpaved roads.

In 1997, EPA established NAAQS for PM2.5 for the first time as well as revised NAAQS for PM10. Because the monitoring and implementation plans for these two pollutants are different, separate sets of webpages have been created for them. This page is a launch point for information on PM10.

Standards

PM10Guidance Documents

PM10Technical Resources

PM10Nonattainment Information & Maps

Trends report

Links to Related sites

File Utilities


size=2 width=”100%” align=center>

Local Navigation

http://www.epa.gov/ttnnaaqs/pm/pm10_index.html

**

Natural Resources Conservation Service Air Quaility Home Page

**

Under the Clean Air Act, EPA establishes air quality standards to protect public health and the environment. EPA has set national air quality standards for six common air pollutants. These include:

  • carbon monoxide,
  • ozone,
  • lead,
  • nitrogen dioxide,
  • particulate matter (also known as particle pollution), and
  • sulfur dioxide.

Each year EPA tracks the levels of these pollutants in the air and how much of each pollutant (or the pollutants that form them) is emitted from various pollution sources. The Agency looks at these numbers year after year to see how the pollutants have changed over time. EPA posts the results of our analyses to this web site.

Basic Information – Information about air quality standards for the six common air pollutants, also called criteria pollutants.

Air Quality Trends by Pollutant:

Where You Live – View local-area air trends for the six common air pollutants.

Reports and Data – View and download current and past Air Trends Reports, EPA’s “report card” on the status of air quality and air pollutant emissions.

Special Studies – Links to special study topics regarding policy-relevant information related to air quality trends.

Air Quality Data and Regulatory Statistics:

Acronyms – A list of common acronyms used throughout the Air Trends site.

(from)

http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/

**

http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/pm.html

(includes two bad charts that don’t make any sense about PM2.5 and PM10 – I saved them)

Also has two national maps to select a state for comparison – one is for PM2.5 and the other for PM10.

The Georgia map indicates that there are not enough monitoring stations for PM10 to even cover the emissions from the freeways, let alone from the open air concrete, cement, lime and other piles that have no cover whatsoever.

**

This site is from Shasta County California

Department of Resource Management

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

Russ Mull, R.E.H.S., AICP
Air Pollution Control Officer

Ross Bell
Air Quality District Manager

1855 Placer Street, Suite101
Redding, California 96001
Phone: (530) 225-5674
Fax: (530) 225-5237

The Air Quality Management District (AQMD) endeavors to manage and enhance the air quality resources of Shasta County through a balanced program of environmental oversight and protection of public health. The AQMD functions as professional staff to the Air Pollution Control Board regarding rule development and potential industrial and commercial development. It also processes commercial and industrial applications to construct emission devices and issues Permits to Operate which are renewed on an annual basis. The AQMD estimates releases of air contaminants and maintains an emission inventory to track emissions of all permitted devices. It also proposes mitigation strategies working cooperatively with affected emission sources, evaluates potential health risks, and adopts air pollution control measures and regulations that seek to attain federal and state ambient air quality standards.

The AQMD operates monitoring devices to obtain information regarding concentrations of particulate matter (PM10) and ozone air pollutants that may have an impact on the health of the general public or may damage vegetation and other materials. It issues open burning permits for agricultural, forest management, land clearing, and hazard reduction burning projects.

PAGES OF SPECIAL INTEREST

·         Current Air Quality Index -

·         School Bus Grant -

·         Northern Sacramento Valley Planning Area 2006 Air Quality Attainment Plan

OVERVIEW OF THE AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

DOCUMENTS, STUDIES, AND REPORTS AVAILABLE

FORMS AVAILABLE

ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK

SERVICES PROVIDED

PERMIT/APPLICATION FEE STRUCTURE

http://www.co.shasta.ca.us/departments/resourcemgmt/drm/aqmain.htm

(this site has an air quality chart from EPA – saved as “aqi_chart_english”)

**

Zip Code:
State: Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District Of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming
National Air Quality Summary (text)

  • Forecast
  • Current AQI
  • AQI Animation
  • Current Ozone
  • Current PM2.5

AQI  Forecast -  http://www.epa.gov/airnow/today/forecast_aqi_20100311_usa.jpg

http://www.airnow.gov/

***

 -  http://www.epa.gov/airnow/today/cur_pm25_usa.jpg

// <![CDATA[
// <![CDATA[
var vars = [], hash;
var hashes = window.location.href.slice(window.location.href.indexOf(‘?’) + 1).split(‘&’);

for(var i = 0; i

***

My Note -

It has rained for two days here in Atlanta. Its probably the only reason we aren't on the list above.

- cricketdiane

**

Air Quality Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Air Quality Index (AQI) (also known as the Air Pollution Index (API) or Pollutant Standard Index (PSI)) is a number used by government agencies to ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Quality_Index
Air Quality Index Chart - EPA

Air Quality Index Chart - EPA

(from)

http://www.co.shasta.ca.us/departments/resourcemgmt/drm/aqmain.htm

***

About Air Toxics

<!–

Technical Information
Regulations and Other Toxics Programs

–>

What are toxic air pollutants?

Toxic air pollutants, also known as hazardous air pollutants, are those pollutants that are known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious health effects, such as reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse environmental effects. EPA is working with state, local, and tribal governments to reduce air toxics releases of 188 pollutants to the environment. Examples of toxic air pollutants include benzene, which is found in gasoline; perchlorethlyene, which is emitted from some dry cleaning facilities; and methylene chloride, which is used as a solvent and paint stripper by a number of industries. Examples of other listed air toxics include dioxin, asbestos, toluene, and metals such as cadmium, mercury, chromium, and lead compounds.

What are the health and environmental effects of toxic air pollutants?

People exposed to toxic air pollutants at sufficient concentrations and durations may have an increased chance of getting cancer or experiencing other serious health effects. These health effects can include damage to the immune system, as well as neurological, reproductive (e.g., reduced fertility), developmental, respiratory and other health problems. In addition to exposure from breathing air toxics, some toxic air pollutants such as mercury can deposit onto soils or surface waters, where they are taken up by plants and ingested by animals and are eventually magnified up through the food chain. Like humans, animals may experience health problems if exposed to sufficient quantities of air toxics over time.

Where do toxic air pollutants come from?

Most air toxics originate from human-made sources, including mobile sources (e.g., cars, trucks, buses) and stationary sources (e.g., factories, refineries, power plants), as well as indoor sources (e.g., some building materials and cleaning solvents). Some air toxics are also released from natural sources such as volcanic eruptions and forest fires.

How are people exposed to air toxics?

People are exposed to toxic air pollutants in many ways that can pose health risks, such as by:

  • Breathing contaminated air.
  • Eating contaminated food products, such as fish from contaminated waters; meat, milk, or eggs from animals that fed on contaminated plants; and fruits and vegetables grown in contaminated soil on which air toxics have been deposited.
  • Drinking water contaminated by toxic air pollutants.
  • Ingesting contaminated soil. Young children are especially vulnerable because they often ingest soil from their hands or from objects they place in their mouths.
  • Touching (making skin contact with) contaminated soil, dust, or water (for example, during recreational use of contaminated water bodies).

Once toxic air pollutants enter the body, some persistent toxic air pollutants accumulate in body tissues. Predators typically accumulate even greater pollutant concentrations than their contaminated prey. As a result, people and other animals at the top of the food chain who eat contaminated fish or meat are exposed to concentrations that are much higher than the concentrations in the water, air, or soil.

Can I find out about the toxics in my community?

  • National Air Toxics Assessment — This site provides emissions and health risk information on 33 air toxics that present the greatest threat to public health in the largest number of urban areas. Maps and lists are available and can be requested by state or county level.
  • Toxics Release Inventory — This database includes information for the public about releases of toxic chemicals from manufacturing facilities into the environment through the air, water, and land. You can access the data by typing in your zip code.

What progress has EPA made in reducing toxic emissions?

  • Controls for industrial and commercial sources of toxics — EPA has issued rules covering over 80 categories of major industrial sources, such as chemical plants, oil refineries, aerospace manufacturers, and steel mills, as well as categories of smaller sources, such as dry cleaners, commercial sterilizers, secondary lead smelters, and chromium electroplating facilities. These standards are projected to reduce annual air toxics emissions by about 1.5 million tons. For more information about these rules, see Taking Toxics Out of the Air.
  • Controls for cars and trucks — EPA and state governments (e.g., California) have reduced emissions of benzene, toluene, and other air toxics from mobile sources by requiring the use of reformulated gasoline and placing limits on tailpipe emissions. Important new controls for fuels and vehicles are expected to reduce selected motor vehicle air toxics from 1990 levels by more than 75% by 2020. For more information, see Mobile Source Air Toxics.
  • Indoor air — EPA, in close cooperation with other Federal agencies and the private sector, is actively involved in efforts to better understand indoor air pollution and to reduce people’s exposure to air pollutants in offices, homes, schools, and other indoor environments. For more information, see Indoor Air Quality.

Health and ecological effects resources

  • The Health Effects Notebook for Hazardous Air Pollutants — Detailed information about the health effects of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) is available in separate fact sheets, for nearly every HAP specified in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.
  • Mercury — Learn more about mercury and what is being done to protect your health.
  • Air Pollution and Health Risk — Find out how we know when a risk from a hazardous substance is serious. Learn how researchers estimate risk, and how the government uses this information to develop regulations that limit our exposure to hazardous substances.
  • Evaluating Exposures to Toxic Air Pollutants: A Citizen’s Guide — Toxic air pollutants can increase the chance of health problems and cause ecological impacts. This publication explains the process that EPA uses to determine how much of a toxic air pollutant people are exposed to and how many people are exposed.
  • Risk Assessment for Toxic Air Pollutants: A Citizen’s Guide — Find out more about risk assessment, which is the process used to estimate the risk of illness from a specific human exposure to a toxic air pollutant.
  • Taking Toxics Out of the Air — This brochure describes what air toxics are, where they come from, and how they impact people and the environment.

Links to other air toxics resources

(from)

http://www.epa.gov/air/toxicair/newtoxics.html

***

SAVE THE DATE for the 2010 National Training Conference on the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and Environmental Conditions in Communities.
The next TRI conference will be November 1 – 4 at the Washington Marriott at Wardman Park in Washington, D.C. This year’s conference expands on previous TRI National Training conferences to include sessions on sources of other environmental data and on conditions and trends in ecological and human health that collectively help to support environmental-related decision making in communities. Visit the Chemical Right 2 KnowExit EPA Disclaimer collaborative forum for more information.

(found here )

http://www.epa.gov/tri/

***

(also)

New! EPA Launches the TRI Current Data page.
TRI’s new Current Data page provides easy access to data files from TRI reporting years 1987 thru 2008. Users may now download TRI data in the current standardized format and updated to reflect the most recent submissions, corrections, or withdrawals made by reporting facilities.

New! EPA Publishes Evaluation of Hydrogen Sulfide, Recommends Lifting Administrative Stay of TRI Reporting Requirements.
EPA is taking an important step to provide communities with additional information about toxic chemicals being released to the environment. The Agency is announcing that it is considering lifting the Administrative Stay of the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting requirements for Hydrogen Sulfide. In 1994, EPA issued an Administrative Stay of the reporting requirements for hydrogen sulfide, because of the reporting stay, facilities have not been required to file annual TRI reports for hydrogen sulfide. EPA is now presenting its rationale for why the Administrative Stay should be lifted, based on an updated evaluation. The Agency’s review of hydrogen sulfide is part of its efforts to examine the scope of TRI chemical coverage and provide communities with more complete information on toxic chemical releases.

***

  1. MapEcos – US Industrial Toxic Releases Map

    Jan 8, 2008 A map of US facilities with information on pollution and improvement efforts. Learn more about nearby factories or view regional performance
    www.mapecos.org/ – CachedSimilar

  2. TOXMAP – TRI and Superfund Environmental Maps

    Use Quick Search or click on a map to explore on-site toxic releases and hazardous waste sites from the EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and the
    toxmap.nlm.nih.gov/ –
  1. Free Toxic Release Inventory TRI ArcGIS Shapefiles

    Jump to Base Maps‎: We also include a full set of base maps and other materials. Check the readme file that is included in each download.
    www.mapcruzin.com/tri_2004_maps/ – CachedSimilar

  2. ToxicRisk.com Combines Latest EPA Toxic Release Inventory Data

    ToxicRisk.com’s maps are based on the most recent annual Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) data released by EPA, March 19, 2009. MapCruzin.com was encouraged by
    http://www.1888pressrelease.com/toxicrisk-com-combines-latest-epa-toxic-release-inventory-da-pr-113026.html –

Toxics Release Inventory – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The data in the Toxic Release Inventory is available to the public, but initially The system currently only maps the locations and links to data at the
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxics_Release_Inventory –

(from google “toxic release maps” search)

***

My Note —

This is the one I like using – however, the toxic release inventory along with the amounts being released are voluntarily submitted by manufacturers, industries and plant managers. They may be amounts on the conservative side. And, those who chose not to submit information are not included on the map although there may be toxic releases occurring as a result of their activities.

- cricketdiane

***

MapEcos is a map of US facilities with information on pollution and improvement efforts. We present a balanced view of industrial environmental performance.

What’s on the MapEcos map?
You can view detailed industrial performance information on facilities across the US
Mapped facilities are color coded by emission level
blue marker Low emissions red marker High emissions
Facility managers can describe their efforts toward environment protection and community engagement
purple  marker with ring Green rings indicate facilities with management provided information

from -

http://mapecos.org/

***

Air Quality - PM10 Air Quality Monitoring Sites in Georgia 1990-2008 - EPA

Air Quality - PM10 Air Quality Monitoring Sites in Georgia 1990-2008 - EPA

PM10Nonattainment Information & Maps

***

http://toxmap.nlm.nih.gov/toxmap/main/index.jsp

Use Quick Search or click on a map
to explore on-site toxic releases and hazardous waste sites from the EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and the Superfund National Priorities List (NPL).
Composite image map showing TRI facilities  in blue and Superfund NPL sites in red

Alaska Hawaii Puerto  Rico & US Virgin Islands American  Samoa Guam Marianas Continental US

TRI facilities (blue) and Superfund NPL sites (red).

TOXMAP now includes 2008 TRI data, ability to view search results in Google

(found here – )

http://toxmap.nlm.nih.gov/toxmap/main/index.jsp

***

My Note – It is now 2010. These maps and lists of information are combining information from today? Or are they only showing information updated to the registries of data sets from two years ago? Hmmm.

- cricketdiane

Just for reference – the chart below shows that we have endured the lowered standards for air quality, hazardous waste, particulate matter and chemical releases without any real economic improvement as a result during the same time period:

***

TheBushEconomyLagsBehind - JEC staff from US Commerce Department Numbers

TheBushEconomyLagsBehind - JEC staff from US Commerce Department Numbers

***

(And from the ToxMap site )

EPA Adds and Proposes Three Sites to Superfund’s National Priorities List in the Southeast

Release date: 03/03/2010

Contact Information: Harris-Young, (404) 562-8421, harris-young.dawn@epa.gov
(Atlanta, Ga. – Mar. 3, 2010) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has added three and proposed three new hazardous waste sites in the southeast that pose risks to human health and the environment to the National Priorities List (NPL) of Superfund sites. The NPL is a listing of priority sites that EPA investigates to determine if actions are needed to clean up the waste. Superfund is the federal program that investigates and cleans up the most complex uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites in the country – protecting the health of nearby communities and ecosystems from harmful contaminants.

The JJ Seifert Machine (Ruskin, Fla.), Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp – Jacksonville (Jacksonville, Fla.), and Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp – Navassa (Navassa, N.C.) sites have been added to the National Priorities List. Sanford Dry Cleaners (Sanford, Fla.), The Wright Chemical Corporation (Riegelwood, N.C.), and Smokey Mountain Smelters (Knox County, Tenn.) sites have been proposed for inclusion on the National Priorities List.

To date, there are 1,279 sites on the NPL (including the 10 new sites added today). With the proposal of the eight new sites, there are 61 proposed sites awaiting final agency action. There are a total of 1,340 final and proposed sites.

Contaminants of concern found at the final and proposed sites include arsenic, benzene, chromium, copper, creosote, cyanide, dichloroethene (DCE), lead, mercury, perchloroethene, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and selenium, among others.

With all Superfund sites, EPA tries to identify and locate the parties potentially responsible for the contamination. For the newly listed sites without viable potentially responsible parties, EPA will investigate the full extent of the contamination before starting significant cleanup at the site. Therefore, it may be several years before significant cleanup funding is required for these sites.

Sites may be placed on the NPL through various mechanisms:

      • · The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) of the U.S. Public Health Service has issued a health advisory that recommends removing people from the site;
        · EPA determines the site poses a significant threat to public health; and
        · EPA anticipates it will be more cost-effective to use its remedial authority than to use its emergency removal authority to respond to the site.
  • · Numeric ranking established by EPA’s Hazard Ranking System.
    · Designation by states or territories of one top-priority site.
    · Meeting all three of the following requirements:


For Federal Register notices and supporting documents for these final and proposed sites, please visit
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/current.htm

*(from)

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/1B6653CF3FB79735852576DB0068361E

***

Temperature Trackers

226 x 170 – 59k - jpg
nasa.gov

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/elnino20100223.html

Satellite image of El Niño This image depicting the current El Niño condition in the Pacific Ocean was created with data collected by the U.S./European Ocean Surface Topography Mission/Jason-2 satellite during a 10-day period centered on Jan. 30, 2010. Image credit: NASA/JPL Ocean Surface Topography Team
› Larger view

Climatologists have long known that human-produced greenhouse gases have been the dominant drivers of Earth’s observed warming since the start of the Industrial Revolution. But other factors also affect our planet’s temperature. Of these, the ocean plays a dominant role. Its effects helped nudge global temperatures slightly higher in 2009, and, according to NASA scientists, could well contribute to making 2010 the warmest year on record.

Covering 71 percent of our planet’s surface, the ocean acts as a global thermostat, storing energy from the sun, keeping Earth’s temperature changes moderate and keeping climate change gradual. In fact, the ocean can store as much heat in its top three meters (10 feet) as the entire atmosphere does.

“The vast amount of heat stored in the ocean regulates Earth’s temperature, much as a flywheel regulates the speed of an engine,” said Bill Patzert, an oceanographer and climatologist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. “The ocean has a long history of capturing and giving up heat generated by both human activities and natural cycles; it is the thermal memory of the climate system.”

Heat and moisture from the ocean are constantly exchanged with Earth’s atmosphere in a process that drives our weather and climate. Scientists at NASA and elsewhere use a variety of direct and satellite-based measurements to study the interactions between the ocean and atmosphere.

“These interactions result in large-scale global climate effects, the largest of which is the El Niño-Southern Oscillation,” explained Josh Willis, a JPL oceanographer and climate scientist. This climate pattern appears in the tropical Pacific Ocean roughly every four to 12 years and has a powerful impact on the ocean and the atmosphere. It can disrupt global weather and influence hurricanes, droughts and floods. It can also raise or lower global temperatures by up to 0.2 degrees Celsius (0.4 degrees Fahrenheit).

The oscillation pattern is made up of linked atmospheric and oceanic components. The atmospheric component is called the Southern Oscillation, a pattern of reversing surface air pressure that see-saws between the eastern and western tropical Pacific. The ocean’s response to this atmospheric shift is known as either “El Niño” or “La Niña” (Spanish for “the little boy” and “the little girl,” respectively).

Where the wind blows

During El Niño, the normally strong easterly trade winds in the tropical eastern Pacific weaken, allowing warm water to shift toward the Americas and occupy the entire tropical Pacific. Heavy rains tied to this warm water move into the central and eastern Pacific. El Niño can cause drought in Indonesia and Australia and disrupt the path of the atmospheric jet streams over North and South America, changing winter climate.

Large El Niños, such as the most powerful El Niño of the past century in 1997 to 1998, tend to force Earth’s average temperatures temporarily higher for up to a year or more. Large areas of the Pacific can be one to two degrees Celsius (around two to four degrees Fahrenheit) above normal, and the average temperature of the ocean surface tends to increase. The current El Niño began last October and is expected to continue into mid-2010. Scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies in New York estimate that if this pattern persists, 2010 may well go down as the warmest year on record.

El Niño’s cold counterpart is La Niña. During La Niña, trade winds are stronger than normal, and cold water that usually sits along the coast of South America gets pushed to the mid-equatorial region of the Pacific. La Niñas are typically associated with less moisture in the air and less rain along the coasts of the Americas, and they tend to cause average global surface temperatures to drop. The last La Niña from 2007 to 2009 helped make 2008 the coolest year of the last decade. The end of that La Niña last year and subsequent transition into an El Niño helped contribute to last year’s return to near-record global temperatures.

All the ocean’s a stage

Both El Niño and La Niña play out on a larger stage that operates on decade-long timescales. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation, or PDO for short, describes a long-term pattern of change in the Pacific Ocean that alternates between cool and warm periods about every five to 20 years. The PDO can intensify the impacts of La Niña or diminish the impacts of El Niño. In its “cool, negative phase,” warm water, which causes higher-than-normal sea-surface heights (because warmer water expands and takes up more space), forms a horseshoe pattern that connects the north, west and south Pacific with cool water in the middle. In its “warm, positive phase,” these warm and cool regions are reversed, and warm water forms in the middle of the horseshoe.

Such phase shifts of the PDO result in widespread changes in Pacific Ocean temperatures and have significant global climate implications. During the 1950s and 1960s, the PDO was strongly negative, or cool, and global temperatures seemed to level off. During most of the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, the Pacific was locked in a strong positive, or warm, PDO phase and there were many El Niños. We are currently in the early stages of a cool PDO phase that began around 2006. Cool, negative phases tend to dampen the effects of El Niños.

Willis said the PDO, El Niño and La Niña can strongly affect global warming due to increased greenhouse gases. “These natural climate phenomena can sometimes hide global warming caused by human activities, or they can have the opposite effect of accentuating it,” he explained.

Wild ride

“These natural signals — El Niños, La Niñas and PDOs — can modulate the global record for a decade or two, giving us a wild ride with major climate and societal impacts,” said Patzert. “They can have a powerful short-term influence on global temperatures in any particular year or decade. This can make it appear as if global warming has leveled off or become global cooling. But when you look at the long-term trend over the past 130 years, our world is definitely getting warmer. And that’s the human-produced greenhouse gas signal.”

Patzert said the recent climate record is like making a drive from the coast to the mountains. “As you rise slowly to higher and higher elevations, occasionally you hit a major speed bump, such as the 1997 to 1998 El Niño, and temperatures spike; or you hit potholes, such as cooler phases of the PDO, and temperatures dip,” he said. “In the end, though, we still tend toward the top of the mountain, and the trend upwards is clear. We are driving ourselves into a warmer world.”

Alan Buis
818-354-0880
alan.buis@jpl.nasa.gov

2010-060

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/elnino20100223.html

***

My Note –

The colleges and universities can be paid to re-research all the climate based information as has been recently announced for another thirty years or until hell freezes over, which may come first – but it still won’t have any impact on the direct results of mankind’s involvement in the process negatively affecting large scale changes in the atmosphere, oceans, and climate.

Those resources could be used to solve the problems instead of further two-years ago studies of the problems that take five years and ten-years to accomplish.

Not only does the EPA not have enough monitoring stations to indicate an accurate picture of the toxic waste being emitted and particulate matter of every scale, there is also only a voluntary admission of toxic releases by factories, industries, businesses, manufacturing, processing and every sort of business endeavor in the United States.

The freeways are clogged with cars, diesel trucks and fumes emanating from tremendous sources of toxic chemicals, half-burnt fuel and nitrogen compounds, sulfur compounds, serious particulate matter, carbon compounds and a myriad list of toxins whose names are longer than my arm.

The only real solution is to use those toxic emissions as a new fuel compound since we actually have enough of it to do so and it is the only real way that it will ever be converted to something else effectively.

- cricketdiane, 03-11-10

***

All TRI Reporting Facilities: All Chemicals
TRI – Map shows 20,483 TRI facilities reporting nationwide in 2008. View in:  
All Superfund NPL Sites: All Chemicals
Superfund – Map shows 1,619 NPL sites nationwide

http://toxmap.nlm.nih.gov/toxmap/combo/select.do;jsessionid=3110BC21D0CBCC1D52181F8BA7F8EA3A

ToxMap of Chemical Superfund Cleanup Sites and Toxic Release Inventories from 2008 - most current info from EPA

All TRI Reporting Facilities: All Chemicals TRI - 20,483 TRI facilities reporting nationwide in 2008 and All Superfund NPL Sites: All Chemicals Superfund - 1,619 NPL sites nationwide - United States

My Note –

Although this information is from the most current available apparently which is from 2008 – there is still evidence that it indicates there is a massive problem with air, soil and water in the United States which continues to be a problem. This map does not include the comprehensive information that could be available elsewhere, but it does allow population demographics to be shown on the same map by clicking the parameter for it below the map.

The astonishing thing to me was to consider that economically, these de-regulations and lowered national air quality standards, among others was sold to us as a way to encourage business, to give the economy limitless freedom and to keep from hindering business and industry in the United States. It didn’t do that either.

All it has done is to leave America with a diseased and toxic bed to lay in with no where to go. And, now that many polluting companies have taken their old ways of doing business elsewhere without cleaning up their act, these same pollutants, effluents and emissions are across a broader area of the planet.

It did not do good things for us. Considering the amount of money that businesses and industries have spent on lobbyists, funding studies, moving to other countries and countless lawyers, efforts, pr firms, doctors and others paid to discredit the truth, alter the public’s perception of the truth and change the facts, they could’ve simply paid to put filters on their smokestacks cheaper and to reprocess the water – effluent coming from their plants. But, no . . .

- cricketdiane

***

PrivateInvestmentUnderBushLagsBehindClinton - JEC using US Department of Commerce and US Bureau of Economic Analysis numbers

PrivateInvestmentUnderBushLagsBehindClinton - JEC using US Department of Commerce and US Bureau of Economic Analysis numbers

bush_unemployment3

bush_unemployment3 - JEC from bureau of labor statistics

My Note –

De-regulating the banking industry, the financial industries, insurance industries and stock market investment firms yielded much higher unemployment and job losses on top of these listed during the Republican controlled US of the Bush Administration and predominantly Republican governors across the United States. The de-regulation of industry requirements from EPA based knowledge and National Institutes of Health, OSHA and CDC information – yielded a country filled with toxic air, toxins in water supplies, and numerous other insane results that we and our children live with everyday.

But, rather than fix any of it, our governors want to tax sugary beverages claiming that is the basis of poor quality health, buy really fancy police cars with onboard computers along with other high tech tasers and gizmos for their police forces and use every excuse for why the money in the budgets their stewardship’s depleted has to be replaced by new fees, new taxes, new forces against the American people challenging their economic survival and well-being.

Meanwhile, the fallout from de-regulation, depletion of budgets in agencies that were intended to protect the safety and well-being of the public, the leveraging of state financial resources in order to use them to play the stock market and engage in credit default swap plays – that actually have been and are occurring in communities and state across the US are actually and literally negatively impacting the health of every man, woman and child in America.

then, they study it some more. then, they find a way to get a study that says they aren’t at fault. Then, they find a way to be exempt from responsibility. Then, they find a way to not have to change anything. Then, they stall, dig their heels in, get out of the limelight and into the background continuing to influence policy and the press and the public. Then, they refuse to listen because they know what they know and nobody is going to change their minds. Then, they deplete more resources to divert them into fixing up a golf course, or a yacht club facility, or a vacation village in the ski resort that they enjoy, and find a way to use more resources to get toys and high-tech gadgets available to their county in order to quell the population should the need arise, then they say they aren’t doing that, then it turns out there is evidence that they have done it, then they deny it again with studies and experts and pr firms to prove it wasn’t them and it didn’t happen. Then it turns out that it did happen exactly that way and they were at fault. Then they get a team of attorneys at the state’s expense / the taxpayers’ expense to prove in court that it either doesn’t matter, doesn’t count, didn’t actually really happen or that for whatever reason they are not accountable for it. Then, we all continue to suffer from the same things that were a direct result of whatever policy and choices they made and nothing is accomplished to fix it even after spending tons and tons and tons of money on study after study after study by experts of every respect without any effective solutions being applied whatever – all of which go to prove it will be another 25 – 30 – 50 years before anything can be done about it using the solutions that might be available to do it . . .

Okay – if I sound crazy and that is a description above of how it has actually been being done in my lifetime – and it has for the last thirty-five years of my life that I’ve watched it, I would have to say that there is nothing particularly impressive about what they are calling “normal”.

- cricketdiane

***

About these ads