Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Chapter 12 (t3-1), :heartpulse: Jun :heartpulse:, :avocado: Jun :pineapple…

- - - - in the eastern United States and in Canada
  - - - loss of forests& acidification of lakes
      - blaming on midwestern smokestacks
    - - denied
        
        Midwestern smokestacks are the major cause
      - argued
        
        they shoudn't have to pay the cost of cleaning up the problem
    - - two alternatives
        
        power plants to burn low-sulfur coal
        
        undoubtedly cut back on sulfur emissions
        
        cost money
        
        power plants to install scrubbers
        
        complicated& expensive devise
        
        allow midwestern utilities
        
        using cheap, high-sulfur coal
        
        Congress voted for the scrubbers
        
        political advantages
        
        protect the jobs of miners in high-sulfur coal mines
        
        powerful allies in Congress
        
        environmentalists liked scrubbers
        
        technological "solution"
        
        seemed to regard as a definitive
        
        more preferable to buy low-sulfur coal
        
        scrubber manufactures liked the idea
        
        some easterns governors liked scrubbers
        
        all new plants had to have scrubbers
        
        would be more costly
        
        opinion of economists
        
        wrond decision
      - the 1977 law
        
        unsuccessful
        
        1980s Reagan administration warrant strong action
        
        scrubbers didn't work very well
        
        required scrubbers on all new coal-burning plants
        
        negative appraisal
  - - - proposed by president Bush the elder
      - 111 power plants should reduce their emission of sulfur
        
        Coal miners complained that they would lose jobs
        
        promised some financial compensation
        
        buy low-sulfur coal
        
        install scurbbers
        
        use some other technology
      - sharper edmission reductions for many plants
        
        require the use of scrubbers
    - - power plants to reduce emissions
        
        sulphur dioxide
        
        nitrogen
        
        at least 70 percent over the next fifteen years
        
        mercury
  - - - weighing the competing demands of established residents
        
        against demands of developers
    - - taps streams of public opinion
        
        reflected in majoritarian politics
      - lacks moral fervor of entrepreneurial politics
      - environmental policy: more complex
      - result
        
        become harder to change existing policies
    - - political momentum remains with policy entrepreneurs
- - - - popular support remains strong
        
        the public doesn't believe the high price is payed
        
        believe they gain a significant benefit
    - - the politicans didn't push the tax hike
        
        environmental measure
      - the public receive concrete benefits
        
        more highways
        
        more buses
        
        reduction in the federal deficit
  - - - automobile tail pipes
    - - Initially the auto emissions
        
        public's demanded
        
        media supported
        
        make cars less polluting
        
        public won
        
        new cars: 90 percent less of two pollutants
        
        hydrocarbons & carbon monoxide
        
        achieve 90 percent reduction
        
        nitrous oxides
        
        followed entrepreneurial politics
      - battle of majoritarian politics
        
        develop land-use and transportation rules
        
        required states
        
        government's effort
        
        failed
        
        Popular opposition to rules was too great
        
        rules didn't work
        
        Congress react
        
        postpone deadlines
        
        3 more items...
        
        ban downtown parking
        
        mandatory use of buses/carpools/gasoline rationing
    - - tougher auto emisson control standards
  - - - pro-environmental law
- - - - Rise of Earth’s temperature
        
        Causes
        
        Ex) Carbon dioxide
        
        Residue made by burning fossil fuel
        
        EX) wood, oil, coal
    - - Flood
        
        Polar ice caps melt
      - wild weather
        
        more storms and spread of diseases
    - - golbal warming
        
        Activist scientists
        
        getting warmer
        
        skeptics
        
        getting cooler
      - what makes warm?
        
        Activist scientist(A. S.)
        
        due to fossil fuel and gases
        
        skeptics(Sk)
        
        due to natural cause, such sun level
      - melting ice
        
        A. S.
        
        sea will rise due to melting ice
        
        Sk.
        
        not happen
      - humankind
        
        A. S.
        
        bad effect
        
        Sk.
        
        good effect
    - - Raise money with scary statements
        
        Conservatives
        
        About the economic pain an American cut in greenhause gases will cause
        
        Environmental activists
        
        About the harm global warming will cause
    - - Enterpreneurial politics
  - - - Science can’t prove what real dangerous level is
      - Law governing air, water, pesticides -> important
        
        Popular scandals come -> can’t work on more important issue.
        
        EX) Love Canal and Virginia Beach toxic chemicals
        
        EPA -> limited time to solve everything
    - - EX) water and air cleaning
        
        How clean is clean enough?
      - Congress gives unrealistic goals
        
        Cause appearance of kuckling under to industry pressure
        
        To achieve goals, need to know possibilities
    - - How to get people voluntarily to clean up?
      - Command-and-control strategy
        
        to prevent cost going out of control
        
        Rules from EPA
        
        Pollution allowances (or banks)
        
        More reduction of pollutionn than law requires
        
        Sell to another company as a offset
        
        Can use this excess in future
        
        Offests
        
        Not allows many pollution in one area
        
        Bubble standard
        
        Limiting total pollution amount
        
        New approaches
        
        EX) Superfund law
        
        Purpose
        
        To clean up toxic wast dumps
        
        Effect
        
        Increase of lawsuit to determine who was responsible for the toxic waste
    - - Cleaning cost = jobs, energy, and economic growth cost.
        
        Need to know realistic and unrealist threats
        
        Need to know reasonable and unreasonable costs
  - - - Clear water
        
        By isolating origin of gunk
      - less carbon monozide, sulfur dioxide, and lead in the atmosphere
    - - Reaching agreement on what is a dangerous pesticide
        
        Finding a wat of minimizing the harm
- - - - overused pesticide remains into soil
      - pesticide contaminate water supply
    - - only few pesticides removed
        
        small budget
        
        media enforcement
    - - DDT - EPA banned it due to harm of wildlife
        
        EPA tried to evaluate pesticides but it was impossible
    - - protected use of pesticides
        
        only small effect on human
        
        no evidence of causing cancer
      - Industry
  - - - Clean Air Act
      - Improving water and air
      - Enforced by inspector
    - - Written by government and business leaders
        
        flexible
        
        few excepltions
    - - policy
        
        controlled by the state governments
        
        largely paid in Washingtion
      - final decision
        
        1988
        
        Waste to Nevada