Lisa Jackson: No limit to EPA's air authority

EPA administrator Lisa Jackson affirmed this week that the EPA could view Mother Nature as a polluter.

Last week we spotlighted commentary in the New England Journal of Medicine by the chairman of the EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Council (CASAC) asserting that there is no evidence of a safe level of exposure to ozone and fine particulate matter.

This week in an allegedly-spontaneous-but-really-scripted scripted exchange of letters between Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Jackson offers asserts that the current ozone standard (75 ppb) was illegally set by the Bush administration because it fell outside the range of standards recommended by CASAC (i.e, 60-70 ppb).

So under Jackson’s view of the law, the recommendations of CASAC (which is just supposed to be an advisory body) are binding. And of course, the chairman of CASAC says there is no threshold of safety.

So as far as Lisa Jackson is concerned, the EPA could set an ozone standard at zero ppb — regardless of the fact that some ozone is naturally occurring at as much as 50 ppb.

5 thoughts on “Lisa Jackson: No limit to EPA's air authority”

  1. As I commented on the lead thread, all Congress has to do is set Nature as the limit. Whatever you put into the air can not contain more of any particular toxic item than Nature has put there to begin with. This will include natural dilution in the consideration.

  2. Ozone is created by UV rays splitting O2 (that we breathe) into O. O is a free radical- it must attach to something. By far the most common molecule to bind to nearby is O2. Upon ataching to O2, it becomes O3- ozone. Ozone is unstable. It will break up within 24 hrs because UV rays will accelerate the process. That’s how it protects the Earth from UV rays, by absorbing them.
    Eventually all Os will find other Os to attach to making stable O2. But in the mean time, the sun still makes UV rays breaking those down.
    In fact, O2 is the 1st line of defense against UV rays of one frequency, while O3 is the secondary defense against other UV rays.
    Why does a depletion of ozone appear each winter at the poles? Because there are NO UV RAYS to make it, and in this scenario ozone is not needed anyway because it’s dark 24/7 for those few months anyway (in other words, no UV rays to be protected from).
    As long as there is O2 and sunlight, there will ALWAYS be an “ozone layer” (which really isn’t a layer anyway according to the true definition). You couldn’t stop the process if you pumped all the hydrochloroflourides in the world into the upper atmosphere. So as long as there is oxygen (O2) and sunlight we will always be protected from UV rays. Take away either and life will disappear regardless whether there is ozone or not.
    As for ozone at ground level, that is caused by inefficient combustion, but since ozone is unstable anyway, as soon as you eliminate the source, it will disappear by itself within 3 days max.
    As any chemist why you cannot acquire ozone anywhere, in any form, in any container, compressed or not and he will explain it to you.
    I learned that from a circa early 1980s college Earth Science video shown on PBS, that isn’t broadcast anymore because it’s not PC.

  3. When is she going to decide to do something about the 1 part-per-billion of the carbon-14 in the air produced by cosmic ray action on nitrogen in the stratosphere? Carbon-14 is arguably the most potent carcinogen of all (Asimov, 1974)causing far more net damage to nuclear DNA than any other substance or radiation. She could take GOD to court!

  4. Taking God to court would be an admission that He exists. A view antithetical to many in Jackson’s worldview

Comments are closed.