Central Pollution Control Board has been entrusted with the responsibility of preparation of nation-wide plans for control of air pollution under the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. For rational planning of pollution control strategies, scientific information is needed on nature, magnitude and adverse health effects of air pollution.

Suggests steps to curb pollution at MPT

VASCO, JULY 23

After a decade of deliberations and review of more than 1,700 new studies, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the new primary standard for ground-level ozone in March 2008. The new standard, 75 ppb, is being assailed from all sides

Air quality standards provide a legal framework for air pollution control. An air quality standard is a description of a level of air quality that is adopted by a regulatory authority as enforceable.

The us government has tightened federal air quality standards for smog-forming ozone, but not to the extent recommended by the us Environmental Protection Agency's scientific advisers.

European states have agreed on legally binding limits on the airborne concentration of ultra-fine dust. The new directive on ambient air quality sets standards for reducing the concentration of fine particles known as PM2.5. Ultrafine particulate matter poses the biggest threat to human health as it can work its way deeper into the lungs than larger dust particles. The directive adopted this week mirrors closely the European Commission proposal of September 2005.

Last month, The Washington Post reported that President George W. Bush had personally intervened to weaken new regulations to control smog just as they were about to be announced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In response, advocates of tighter standards predictably charged that the president had overturned a scientific judgement. Carol Browner, who headed the EPA under President Bill Clinton, put the matter starkly, telling the Post that the Clean Air Act creates "a moral and ethical commitment that we're going to let the science tell us what to do'.

For many researchers, the Bush administration will be best remembered for the way it has manipulated scientific advice for political ends.

More than a hundred people live in cities that fail to meet international standards for air quality. Efforts to improve conditions in these urban areas have usually focussed on reducing emissions of reactive hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxide free radicals and primary and secondary sources of particulate matter.

In December 2005, Stephen Johnson dunked himself in hot water. Johnson, the administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), decided to discard advice from a scientific advisory committee when he set a major air-quality standard for soot. Scientists and environmental groups were outraged. This time Johnson did it again with ozone, the main component of smog and the hand of the White House was plain to see.

Pages