3 Global Policies.

Clean Air Act (1970)

The Clean Air Act was legislation passed in the United States in 1970. This was a large milestone for the environmental movement since it was the first time the federal government took larger action to regulate air pollution. Before 1970, air pollution began to be a growing problem in the United States especially cities with industrial growth and the growing use of automobiles. Since the first earth day was held in April of 1970 there was a larger than ever push for reform. Although the first Clean Air Act was in 1963, the amount of new legislation in the new bill is seen almost entirely in the new portion. According to the EPAs website, the clean air act was made” To protect public health and welfare nationwide, the Clean Air Act requires EPA to establish national ambient air quality standards for certain common and widespread pollutants based on the latest science. EPA has set air quality standards for six common “criteria pollutants”: particulate matter ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, and lead” (EPA, n.d). Setting standards for these different types of pollutants was a huge step in the right direction for the United States since there had been little accountability before this act. (LM)

The Clean Air Act also aimed at some other points of concern that were growing during the time period. As is known today, automobiles cause a large amount of pollution and have restrictions on how much pollution can be made. The Clean Air Act first started to address this issue but requiring automakers to reduce emissions from new vehicles by 90% by 1975. This did lead to new technology that would be used till this day like the catalytic converter. Another smaller problem that was eliminated with this was leaded gasoline. People could get sick from the lead in the gas but also it was not good for pollution as well. So, the elimination of leaded gas killed two birds with one stone. Another portion of the Clean Air Act was to create programs to identify pollution problems. A good example of this would be new programs aimed at researching greenhouse gas emissions and how that impacts climate change. The Clean Air Act was the starting foundation for additional amendments that occurred in 1977 and 1990. This would cause stricter deadlines, more pollutants being addressed, and steps working towards eliminating acid rain and ozone depletion. (LM)

WHO Global Air Quality Guidelines

Although these guidelines are not necessarily an overall policy, many countries around the world use these guidelines to base their policy decisions off of. The world health organization states “In 2015, the World Health Assembly adopted a landmark resolution on air quality and health, recognizing air pollution as a risk factor for noncommunicable diseases such as ischemic heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma and cancer, and the economic toll they take. The global nature of the challenge calls for an enhanced global response” (World Health Organization, n.d). Setting these guidelines for different countries gives them the ability to understand where they might need to make further changes and understand where they might have underlying problems. This can come in many forms like pollution from production, or their people are over consuming and producing too much waste. This set of guidelines was important to be on this list because it gives many countries important data and research so that they can make policy decisions that would reflect these studies. (LM)

(St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. (n.d.). World Health Organization | St. Jude Global Alliance [Photograph]. St. Jude Global).

Carbon Credits

Carbon Credits have been a great way in recent years to reduce carbon emissions and other greenhouse gas emissions. It is primarily based on the Kyoto Protocol that was made in 1997. This protocol uses the United Nations framework to get industrialized countries committed to limit and reduce greenhouse gas emissions with their own individual targets. “It only binds developed countries and places a heavier burden on them under the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities”, because it recognizes that they are largely responsible for the current high levels of GHG emissions in the atmosphere.” (United Nations, n.d).  (LM)

The idea of Carbon credits started to form after the Kyoto Protocol. Industries in these industrialized countries would earn credits if they were to do emission reduction projects. The government would then set a limit on the number of emissions that could be produced by that industry using research and other benchmarks. Once that limit was set, every couple of years they would reduce the number of credits in the market to push for more improvements within those industries. For the companies in those industries, they would need to invest money into emissions reduction equipment to be able to stay within those standards set by the government. If they produced more pollution than they had credits for, they would either have to purchase more credits from other companies with extra credits or face steep penalties. If companies kept investing in equipment that would reduce their pollution more than they needed credits for, they could sell those credits to those companies at a marked-up rate. This created the idea of paying to pollute principle. If companies had the money too, they could just keep buying credits so that they could produce more. This was mostly stopped by there being a limit on the number of credits in the industry and tightening of guidelines every couple of years. (LM)

Carbon Credits have some large benefits associated with them and the reason they are so successful. It encourages companies to innovate and reduce emissions at a low cost, so it pushes technology forward while also reducing emissions. Along with that, it helps environmental investments by giving financial incentives for sustainable practices especially in counties where emissions are high. At some point carbon credits can allow companies to become carbon neutral if they push hard enough for emissions reductions. Good examples of companies would be Microsoft, Good, Amazon and many others purposely cutting greenhouse gas emissions to zero to improve costs. Overall, since the implementation of carbon credits, there has been a large step in the right direction when it come to emissions and with more time it can push companies to be even more environmentally cautious. (LM)