Anthropogenic or human generated pollutants include particulate matter (PM) such as dust from construction sites or roadways and smoke from diesel engines, smoke stacks, stoves, fireplaces, furnaces, incinerators, cigarettes, and controlled burns in forestry and agriculture.
Gas pollutants include sulfur oxides from burning coal and oil, nitrogen oxides from high temperature combustion, carbon monoxide from incomplete combustion and from vehicular tailpipe emissions, carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) from products now banned in most countries, volatile organic compounds such as solvents, toxic metals such as lead, cadmium, and copper, ground-level ozone (a component of smog), ammonia from agriculture, and odors from garbage, sewage and industrial plants.
The efforts of environmentalists have been to mitigate the worst pollution offenders and find substitute energy and heat sources, transportation methods, consumer products and processes that lessen or eliminate the pollutants. They do this through lobbying for legislation and by public awareness and education programs. The Clear Skies Act is one piece of legislation, but state and local communities also set regulations.
Wikipedia, Air Pollution US Environmental Protection Agency
The Natural Resources Defense Council is pushing for even stricter national air quality standards for particulate matter and ozone to help asthma sufferers. Their focus is on encouraging industry to switch to cleaner fuels as an alternative to dirty diesel-diesel exhaust, requiring coal-fired power plants that operate without SO2 controls to install scrubbers to curb their emissions, and putting more clean-running, fuel-efficient cars and trucks on the road can to cut down on emissions of NOx and other chemicals that contribute to ozone formation.
The American Lung Association also has called for tighter restrictions on ozone smog. The ozone smog standard proposed by the EPA “barely touches the more protective levels recommended independent scientists.”
American Lung Association National Safety Council Center for Disease Control and Prevention Natural Resources Defense Council World Health Organization Environmental Defense
Opposing Viewpoints
Opposing viewpoints are not necessarily against air pollution regulations in general, but rather consider specific regulations as too costly, improperly applied, lacking the level of technology to meet the criteria or are unnecessary. Many tend to favor a free market approach to reducing pollution levels.
The National Center for Policy Analysis, for example, points out that “despite this progress [in ozone level reduction], the Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a new federal standard for ozone that would put 67 percent to 87 percent of metropolitan areas and 39 percent to 72 percent of non-metropolitan counties in violation. Because the proposed standard would be lower than the natural levels of ozone in some areas, many cities and counties could risk a budget shortfall or even bankruptcy trying to meet the new standard -- and still fail. A more stringent ozone standard might be worthwhile if current ozone levels posed a significant threat to human health, and if making the standard stricter were cost-free. Neither of these conditions holds true.”
In another example, a report by the Department of Energy, EERE, on Distributed Generation (DG) states that “current air quality regulatory practices are inappropriately inhibiting the development of DG through a failure to recognize the environmental benefits offered by DG or by imposing requirements designed for larger systems that are not appropriate to DG systems”.
Opposing Websites CATO Institute American Enterprise Institute National Center for Policy Analysis