Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: miraje who wrote (297841)	3/23/2009 11:11:29 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793916

The EPA is a PIA. Next thing we know, the EPA will outlaw humans. Carbon Dioxide Carbon Dioxide: A Common Indoor Air Pollutant aerias.org Carbon Dioxide: A Common Indoor Air Pollutant What carbon dioxide is Sources of carbon dioxide Health problems associated with carbon dioxide Decreasing exposure to carbon dioxide What Carbon Dioxide Is Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a colorless, odorless gas formed by metabolic activity (humans and other animals exhale carbon dioxide when they breathe), combustion activities, and motor vehicles in garages. In solid form, it is called dry ice. Though carbon dioxide is not toxic itself, the amount found in the indoor environment is used as an indicator for human comfort. Elevated levels of carbon dioxide indicate that an insufficient amount of fresh, outdoor air is being delivered to the occupied areas of the building. This also indicates that other pollutants in the building may exist at elevated levels since there is not enough fresh air to dilute them. Since carbon dioxide is an unavoidable, predictable, and easily measured product of human occupancy, it is used as a marker for whether pollutants introduced from humans or other sources in the building are likely to become a nuisance or a hazard. Carbon dioxide is mostly a threat to health when the concentration is high enough to displace the oxygen, which can lead to suffocation in a confined space. Sources of Carbon Dioxide Since carbon dioxide is a product of human or animal respiration (or breathing), it is found almost everywhere. Measurable amounts are seen in lecture halls, homes, classrooms, office buildings, and submarines. Carbon dioxide has been used: ? In the carbonation of beverages ? In chemical processing ? As a food preservative ? As an inert "blanket" to fight fire ? For low temperature testing of aviation, missile and electronic components (in liquid form) Health Problems Associated with Carbon Dioxide There are many factors that determine if one might get sick due to exposure to carbon dioxide. These include: ? The concentration and amount of carbon dioxide: Carbon dioxide is naturally present in the atmosphere at levels of about 0.035 percent. Exposure of healthy individuals for prolonged periods of 1.5 percent carbon dioxide will cause mild problems while exposure to 7 percent to 10 percent carbon dioxid will produce unconsciousness within a few minutes.1 That is because at higher concentrations, carbon dioxide can displace the oxygen in the air. Because of this, carbon dioxide is called a "simple asphyxiant." ? Personal characteristics: These characteristics include age, gender, weight, general health status and general activities. For example if somebody suffers from a chronic lung condition in which they have higher amounts of carbon dioxide in the body than most people do, they may feel the effects more. In addition, the effects of carbon dioxide can become more pronounced upon physical exertion, such as heavy work. ? Exposure characteristics: Is a person exposed to just carbon dioxide or is it a variety of pollutants? Animal studies indicate that a combination of carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide causes an increase in the rate of carbon monoxide-binding to hemoglobin. Health problems caused by carbon dioxide are usually acute, which means they occur immediately or within a few days of exposure. Higher concentrations of carbon dioxide can result in1: Health Problems (concentration) ? Headaches (7.5 percent) ? Dizziness (7.5 percent) ? Restlessness (7.5 percent) ? Feeling of an inability to breathe (7.5 percent) ? Sweating (7.5 percent) ? Malaise (vague feeling of discomfort) (7.5 percent) ? Increased heart rate (7.5 percent) ? Increased blood pressure (7.5 percent) ? Visual distortion (7.5 percent) ? Impaired hearing (10 percent) ? Nausea/vomiting (10 percent) ? Loss of consciousness (10 percent) ? Coma (30 percent) ? Convulsions (30 percent) ? Death from asphyxiation (30 percent, although several deaths have been reported at concentrations greater than 20 percent). With asphyxiation, body cells do not get the oxygen they need to live. Decreasing Exposure to Carbon Dioxide ? Have areas where people are congregating be adequately ventilated. Human occupants produce carbon dioxide, water vapor, and contaminants including particulate matter, biological aerosols, and volatile organic compounds. The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. states that "comfort (odor) criteria with respect to human bioeffluents are likely to be satisfied if the ventilation results in indoor CO2 concentrations less than 700 ppm above the outdoor air concentration. CO2 concentrations in acceptable outdoor air typically range from 300 to 500 ppm.2" This level keeps body odors down to where at least 80 percent of visitors entering the room will not notice them. Keeping levels less than 700 ppm above the outdoor air concentration is an indication that sufficient outdoor air is being brought into the environment and will help control other pollutants at acceptable levels. IAQ research has shown that building occupant complaints will be observed as the indoor concentration of carbon dioxide increases about 700 ppm to 800 ppm; the carbon dioxide level is a surrogate indicator that other pollutants from indoor sources may exist at irritating and observable levels. ? Generally, the carbon dioxide concentrations should be <=0.5 percent. This level should not adversely affect persons with normal health. References 1. Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. Health effects of carbon dioxide gas. Date accessed October 2000: www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals/chem_profiles/carbon_dioxide/health_cd.html. 2. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. ASHRAE Standard 62-1999: Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 1999;10, 22-23.

To: miraje who wrote (297841)	3/24/2009 9:41:53 PM
From: KLP	1 Recommendation Respond to of 793916

EPA says it could block mountaintop coal permits Tue Mar 24, 2009 4:54pm EDT [KLP Note: Did you hear about this today? I call it Obama’s Job Killing and Energy Bills Spiking Machine: ] reuters.com By Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said on Tuesday it has the legal power to block permits for so-called mountaintop coal mines, a move that could affect hundreds of mining operations. The EPA voiced concerns about the controversial mining practice and said it could veto permits issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers if the mines would permanently impair water quality by fouling valley streams. This could affect hundreds of operations where mining permits have been sought or granted. The environment agency made its position known in a pair of letters to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which grants permits for this kind of destructive mining under the condition that mine operators rebuild the streams. The EPA strongly questioned whether the human-made channels often used to replace natural valley streams meet this condition. "The two letters reflect EPA's considerable concern regarding the environmental impact these projects would have on fragile habitats and streams," Lisa Jackson, the agency's chief, said in a statement. "I have directed the agency to review other mining permit requests," she said. "EPA will use the best science and follow the letter of the law in ensuring we are protecting our environment." The essential components of living streams -- microscopic animals and plants -- suffer downstream from mountaintop mining sites, compared with undisturbed sites, the EPA letters said. The letters referred to two specific operations in West Virginia where mountaintop mining is proposed. The EPA's move is a departure from the agency's stance during the Bush administration, which supported mountaintop mining. Coal companies consider it an economical alternative to traditional underground mines in Appalachia, where production is declining. More than half of U.S. electricity is derived from coal. Environmentalists and community activists in coal country decry it as ecological devastation and went to court to prevent it in West Virginia, but a three-judge panel of the U.S. Appeals Court in Richmond, Virginia, overturned a ban on the practice on February 13. The appeal was brought by Massey Energy Co and the West Virginia Coal Association. Joan Mulhern, an attorney with the environmental legal group Earthjustice, said the matter is still in flux and the plaintiffs have the right to ask the whole appeals court to hear the case. But Mulhern said EPA was showing a "seismic shift" in U.S. policy. "The EPA is saying this is a significant transition from Bush policies on mountaintop removal to Obama administration policies," Mulhern said by telephone. (Editing by Philip Barbara) 888888888888888 From CNN: UPDATE: EPA To Scrutinize Mountaintop Coal-Mining March 24, 2009: 07:18 PM ET money.cnn.com ("UPDATE: EPA To Scrutinize Mountaintop Coal-Mining," published at 5:18 p.m. EDT, misstated ownership of the West Virginia mine in the third paragraph. The correct version follows.) By Siobhan Hughes and Mark Peters Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The Obama administration moved to block a mountaintop coal-mining project from going forward and said Tuesday it would scrutinize more than a hundred mining permits amid concern about the waste that is dumped into rivers and streams. It was viewed as the first time in at least eight years the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has flexed its muscle to block a mountaintop coal-mining project. Environmentalists said the move would protect rivers and streams. The coal industry complained the decision would cost thousands of high-paying jobs. More at above link^^^^ NYT: EPA to review mountaintop removal's impact on water quality By KATHERINE BOYLE, Greenwire Published: March 24, 2009 nytimes.com U.S. EPA announced plans today to review permitting for mountaintop mining to assess the impacts of those projects on water quality and aquatic life. Exerting its authority under the Clean Water Act, EPA notified the lead federal permitting agency, the Army Corps of Engineers, yesterday that it planned to review permitting for two coal mining operations in West Virginia and Kentucky. In a statement, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said her agency "will use the best science and follow the letter of the law in ensuring we are protecting our environment." EPA plans to assess the Central Appalachia Mining's Big Branch project in Pike County, Ky., and the Highland Mining Company's Reylas mine in Logan County, W.Va. Mountaintop mining involves the removal of summit ridges to expose coal seams and the dumping of debris into valleys, a practice EPA says is likely to pollute water and severely damage or destroy streams. More at above link: ^^^^