
Environmental Encyclopedia 3
Pollution Prevention Act (1990)
environmental goals. For example, the EPA’s national
acid
rain program to reduce sulfur dioxide resulted in a decrease
of six million tons of emissions a year compared to 1980
levels.
Nitrogen
oxide levels were reduced by 50% compared
to 1990 levels as a result of a program undertaken by numer-
ous northeastern states.
Critics of the trading program, however, have sug-
gested that the system is flawed. They contend that although
it was meant to be a way of encouraging industry to find
ways of producing less pollution, the system provides a way
of merely transferring responsibility—the one polluting is
not held responsible for the poor quality of air it has affected.
In 2000, for example, the state of New York identified
several midwestern and southeastern states—Delaware, Illi-
nois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, Maryland, New
Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia,
West Virginia, and Wisconsin—as the major sources of its
acid rain, a serious problem undermining
natural resources
and
wildlife
. Between 1995 and 2000, the state had accumu-
lated more than 700,000 pollution credits—providing the
New York businesses selling them with a total of approxi-
mately $37.5 million. The result was that pollution within
New York had declined only to be blown back over state lines
by other states that had purchased the credits. According to
a May 2, 2000 report of the Environment News Service
(ENN) by writer Cat Lazaroff, “Despite the state’s efforts
to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions, many high altitude lakes
in New York’s
Adirondack Mountains
remain too acidic
to support many native
species
. Some government studies
estimate about half of the region’s 3,000 lakes and ponds
may become too acidic to support life if acid rain is not
reduced.” The state fought back with legislation authorizing
the fining of utility companies that sell their pollution credits
to the polluting states.
Attempts to regulate less and provide more incentives
have been met with suspicion by program critics, who fear
an increase in pollution, and applause by businesses, who
view the reduction in standards as a possible financial relief.
In any case, pollution credits had become a valuable com-
modity on the open market by the early twenty-first century,
in the United States and throughout the world.
[Jane E. Spear]
R
ESOURCES
P
ERIODICALS
“Big Cities a Headache U.N. Summit wants to Address.” Environmental
News Network June 6, 2002 [cited July 7, 2002]. <http://www.enn.com/
news/wire-stories/2002/06/06062002/reu_47462.asp>.
Borenstein, Seth. “Bush Vows to Cut Pollution with more Incentives,
Fewer Regulations.” Knight Rider Newspapers, February 14, 2002.
“Environmentalists, EPA Disagree Whether Current Law or Bush Plan
would Help Air More.” Environmental News Network, February 21, 2002
1110
[cited July 7, 2002]. <http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories/2002/02/
02212002/ap_46452.asp>.
“Industry Still Failing on Environment, says U.N. Report.” Environmental
News Network, May 16, 2002 [cited July 7, 2002]. <http://www.enn.com/
news/wire-stories/2002/05/05162002/reu_47235.asp>.
Kahn, Joseph. “Whitman Begins to Consider Streamlining Pollution
Checks.” New York Times, July 28, 2001.
Kranish, Michael. “The Politics of Pollution.” Boston Globe Magazine,
February 18, 1998.
Lazaroff, Cat. “New York Fights Acid Rain Through Curb on Pollution
Credits.” Environment News Service, May 2, 2000.
Max, Arthur. “Pollution Trading a Contentious Issue at Climate Talks.”
Associated Press, November 15, 2000.
“Oil Spills in the Sky.” December 9, 1997 [cited July 7, 2002]. <http://
www.enn.com/features/1997/12/120997/1209fea_20122.asp>.
“Pollution Credits: The Science Isn’t In Yet.” Environmental News Network,
February 2, 1999 [cited July 7, 2002]. <http://www.enn.com/news/enn-
stories/1999/02/020299/co2findings_1423.asp>.
Sommer, Dean S. “’Retiring’ Pollution Credits helps both Business and
Environment.” The Business Review, March 22, 1999.
“States Ready to Trade Air Pollution Credits.” Environmental News Net-
work, January 3, 2001 [cited July 7, 2002]. <http://www.enn.com/news/
enn-stories/2001/01/01032001/pollution_41007.asp>.
“Trading for Clean Air just got Easier.” December 5, 2001 [cited July 7,
2002]. <http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/12/12052001/
s_45776.asp>.
“Trading Credits Does not cut Pollution.” Houma Today, November 28,
2001.
“U.S. EPA Proposes Pollution Credits to Clean Up Rivers.” Environmental
News Network. May 16, 2002 [cited July 7, 2002]. <http://www.enn.com/
news/wire-stories/2002/05/05162002/reu_47230.asp>.
O
THER
Environmental Protection Agency. “The Plain English Guide to the Clean
Air Act.” May 13, 2002 [cited July 7, 2002]. <http://www.epa.gov/oar/
oaqps/peg_caa/pegcaain.html>.
O
RGANIZATIONS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC USA 20460 (202) 260-2090, <http://www.epa.gov>
Pollution Prevention Act (1990)
The
Pollution
Prevention Act of 1990 is a piece of legislation
intended to limit the creation of pollution. As part of the
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, the Pollution
Prevention Act differed from previous legislation, which
had generally treated pollution after it had been created.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) administrator
William K. Reilly strongly supported the act, believing that
much hazardous or toxic pollution can be more effectively
and economically controlled, and the
environment
pro-
tected more fully, if the pollution never occurs.
The impetus for this act lies in a 1986 EPA report
to Congress entitled “Minimization of Hazardous Wastes.”
Based on this report, the agency began to take actions de-
signed to reduce pollution. According to a subsequent report
by the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), however,