Political Influences to Control Our Air Pollution Problem

Air pollution is one of the greatest health problems in today’s society. Most people think that they are healthy because they eat healthily and exercise on a regular, but in reality, when the air quality is horrible, their chances of being in tip-top shape has declined significantly. The thing to remember with this is that everyone is affected by air pollution and they cannot escape it. To get a better understanding of air pollution, what is it? Air pollution is the contamination of the air through the escape or discharge of harmful substances. 

Some of these harmful substances are used every day by us and that is fumes that are given off by the car we drive daily. The pollution of our air quality has always been at extremes that now it is best to have a scientific group to tell us what is needed and how to use things to preserve the little clean air we have left. Science is the backbone of our nation’s air quality and without science, EPA policymakers would rely on political influences to control our air pollution problem.

The EPA’s purpose is to ensure that science culture is something that will continue among its community. Earlier this year, an article written on nature.com sought to give written feedback to science and air pollution. According to the article, a top advisor to the EPA board verbally attacked a decision-maker when they found out that people have been breathing in tiny Airbourne particles that reduces the lifespan of individuals. This was said to be longterm research that has been going on. 

Scientists have been in on edge when it comes to this because they have the feeling the consensus board does not care much about the health of individuals and the risk to life but decisions seem to be more so on the basis of politics. According to the article, A “ draft letter called on the EPA to do another research assessment looking at the uncertainties and inconsistencies in the scientific literature on air pollution.” This letter was in reference to others who have been a skeptic of the claims on air pollution are uncertain and inconsistent without any definite proof. The EPA’s purpose is to ensure that science culture is something that will continue among its community.

Individuals have been becoming increasingly aware of air toxins. According to the article, Public Health Opportunities to Address the Health Effects of Air Pollution, particles that have a diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers is said to be a public implication when it comes to a lot of health problems. According to apha.org, exposure to the highest level of air pollution happens mostly in urban areas. This to me is because we find that these areas are oftentimes overpopulated and the EPAs policy might not work in overpopulated areas because when the plan and research was conducted, it might have been for a certain amount of individuals to a certain area.

Often times, health factors pertaining to the urban areas can be caused due to low-income individuals who live nearest to the freeways or even industrial areas which gives off a lot of toxins. These individuals are often underrepresented to certain programs like the pollution abatement programs or even facing economical constraints that tend to hinder them in moving to cleaner environments.

Ideally, it would be really good to have everyone represented and not by where they live or how their income is set up. We find that a lot of times when policies have been made when it comes to the EPA, Science and Air Pollution, individuals who work in these agencies find it hard to find representation for the lower-income households or the ones who do not live in a cleaner environment, which to me, would be ideal to them.

Decisions made by the EPA with the advisement of scientists is to ensure that the environment is maintained at healthy levels where individuals can live and learn. When these processes are being made, other co-contributors to a healthy environment has to be taken into consideration and these are climate, visibility, soils and water, and animals and wildlife. Decision making is a great deal because when decisions have been made, it should benefit not just humans but other organisms that we need to survive on.

According to the EPA, the progress of achieving healthy air quality standards has been amazing. Although this has been amazing, there are challenges to come and challenges that is currently being dealt with. Pollutions can be very harmful, even when it is not visible. Airbourne lead is a common problem throughout the USA and since then, this has been able to meet air quality standards except in the area that has large plants or “industrial facilities.” Another great problem is the control of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. Currently, this is a problem and the EPA is working on controlling these levels of emissions of these gases with each state and trying to find out how often and when the unhealthy peaks occur.

EPAs culture has long been in line with scientific integrity. In doing so, the EPA ensures that policymakers involve science experts on issues that is pertained to science, like air pollution, and that the scientific information received “manifests scientific integrity, quality, rigor, and objectivity.’ Science has a lot to say when it comes to air quality. Who better to understand the environment that someone who studies it through the eyes of science. It is no secret that this is something that has already been happening. Our air quality is important for us to survival and when not at good levels, the lifespan of individuals often gets cut short or the ones with respiratory problems like asthma have no chance of survival.