The Continuing Trends of Pollution Controls in the United States

In today's world, there are few concerns that are greater than the effects of pollution. In essence, there is nothing that is more important to the survival of our world than pollution control. If the world became so polluted that it was deemed uninhabitable, none of the other problems we face would be relevant. The government knows this, and they are committed to controlling pollution in and around cities by enforcing strict guidelines and policies to limit the amount of pollution produced each year.

If a government is to regulate pollution, it first must ask itself, what is pollution? M.H. Atkins defines pollution as "the production of 'bads' rather than goods. Pollution may have a visual impact, a smell, a sound or noise, or may be defined in terms of its physical characteristics; it may be something which is solid, liquid or airborne and which causes some discomfort or harm to at least some sections of the population" (Atkins, 1977, p. 1). When most people think of pollution, they immediately think of environmental pollution such as toxic waste, smog, litter, etc. It is important to remember that when we talk about government policies, we must broaden our definition of pollution to include noise ordinance, graffiti, and other visual stimulants that otherwise send a negative message in the communities.

Now that the government has a firm hold on the definition of pollution, the next step is to understand how and why pollution exists in the first place. According to Gunter Stephan, there are two reasons. The first reason says, "The industrial process inescapably is connected with a continuous flow of pollution into the environment, (and) the entropy law tells us that only part of the material and energy inputs is transformed into the final output during production...(causing) emissions and leading to a degeneration of the environment" (Stephan, 1989, p. 3). The obvious solution to this would be reduced emissions controls and controls on waste. The second reason for pollution, according to Stephan, is "economic growth" which means..."that under the existing technologies, more and more raw materials and energy have to be put into circulation producing an increasing amount of waste which is discharged to the environment" (Stephan, 1989, p. 3). In this reasoning, it shows that pollution is a type of byproduct of economic growth. Stephan is saying that we must pollute in some ways if we plan on growing.

Now that we have defined pollution and the major characteristics relating to its production, it is important to understand how the government plans to combat this very important issue. In 1970, The White House and Congress instituted a new agency whose only mission was to "protect human health and the environment" (EPA Web, 2006). This new division is known as the Environmental Protection Agency, or the EPA. The main tasks of this agency are to "develop and enforce regulations that implement environmental laws enacted by Congress. EPA is responsible for researching and setting national standards for a variety of environmental programs, and delegates to states and tribes the responsibility for issuing permits and for monitoring and enforcing compliance. Where national standards are not met, EPA can issue sanctions and take other steps to assist the states and tribes in reaching the desired levels of environmental quality" (EPA Web, 2006). This is the major contribution of the United States government in the fight against pollution. The EPA's headquarters is located in Washington, D.C., but its jurisdiction ranges coast to coast and covers just about every major and minor concern relating to pollution in the country. According to the EPA mission statement, the EPA uses a wide array of tools to combat pollution, including: developing and enforcing regulations, offering financial assistance, performing environmental research, sponsoring voluntary sponsorships and programs, offering environmental education seminars, and publishing materials in written and electronic forms (EPA Web, 2006).

One major policy implemented by the EPA in 1972 was the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, otherwise known as the Clean Water Act. This act gave the EPA the right to implement pollution control programs across the United States, and regulate the amount of contaminants in our waters. "The Act made it unlawful for any person to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained under its provisions. It also funded the construction of sewage treatment plants under the construction grants program and recognized the need for planning to address the critical problems posed by non-point source pollution" (EPA Web, 2006). Non-point pollution refers to the pollution caused by melting snow or rain moving contaminants such as fertilizer or natural waste into or rivers and streams. The treatment plants that were built as a result of the Clean Water Act are a major factor in the cleanup of our environment. In 1974, the Safe Drinking Water Act was created to accompany and further define the Clean Water Act. "The Safe Drinking Water Act was established to protect the quality of drinking water in the U.S. This law focuses on all waters actually or potentially designed for drinking use, whether from above ground or underground sources (EPA Web, 2006)."

The Clean Air Act of 1970 was enacted to "regulate air emissions from area, stationary, and mobile sources" (EPA Web, 2006). These emissions include vehicle emissions, factory pollutants, smoke stacks, aerosols, and other airborne pollutants. The EPA enforces this Act using the "National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to protect public health and the environment" (EPA Web, 2006). This Act is particularly important to many large cities, because it regulates the high concentration of emissions that are prevalent in most metro areas by providing additional funding for public transportation and other carpooling methods. In 1990, amendments were included in the Clean Air Act to account for many big city produced "problems such as acid rain, ground-level ozone, stratospheric ozone depletion, and air toxics" (EPA Web, 2006). The federal government puts these laws into effect, but it comes down to the individual states to actually regulate the laws within their boundaries. In order for a state to enforce these laws, they "have to develop state implementation plans (SIPs) that explain how each state will do its job under the Clean Air Act. A state implementation plan is a collection of the regulations a state will use to clean up polluted areas (EPA Web, 2006)."

In 1990, the government introduced the Pollution Prevention Act. This act "focused industry, government, and public attention on reducing the amount of pollution through cost-effective changes in production, operation, and raw materials use" (EPA Web, 2006). These practices focus primarily on the treatment and disposal of the materials, and the particular methods used such as "recycling, source reduction, and sustainable agriculture" (EPA Web, 2006). Source reduction is defined by the EPA as "any change in the design, manufacture, purchase, or use of materials or products (including packaging) to reduce their amount or toxicity before they become municipal solid waste" (EPA Web, 2006), as well as the reuse of any products or materials. "A sustainable agricultural system is one that can indefinitely meet the requirements for food and fiber at socially acceptable, economical and environmental costs" (Sustainable, 2006). The Pollution Prevention Act is a general articles type of act, meaning it covers much of the overall subject of pollution.

Sometimes, the government simply cannot stop pollution. When this is the case, their next course of action is to implement zoning restrictions. Industrial zones are very important to the economy of any major city, but these industrial workplaces "generate all sorts of externalities including noise, glare, dust, odor, vibration, and smoke. Zoning works as an environmental policy because...the easiest way to reduce the exposure to pollution is to put a buffer between a polluter and its potential victims" (O'Sullivan, 2007, p.187). A solution like this certainly works because it isolates the source of pollution, thereby reducing the sight or effect of pollution on a growing city. The problem with zoning as a pollution combatant is that it doesn't help the true underlying problem at all. It just moves it away from the masses.

Pollution taxes are also an effective remedy for polluting firms. A pollution tax is a "tax on pollution equal to the external cost it imposes on society" (O'Sullivan, 2007, p. 187). When a pollution tax is imposed, it works against a firm like any other account payable. This forces a firm to have "an incentive to economize on pollution in the same way that it economizes on raw materials and labor" (O'Sullivan, 2007, p.187). This automatically reduces the pollution in the firm to a minimum acceptable level.

The subject of pollution is a relatively new objective for the government. We have only cracked the surface of this topic, and every year there are stricter rules applied to emissions and environmental standards. The economic viewpoint on this subject will continue to focus on the effects of zoning and tax reform. Some argue that a combination of the two will stimulate a safer environment, while many argue that it will only cause industry to move closer to the city core. Only time will tell in these debates, but one thing is for certain: Pollution needs to continue to be strongly regulated or it will only grow worse.

Works Cited

Atkins, M.H.. Pollution Control Costs In Industry. 1. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1977.

Holden, Matthew. Pollution Control As A Bargaining Process. Detroit: Wayne State University, 1966.

Pollution Control: Perspectives on the Government Role. 1. New York: Tax Foundation, Inc., 1971.

Stephan, Gunter. Pollution Control, Economic Adjustment and Long-Run Equilibrium. 1. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1989.

"Sustainable Agriculture." The University of Reading. 2006. ECIFM. 24 Sep 2006 .

"U.S. Enviromental Protection Agency." EPA.com. 2006. 22 Sep 2006 .