«
The debate on air pollution and science is heated and interesting.
Not exact matches
Despite
debate over how many «deaths»
air pollution causes, it is clear bad
air damages our health, so attempts to delay rules
on reducing it must be resisted
The back - and - forth
debate on health is critical to the Clean Power Plan because the provision of the Clean
Air Act the Obama administration is invoking, Section 111 (d), according to EPA's website, «requires EPA to develop regulations for categories of sources which cause or significantly contribute to air pollution which may endanger public health or welfare» (ClimateWire, Apr. 1
Air Act the Obama administration is invoking, Section 111 (d), according to EPA's website, «requires EPA to develop regulations for categories of sources which cause or significantly contribute to
air pollution which may endanger public health or welfare» (ClimateWire, Apr. 1
air pollution which may endanger public health or welfare» (ClimateWire, Apr. 10).
The situation, combined with increased information
on the consequences of
air pollution, prompted nationwide discussion and heated
debate about health and the environment.
Hybrids The national
debate that arose in light of Delhi's
air pollution levels has prompted a strong focus
on electric and hybrid vehicles.
The report also says that most of the benefits of climate mitigation policies in the short term will come in the form of public health co-benefits from reduced
air pollution, suggesting that climate advocacy will be well served to move away from
debates over climate science and apocalyptic doomsaying, instead focusing
on the multiple benefits in the near term of moving toward cleaner energy sources.
Isabel Hilton, editor of China Dialogue, an independent website that publishes information and
debate on the environment in China, said coal is the main cause of the country's
air pollution problems.