Mid-Life Crisis? Clean Air Act Turns 40

Lyrics by James Rado and Gerome Ragni in the off-Broadway debut of the musical "Hair" in October 1967 set the stage for one of the most powerful pieces of environmental legislation in U.S. history.

Welcome sulphur dioxide,
Hello carbon monoxide
The air, the air is everywhere
Breathe deep, while you sleep, breathe deep

Global Warming

Less than four years later, President Nixon signed the Clean Air Act and soon after that formed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to implement the landmark legislation.

On Sept. 14, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson will mark the 40th anniversary of the Clean Air Act's passage at a Washington, D.C. conference. She'll be joined by "leading contributors who have helped shape the act over the past 40 years." The list includes politicians, private sector types and activists.

The real test is the air itself. I live in California's Central San Joaquin Valley, a hotbed of agriculture known for its brown, smog-filled skies. Allergy doctors do well here, and bad-air days are as common as rain in the Pacific Northwest.

Foul air settles in the Valley, which has very little wind and zero rain in summer. Reportedly, noxious emissions from the Bay Area and possibly as far away as China make their way to settle in scenic Fresno and the foothills of the Sierra Mountains.

Thursday's Air Quality Index rating by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District showed a moderate 97 for Fresno County, and an "unhealthy for sensitive groups" 110 for Tulare County just to the south. Ratings below 50 are considered good.

Worldwide it's not much better. According to 350.org, our air has 390 parts per million of carbon dioxide and should have 350 ppm to be considered healthy. The organization has launched a campaign to reduce the amount through grassroots activities on Oct. 10.

Author and clean air activist Bill McKibben says even if we succeed on removing all the fossil fuel belching cars, factories and other contributors, we'll still see the globe warming for decades. He says our prospects are dour.

This comes despite positive moves in past years. Earthjustice.org argues that the amendments added to the Clean Air Act in 1990 gave the law the teeth it needed to go after polluters. "There is no better tool for cleaning up toxic air pollution," said Earthjustice attorney James Pew on the website.

Those amendments, by the way, were signed by President George H.W. Bush, who said at the time: "This bill means cleaner cars, cleaner power plants, cleaner factories and cleaner fuels; it means a cleaner America."

Eliminating the brown nasty air remains a huge challenge. While most of us prefer the smell of clean air (I recall the undeniable freshness after thunderstorms in Fairbanks, Alaska), we still want our cars, our houses at 76 degrees (or so) and the independence of urban and rural sprawl.

And everybody seems to have an opinion. A search for "clean air act importance" on Google turned up a post from the Nuclear Energy Institute that basically said: "Want to clean the air? Go nuclear." I paraphrase. However, the writer does have a point. Dealing with the political fallout and spent plutonium is another matter.
And some want status quo. There's the movement supporting Proposition 23 in California, which would roll back the state's Global Warming Solutions Act. Also known as AB 32, the act seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in California to 1990 levels by 2020.

Needless to say, Prop. 23 wouldn't help clean the air. It's supported by Texas refiners Tesoro and Valero and just got a million boost from Koch Industries, a company notorious for its anti-environmental stance. Rebecca Lefton called the trio the "toxic triplets" in a post on climateprogress.org.

The battle continues. Coal is in the sights of many environmental groups, and the industry is fighting back, trying to keep coal ash from being regulated as hazardous waste and keeping coal mines and coal-fired power plants operational. Of course, the argument there is that coal is domestic, in abundant supply and the industry offers massive employment in questionable times.

It's time for clean energy to step up. Many reports say the industry, such as it is, will generate millions of new jobs. Where are they?

Those interested in listening in on EPA's 40-year look-back event can see it webcast live at http://www.epa.gov/live/.

Mid-Life Crisis? Clean Air Act Turns 40

Going Green & Environmental Protection

It's easy to go green and help towards saving our environment and it can save you money at the same time.

Global climate change presents one of the gravest threats not only to our planet's health, but also to the health and well being of every one of us. Climate change is a global issue but it is one that affects us all. As the planet faces a period of warming where our actions are believed to be the prime cause, it makes sense for each of us as individuals to begin taking the effort to begin a more efficient use of our precious resources. Our continued demands for more and more energy results in more and more burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil and in turn creating more and more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Global Warming

Just small adjustments to some of the simple things in life and our life styles can make all the difference. Some 65 million newspapers are printed every day in the US and some 70% of them will not be recycled. What a waste of trees! You can do your bit to help, leave out your unwanted card and paper for kerbside collection. It will be taken to recycling plants where it will be turned to pulp and reused to manufacture new paper and board products. You could read whatever news you want to read at the same time simply by going online so save some money and read from the web pages.

That cell phone charger that stays plugged in, the DVD player that waits for the occasional playing, and the TV that sits on standby all night, these are prime examples of how we waste energy - unplug them, as even on standby they are consuming energy!

The average family spends some ,400 a year on bottled water. And the worst part is that 95% of the plastic bottles are not recycled! Leave your plastics outside for collection. For less than 0 you could get a high quality staged water filter to make your tap water perfect and you may not need to spend so much on bottled water.

Do you drive as fast as the law allows? You shouldn't. Gentle driving on properly inflated tires, you will save gas, save money and help the planet too. How about using a bicycle to travel around town? Or you could simply walk for those short trips. You won't be pouring hydrocarbons into the atmosphere, warming the planet; you will get some good exercise and save money at the same time.

Going Green & Environmental Protection

productive communication - Email Because Its Right For The Situation, Not Because It's convenient

Themes

Use the proper transportation tool based on the situation and objectives.

Save Energy

Sending an email may be convenient at times, but if it is not the right tool it can sell out your productivity and that of others.

Would you use a wrench to pound a nail? Many of you who have done home improvement projects, worked in your carport or even hung a photograph have probably been in this situation before. You need to pound in a nail, but you don't have a hammer nearby. I personally have turned a crescent wrench nearby and given a galvanized 2-inch 8d a few whacks instead of going to the basement to get a hammer. I've also used a shoe, a rock, and my wife's popular vase to sink nails on assorted occasions when I just couldn't muster up the power to get the right tool. At the time, I de facto plan I was being efficient by using what was convenient.

What were the results? In most cases, I was able to ultimately get the nail in without the hammer but often was only marginally successful. I achieved the goal, but not efficiently or effectively. In every case, I had to hit the nail more times than if I had used a hammer. When I used the wrench, I bent the nail. When I used the shoe, I left a dent in the wall when the heel slipped off the nail head (which I had to patch later). When I used the rock, I smashed my finger. And after reading this article, my wife will finally know how the vase got chipped!

What most population don't comprehend is that they make the same mistake practically every day in the business world. They use the wrong transportation tool because it is convenient for them at the time. But really, they are reducing productivity in the process.

What are the typical results of using the wrong transportation tool? In most cases, the message does ultimately get through. But the sender's and other people's time may be wasted in the process, the message may not get through correctly the first time, it may not originate the right results, or it may even cause damage to relationships along the way that need to be later repaired (like the dent in the wall). When these things happen frequently in an organization, the results can de facto hurt productivity.

The most base example of this today is the overuse of email. You're sitting in a meeting, and you receive an email with a list of questions for you and others. The meeting consulation isn't directly focused on you, so you resolve that you can read it on your Pda without missing out on anyone foremost (a likely mistake we'll address in a future article!). The email is from person you'll see tomorrow in another meeting, and it has a 12-person distribution list. The demand asked of you is a bit unclear, but you're pretty sure that you understand what is being requested. It is also a somewhat sensitive issue that population feel strongly about. The sender needs a response with in 48 hours. Only two population on the list other than the sender need to know your response, and they'll be in the same meeting as the sender tomorrow.

What do you do?

What you should do is go in the basement and get the hammer! In this case, this means you should not acknowledge immediately. Instead, you should bring a copy of the message to your meeting tomorrow and invite clarification from the sender to be sure you understand the question. Then, you should acknowledge while paying attentiveness to the others in the meeting to make sure the negative emotional reaction you are concerned about doesn't happen.

But unfortunately, if you were like many population today, you would instead acknowledge to the message right away. You would peck in an acknowledge on your Pda or pound one in on your laptop. With so many emails arrival in, you just don't want to leave this one sitting there. Since it's too hard to sell out the distribution list (especially on the Pda) you just hit the Reply All button, figuring the others will just disregard the message. You're also sure that if you misinterpreted the request, the sender will get back to you and expound (likely also with a Reply All). Finally, you outline that if there's an emotional reaction, you can deal with it in the meeting tomorrow.

What's the worst-case scenario with this approach? First, you missed out on an foremost part of the meeting you were in since you weren't paying attention. You'll end up redoing some work as a consequent of this. Second, you did misinterpret the request, and it took two more emails with the whole distribution list to perform clarification. Third, your response triggered a strong emotional reaction with one of the people. This person will be in the meeting tomorrow, but by that time they'll have repressed their feelings. Since you didn't get the optical or verbal clues from their preliminary response, you'll never know that you upset them. This will hinder your relationship with them arresting forward.

In summary, 45 irrelevant messages were sent to people, an informal network got damaged, you wasted two hours redoing work, and you spent 20 minutes on all of the emails that were generated on the subject. Had you just brought it to the meeting tomorrow, your preliminary response and the required clarification would have taken one minute. Also, you would have observed the emotional response from one person and clarified your position to resolve their concern. Or maybe you would have even integrated their feedback into your response to make it better!

Because Pda's and email systems make it so convenient to use email, mistakes like this are often made. What's worse is that there's a multiplying consequent in an organization since emails beget emails beget emails. The basic rule to remember in this specific situation is to email because you should, not because you can. In a more general case, you should adopt the right transportation tool based on the situation. If you are in doubt of which one to use, use direct verbal communication.

Email because you should, not because you can

Think about what is most efficient and efficient for all parties involved, even if it means slightly more work for you. A voicemail, phone call or a live conversation may be a better way to communicate.
One inefficient email from you can originate a lot of work for others, especially if a large distribution list is used.
If a response isn't needed in the immediate future, consider other ways and opportunities to chronicle the data such as in an upcoming meeting.
This approach will likely save you time because you'll adopt the most efficient way to chronicle instead of the most convenient at the time.
Don't send messages just because it is easy or convenient.

Avoid the urge to send an email on an issue that should be handled with consulation or other means just because email is most convenient at the time. Don't send an email just because you are in a meeting and that is the only way you can communicate. While it may seem convenient for you at the time, it can often slow down the unabridged process and may de facto make more unabridged work for you and others complicated if the issue is not resolved effectively. It can also be distracting and counterproductive for the meeting you are in. Give yourself a task or action item to follow-up in person if that is the suitable response instead of sending an immediate email. Often emails sent on Pdas in meetings are not well written due to the difficulty of typing on the small devices and the partial focus of the person composing the email. This can lead to misinterpretation of the message being sent.

productive communication - Email Because Its Right For The Situation, Not Because It's convenient

Green business Can assist Your business to Cut Spending

Going green can do more for your firm than just boost your group image. Green firm practices also make good financial sense. While your focus may primarily be on the bottom line, as far as anything else is concerned you are just trying to do your part to help the environment. Being ecologically known is good for the economy as well as the Earth.

The fastest way to reduce the amount of trash and waste that you have is to reduce what you start off with. Check out your entire execution and thought about evaluate what is being wasted. If there is scrap leftover, then there is money being thrown away. Check and see if you could save money, and emissions, in your shipping practices by adjusting the schedules or routes. Take a long look around your office and start to think about how much of the paper you unmistakably need.

Save Energy

Scrap or loose paper should be a thing of the past. Fax machines and copiers jam often sufficient to furnish plentifulness of wrinkled paper that can be cut up and used for phone messages. Both sides of a piece of paper should be used. When it is all said and done that paper should land in the recycling bin, not the waste basket.

Lots of associates are making the move to paperless billing and invoicing. Not only does it generate a lot of waste, it also costs a lot of money to furnish the waste. If you are not comfortable jumping in with both feet you could test the water first by offering it as an choice to existing clients, customers, or suppliers first. Then slowly make the shift to paperless billing as a standard. While citizen can still request paper, they will incur supplementary fees for it.

Wouldn't you love to cut down the cost of firm travel? By reducing the amount of trips made for business, you not only save money, but also reduce the emissions that your firm creates. If traveling for meetings is a tasteless occurrence in the middle of two offices then look into web conferencing. You may have to pay a small fee to set it up, but it will be lower than the cost of paying citizen to go from one place to another.

Maintaining office space gets expensive. The less office space that you use, the less money it will cost you. By changing some of the jobs on your staff to be available for flexible schedules, or purely telecommute, you can rapidly cut down on the amount of space you need for your office. You could also arrange for citizen to work in shifts so that office space is shared in the middle of people. Not only will you lower energy consumption within the office, but citizen will not be driving their cars into work everyday. In one swift move you can improve your group image, boost laborer morale, help the environment, and save money.

Recycling bins need to be clearly marked and easy to find throughout your building. Before throwing away anything make sure that it does not belong in the recycling bin instead of the trash can. Some cities and communities have instituted steep fines for not recycling.

The availability of tax breaks and grants to businesses wanting to implement environmentally cordial changes is growing at an alarming rate. Green firm is the way of the future. It does pay to do the right thing.

Green business Can assist Your business to Cut Spending

Everyone Needs a Lawyer Or Attorney at Some Point in Their Life

Here are some of the many different types of Lawyers and Attorneys that are available. There are Divorce Lawyers and Attorneys, there are Criminal and Civil Lawyers and Attorneys. There are Lawyers that handle wills, there are Lawyers that handle Car accidents, and malpractice. There are employment lawyers, immigration lawyers, mesothelioma lawyers, the list goes on and on.

The point is that at some point everyone will need a lawyer or attorney, whether it be to handle a Death in the Family or to settle Child support, or maybe even get you out of trouble, we all will have to deal with them at some point.

Save Earth

Lawyers are not scum of the earth as some might think, actually they can save us allot of heartache, headache and trouble sometimes. They can get us the justice we seek or the money we are entitled to from an accident or injury. Lawyers have gotten a bad rap lately (especially in the press) but the fact of the matter is without them the world would be a very confusing place.

If you have ever seen a law book and read it (let alone try to understand it or make sense of it) you might appreciate lawyers a little bit more. Lawyers are smart by nature because there is so much to learn in there field, no matter what field of expertise they are in. The law is always changing and they have to not only know the law but stay on top of the every changing laws.

Everyone Needs a Lawyer Or Attorney at Some Point in Their Life