Environmental Hazards

 Natural phenomena
 Human Activities
 Controlling environmental hazards: goal of reducing risk
to human life and health
 Is zero risk attainable?
Five Major Areas of Environmental
Concern Re. Health
 Waste management
 Air pollution
• Outdoor air
• Indoor air
 Water pollution
 Radiation
WASTES AND WASTE
MANAGEMENT
Wastes and Environmental Hazards

 Four contributing factors

• Urbanization
• Industrialization
• Population growth
• Introduction of disposable products and
containers
Solid Waste and Its Management

 Solid waste as part of modern life

 Four major sources
• Agricultural
Together, about 90-91%
• Mining
• Industry 5%
• Municipalities/Domestic Sources 5%
Solid Waste Management

 Aimed primarily at municipal and industrial wastes

 Formation of Environmental Protection Agengy
(1970)
 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1975
(RCRA)
 Integrated waste management approach
 Approx. 80% of money spent on municipal waste
management spend on collection process
Disposal of Solid Wastes
 Sanitary Landfills
 Incineration
 Resource Recovery (Recycling)
 Source Reduction
 Waste Management in Pennsylvania (1996)
• Act 101 requires all counties to have detailed plans for managing
their own wastes; currently, all have municipally ratified, state-
approved plans
• At beginning of 1996, Pennsylvania had 51 permitted municipal
waste landfills and 7 waste-to-energy facilities, with a combined
capacity for 10-13 years
Hazardous Waste Management

 Definition of hazardous waste

 Prior to RCRA, hazardous waste was generally
disposed of in a dump or landfill, along with other solid
wastes
 Four characteristics making a waste hazardous:
• Ignitability
• Corrosiveness
• Reactivity
• Toxicity
 Dual problems faced today:
• Appropriately disposing of new hazardous waste
• Correcting mishandling errors of the past
 Five Approaches to Hazardous Waste Management
• Secured Landfill
• Deep Well Injection
• Incineration
• Recycling
• Source Reduction
Hazardous Waste Cleanup

 Federal government as primary participant

 1980 -- Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) -- the
“Superfund”
 1985 -- Superfund Amendments Reauthorization
Act (SARA)
 Progress as of 1999
• 1,204 uncontrolled hazardous waste sites on NPL
• 585 sites has reached the construction completion stage
WATER POLLUTION
Sources of Water Pollution
• Point Source Pollution
• Non-point Source Pollution

Types of Water Pollution

• Biological pollutants
• Toxic pollutants
• Other/Miscellaneous pollutants

Strategies to Insure Safe Water

• Clean Water Act (1972)
• Focus of EPA regulations
• Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) (1974)
• Waste water treatment -- municipal/governmental

• Septic systems
• Conservation
AIR POLLUTION
Outdoor Air Pollution

 Most Prevalent Sources

• Transportation
• Electric power plans
• Industry, primarily mills and refineries
 Criteria pollutants -- most pervasive air pollutants
 Pollutant Standard Index (PSI)
 Special Concerns with Outdoor Air
• Acid rain
• Smog
• Reduction of the ozone layer
• Global warning (controversial)
 Regulation of Outdoor Air
• Clean Air Act (1963) -- plus subsequent amendments
• 1970 Amendments
• 1990 Amendments
Indoor Air Pollution

 Numerous sources resulting from human actions

 Aeroallegens
 Radon
 Protection of Indoor Air
• Modification of individuals’ behavior
• Legislation
RADIATION
• Naturally Occurring Radiation
• Human-made Radiation
• Nuclear Waste Policy Act (1982)
> Development of site capable of safely receiving
high-level nuclear wastes
> Ensure that low-level wastes (from medicine,
universities, and research labs) are also handled
properly

• Currently, no public waste facility exists in

the U.S. capable of handling high- level
wastes
> NWPA provision for a planned facility in
Yucca Mountain, NV, but controversy has
slowed its development
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS
ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL
LEGISLATION/POLICIES
 Political systems respond to the public demands of the moment. In
environmental health, this has resulted in a pattern of legislative and
policy developments dictated by problems or crises seen as particularly
important at different points in time
 The early 1970s was a critical turning point in expanding government’s
role in environmental regulation, shifting authority from local town halls
to state capitals and to Washington, DC
 The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created in 1970 and
given responsibility for all environmental media (air, water, land) and
most of the major pollution control programs. However, the federal
departments of Interior, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, and
Defense (and, later, Energy) retained considerable control over specific
environmental agency regulatory functions
 After EPA’s formation, many states consolidated environmental
regulatory responsibilities into new agencies -- little “EPAs”
modeled on the national agency
• One result was that state health departments ceased to be the
dominant environmental regulatory agency in the majority of
states
• Another result was the various state agencies retained some
degree of environmental control often at cross-purposes with the
state environmental agency
 The federal EPA (and its state counterparts) became an
amalgamation of programs and divisions, rather than a carefully
integrated agency
 In sum, environmental regulation at the national level is fragmented
along media lines -- partly in response to the variety of influences
in the executive branch that have some role in environmental policy
 Federal legislation also illustrates the fragmentation of
environmental laws -- e.,g., some 25 separate federal laws address
some aspect of toxic substances control and hazardous waste
management; 8 separate laws give EPA authority in toxic substance
control
 At the state level, permits are a basic tool of environmental
management in all states --i.e., proposed development projects
cannot begin until issued a formal permit
 Often, multiple permits must be acquired -- e.g., air and
water pollution, protection of wetlands, wildlife protection
 No two states have devised identical regulatory systems,
despite federal pressures and monetary incentives to do so
 Federal-state relations in environmental regulatory
programs can be characterized in three patterns:
• Federal role as extremely deferential to state
government preferences -- “cooperative federalism” --
with federal attempts to stimulate action through
funding incentives
• Federal role as dominant -- “national
federalism” -- including auto emission policies
and the Superfund
• Balance of federal and state levels -- with
federal role of forcing state action and
providing regulatory control in the absence of
state action, but typically a delegation of
authority to state agencies with funding to ease
state costs of implementation