Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

alp227

(32,034 posts)
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:24 PM Dec 2012

E.P.A. Sets Lower Limit For Soot Particles in the Air

Source: NYT

The Environmental Protection Agency announced a new standard for soot pollution on Friday that will force industry, utilities and local governments to find ways to reduce emissions of particles that are linked to thousands of cases of disease and death each year.

The agency, acting under a court deadline, set an annual standard of 12 micrograms per cubic meter of air, a significant tightening from the previous standard of 15 micrograms, set in 1997, which a federal court found too weak to adequately protect public health. The new standard is in the middle of the range of 11 to 13 micrograms per cubic meter that the E.P.A.’s science advisory panel recommended.

Communities must meet the new standard by 2020 or face possible penalties, including loss of federal transportation financing.

The E.P.A. based its action on health studies that found that exposure to fine particles — in this case measuring 2.5 micrometers in diameter — brought a marked increase in heart and lung disease, acute asthma attacks and early death. Older people, adults with heart and lung conditions and children are particularly susceptible to the ill effects of breathing in soot particles.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/science/earth/epa-proposes-tighter-soot-rule.html

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
E.P.A. Sets Lower Limit For Soot Particles in the Air (Original Post) alp227 Dec 2012 OP
I had a REALLY hard time making sense of that headline caraher Dec 2012 #1
You are not alone. "Upper limit" would have made much more sense. nt eppur_se_muova Dec 2012 #3
bad wording from NYT, should've been: "reduced the level of allowable pollution..." CreekDog Dec 2012 #4
Or "EPA lowers limit". eppur_se_muova Dec 2012 #5
Kick & Recommend. Pirate Smile Dec 2012 #2

caraher

(6,278 posts)
1. I had a REALLY hard time making sense of that headline
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:05 PM
Dec 2012

I initially read "lower limit" as meaning the EPA requires there be at least some minimum amount of soot!

CreekDog

(46,192 posts)
4. bad wording from NYT, should've been: "reduced the level of allowable pollution..."
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:35 AM
Dec 2012

...from soot particles, or fine particles in the air."

or something to that effect.

but going from 15 down to 12 is a good thing.

eppur_se_muova

(36,269 posts)
5. Or "EPA lowers limit".
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:07 PM
Dec 2012

I guess they don't realize how the terms "lower bound" or "lower limit" are normally used in science-speak. Words that can be either verbs or adjectives must be used circumspectly in headlines, as should those that can be either verbs or nouns.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»E.P.A. Sets Lower Limit F...