State of the Air 2009 Report
Iowa
http://www.stateoftheair.org/2009/states/iowa/

For Particle Pollution:

Johnson County Gets an F with 11 Orange Days (Unhealthy for Sensitive Populations)

Linn County Gets an F rating with 10 Orange Days

What you can do
Individual citizens can do a great deal to help reduce air pollution outdoors as well. Simple but effective ways include:

• Drive less. Combine trips, walk, bike, carpool or vanpool, and use buses, subways or other alternatives to driving. Vehicle emissions are a major source of air pollution. Support community plans that provide ways to get around that don’t require a car, such as more sidewalks, bike trails and transit systems.
• Don’t burn wood or trash. Burning firewood and trash are among the largest sources of particles in many parts of the country. If you must use a fireplace or stove for heat, convert your woodstoves to natural gas, which has far fewer polluting emissions. Compost and recycle as much as possible and dispose of other waste properly; don’t burn it. Support efforts in your community to ban outdoor burning of construction and yard wastes. Avoid the use of outdoor hydronic heaters, also called outdoor wood boilers, which are often much more polluting than woodstoves.
• Make sure your local school system requires clean school buses, which includes replacing or retrofitting old school buses with filters and other equipment to reduce emissions. Make sure your local schools don’t idle their buses, a step that can immediately reduce the emissions.
• Get involved. Participate in your community’s review of its air pollution plans and support state and local efforts to clean up air pollution.
• Use less electricity. Turn out the lights and use energy-efficient appliances. Generating electricity is one of the biggest sources of pollution, particularly in the eastern United States.
• Send a message to decision makers. Send an email or fax to urge Congress to oppose measures that weaken the Clean Air Act.

Log on at www.LungUSA.org to see how easy that can be.

source: http://www.stateoftheair.org/2009/key-findings/executive-summary.html

Useful Air Quality Links

Iowa

• Iowa Weather Alerts including Air Quality Alerts from the National Weather Service
• Iowa Air Quality Forecast
• Pollution Rankings in Linn County Iowa
• Iowa Department of Natural Resouces

EPA SuperFund Cleanup Sites List – Locations in Iowa

The 25 Most Ozone-Polluted Regions from 2005 American Lung Association

1. Los Angeles-Long Beach-
   Riverside, CA
2. Bakersfield, CA
3. Fresno-Madera, CA
4. Visalia-Porterville, CA
5. Merced, CA
6. Houston-Baytown-Huntsville, TX
7. Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-
   Truckee, CA-NV
8. Dallas-Fort Worth, TX
9. New York-Newark-Bridgeport,
   NY-NJ-CT-PA
10. Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland,
    PA-NJ-DE-MD
11. Washington-Baltimore-Northern
    Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV
12. Charlotte-Gastonia-Salisbury, NC-SC
13. Hanford-Corcoran, CA
14. Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH
15. Knoxville-Sevierville-La Follette, TN
16. Modesto, CA
17. Pittsburgh-New Castle, PA
18. Youngstown-Warren-East
    Liverpool, OH-PA
19. Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe, OH
20. Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI
21. Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus, NY
22. Sheboygan, WI
23. Chicago-Naperville-Michigan
    City, IL-IN-WI
24. El Centro, CA
25. Lancaster, PA

source: http://www.sixwise.com/newsletters/05/09/07/the-25-most-polluted-regions-in-the-united-states.htm

QI colors

EPA has assigned a specific color to each AQI category to make it easier for people to understand quickly whether air pollution is reaching unhealthy levels in their communities. For example, the color orange means that conditions are “unhealthy for sensitive groups,” while red means that conditions may be “unhealthy for everyone,” and so on.

Understanding the AQI

The purpose of the AQI is to help you understand what local air quality means to your health. To make it easier to understand, the AQI is divided into six categories:

Each category corresponds to a different level of health concern. The six levels of health concern and what they mean are:

• “Good” AQI is 0 – 50. Air quality is considered satisfactory, and air pollution poses little or no risk.
• “Moderate” AQI is 51 – 100. Air quality is acceptable; however, for some pollutants there may be a moderate health concern for a very small number of people. For example, people who are unusually sensitive to ozone may experience respiratory symptoms.
• “Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups” AQI is 101 – 150. Although general public is not likely to be affected at this AQI range, people with lung disease, older adults and children are at a greater risk from exposure to ozone, whereas persons with heart and lung disease, older adults and children are at greater risk from the presence of particles in the air. .
• “Unhealthy” AQI is 151 – 200. Everyone may begin to experience some adverse health effects, and members of the sensitive groups may experience more serious effects. .
• “Very Unhealthy” AQI is 201 – 300. This would trigger a health alert signifying that everyone may experience more serious health effects.

source: http://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=aqibasics.aqi#sens

“Hazardous” AQI greater than 300. This would trigger a health warnings of emergency conditions. The entire population is more likely to be affected.

By JOHN M. BRODER
WASHINGTON — The decade ending in 2009 was the warmest on record, new surface temperature figures released Thursday by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration show.

The agency also found that 2009 was the second warmest year since 1880, when modern temperature measurement began. The warmest year was 2005. The other hottest recorded years have all occurred since 1998, NASA said.

James E. Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said that global temperatures varied because of changes in ocean heating and cooling cycles. “When we average temperature over 5 or 10 years to minimize that variability,” said Dr. Hansen, one of the world’s leading climatologists, “we find global warming is continuing unabated.”

A separate preliminary analysis from the National Climatic Data Center, a unit of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, found that 2009 tied with 2006 as the fifth warmest year on record, based on measurements taken on land and at sea. The data center report, published earlier this week, also cited the years 2000 to 2009 as the warmest decade ever measured. The new temperature figures provide evidence in the scientific discussion of global warming but are not likely to be the last word on whether the planet’s temperature is on a consistent upward path.

Dr. Hansen, who has been an outspoken figure in the climate debate for years, has often been attacked by skeptics of global warming for what they charge is selective use of temperature data. The question of whether the planet is heating and how quickly was at the heart of the so-called “climategate” controversy that arose last fall when hundreds of e-mail messages from the climate study unit at the University of East Anglia in England were released without authorization.

Critics seized on the messages as evidence that, in their view, climate scientists were manipulating data and colluding to keep contrary opinion out of scientific journals. But climate scientists and political leaders affirmed what they called a broad-based consensus that the planet was growing warmer, and on a consistent basis, although with measurable year-to-year variations.

The NASA data released Thursday showed an upward temperature trend of about 0.36 degrees Fahrenheit (0.2 degrees Celsius) per decade over the past 30 years. Average global temperatures have risen by about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degrees Celsius) since 1880.

“That’s the important number to keep in mind,” said Gavin Schmidt, a climatologist at Goddard. “The difference between the second and sixth warmest years is trivial because the known uncertainty in the temperature measurement is larger than some of the differences between the warmest years.”

Policy makers at the United Nations climate change summit conference in Copenhagen last month agreed on a goal of trying to keep the rise in average global temperatures to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, or 2 degrees Celsius, to try to forestall the worst effects of global warming.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/science/earth/22warming.html

the Science of Climate Change & Science of Global Warming

• Union of Concerned Scientists http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/
• The InterGovernmental Panel on Climate Change
• RealClimate “Climate science from climate scientists”
• The New York Times maintains a section
• Pew Center on Global Climate Change has links to reports, Fact Sheets, including “During the twentieth century, the earth’s surface warmed by about 1.4 °F. There are a variety of potential causes for global climate change, including natural and human-induced mechanisms”

The Politics of Global Climate Change

• Google Living Story with the New York Times – “The Politics of Global Warming”
• various attempts to address the Politics and show how science does not support some of the Political claims:
  • Global Warming Science

…. to be continued ….

“I have more respect for people who change their mind after acquiring new information than for those who cling to views they held thirty years ago. The world changes.  Ideologues and zealots don’t”  - Michael Crichton, “State of Fear”

and

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/michael-crichtons-state-of-confusion/

Vegetarian Diet Better for Environment, Says UK Climate Change Leader
Damian Robin
EpochTimes Staff Oct 28, 2009
LONDON—One of the UK’s most prominent climate change experts, Lord Stern, has said a vegetarian diet is better for the environment.

Author of the 2006 Stern Review on the cost of tackling global warming, and former chief economist of the World Bank. Lord Stern believes that the Climate change conference in Copenhagen in December should call for prices of meat and other foods that contribute to climate change to increase.

“Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases,” he said in an interview with The Times on Tuesday 27th October. “It puts enormous pressure on the world’s resources.”

“I think it’s important that people think about what they are doing and that includes what they are eating.”

Nearly one fifth of the world’s current greenhouse gas emissions are produced by livestock – about 50 per cent higher than the level produced by all the vehicles in the world.

Lord Stern’s comments were welcomed by some environmental and farming groups, but dismissed as over-simplistic and irresponsible by the the farmer’s union in the UK.

“Cutting down on meat is a win-win for healthier people and a healthier planet”, said Friends of the Earth’s senior food campaigner, Clare Oxborrow, “but we also need the Government to make big changes to the way it’s produced.”

National Union of Farmers President Peter Kendall commented: “Livestock production is based on grasland which stores more carbon than other land use in England. Focusing on a single issue as a way of saving the planet is extremely iressponsible and likely to be counterproductive.”

Compassion in World Farming said: “Reducing meat consumption in affluent nations will release land for growing food for people rather than feed for factory farmed animals or fuel crops to power our vehicles and it will reduce the emissions of some of the most noxious greenhouse gases.”

“By reducing meat consumption and supporting higher welfare farming, we can help to revive the planet, restore dignity to farmers’ livelihoods and enable the animals themselves to lead lives of quality,” said a statement on their website.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation in 2006 concluded that worldwide livestock farming, including the destruction of forest land for cattle ranching and the production of animal feeds, generates 18 per cent of the planet’s greenhouse gas emissions. By comparison, it said, all the world’s cars, trains, planes and boats accounted for a combined 13 per cent.

source: http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/24455/

Watch the AP story below: