DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. Importance of environmental laws
The human population as it continuously expands, bring threat to the
environment. It could be in the form of pollution, burning fossil fuels,
deforestation, climate change, over-consumption of natural resources,
overpopulation itself, and many more.
Environmental laws came to existence to help address the effects of human
activity on the natural environment. These are laws also referred to as
environmental and resource law. Environmental laws work to regulate the
impacts to the environment and eventually lessen the effects. In a simpler sense,
to protect the environment is its primary function. Environmental laws play a
huge part in protecting humans, animals, resources, and habitats. Without these
laws, there would be no regulations concerning pollution, contamination, hunting,
or even response to disasters. Negligence of these laws results in various
punishments like fines, community service, and in some extreme cases, jail time.
Without these environmental laws, the government would not be able to punish
those who treat the environment poorly.
Humanity, nonetheless, has been aware of the activities they are doing that
hurt the environment even before environmental laws were there to protect the
environment. It is from the inner morality to know what is good for the whole
common, the future generations, and not just to live for themselves.
2. Would you permit a law that permits open burning of hazardous waste on
the high seas? Open burning refers to combustion without emission controls.
Would you favor such a law if emissions were controlled? Discuss your answers in
detail. Would you require permits that specify time of day burning, or distance
from shore of burning, or banning certain wastes from incineration?
The increasing global population goes hand in hand with the increasing volumes of
waste due to the rise in living standards, making waste as a significant global
issue. People are continuously looking for ways to manage the production of
waste and lessen the impacts. Open burning of waste is seen as one of the ways
to aid poor waste management and I am certain that this is a global disaster.
Open burning of waste sounds like an idea to get rid of the waste issues but
it’s not as simple as it appears to be. Open burning of waste releases a variety
of toxic pollutants into the air and also can intensify water pollution. It releases
significant amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere which include carbon
dioxide, methane and particulate matter, which are typically associated with air
pollution and can lead to severe cases of respiratory disease. Open burning of
waste done in land is no different from open burning in high seas. It might really
seem like it would take people away from the antagonistic health effects, but
it’s not. It just only eradicates the direct impact but will always get back to
people in ways. To put the high seas in danger is also putting the resources at
risk, including the organisms, the water quality, and their very condition.
Moreover, the atmosphere will suffer the same air pollution, be it land or in the
high seas. So, there’s no point in permitting a law that allows open waste
burning in high seas.
3. Assume you live in a small town that has two stationary sources of air
pollution: a laundry/ dry cleaning establishment and a regional hospital.
Automobiles and front porches in the town have a habit of turning black literally
overnight. What air laws apply in this situation, and given that they presumably
are not being enforced, how would you
a. Determine if, in fact, ambient or emission standards or both were being
violated and if either was
Any potential sources of air pollution must comply with the provisions of the
law. Emissions must be within the air quality standards. The existing stationary
sources of air pollution like the laundry/dry cleaning establishment and the
regional hospital must comply with the National Emission Standards for Source
Specific Air Pollutants (NESSAP) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and must secure their permit to operate, prior to operation. Turning
the front porches and automobiles black in an overnight timeframe is obviously a
violation in the Clean Air Act, the NESSAP and NAAQS. These black emissions
(black carbon emissions) should be looked after and raised to authorities because
of the danger these could bring to the environment and the people.
b. Advise the residents to respond to see that the laws are enforced.
Residents should be aware of the regulations the stationary sources have
violated. The residents could then report to the local government about the
situation or organization concerned with instigating the clean air act or could
report directly to the DENR. They can, from then check if the stationary
sources are really violating the laws imposed and make proper judgment on how
to file sanctions or fines to violating sources.
4. How would a small, rather poor community handle its municipal solid waste in
the cheapest way without violating any law? What would be the most
environmentally sound way (rather than simply the cheapest)?
Finding the appropriate manner of effective and sustainable waste management
has always been a dilemma to existing community, whether rich or poor, urban
or rural. Here are some tiers to municipal waste management to reduce its
environmental impact: 1
pollution prevention and source reduction; 2
reuse or
redistribution of unwanted, surplus materials; 3
and treatment, reclamation, and
recycling of materials within the waste. On a simpler note, practicing 4R’s:
Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle in waste management would make a big change.
5. The oceans have long been viewed as bottomless pits into which the solid
wastes may be dumped. Engineers, scientists, and politicians are divided on the
issue. Should ocean disposal be banned? Develop arguments pro and con.
Oceans had been viewed as limitless and unaffected by human actions, making it
prone to the idea of ocean disposal or ocean dumping. The use of ocean for
waste disposal is considered due to some potential in addressing the waste
management issues. Ocean disposal can pose less risk to human health than does
land disposal or incineration. Disposal in the deep ocean may have minimal effect
on coastal fisheries and communities. Oceans are huge with relatively high
assimilative capability. If disposal sites are properly chosen and dumping methods
are properly designed, wastes can either be concentrated and confined to a small
area in the deep ocean, or dispersed throughout a large volume. Aerobic
conditions and extensive flora and fauna will result in degradation of some
wastes. For coastal communities, ocean disposal appears to be the most
economical alternative.
In contrary of its hunted effectiveness, it will take massive amount of resources
like time and money, to transport wastes for dumping in the deep ocean. The
released toxins may significantly impact coastal communities even if wastes are
disposed of in deep oceans. If toxins are dumped and the intent is containment,
ocean dumping offers less control than current landfills. Potential for negative
press. If organic waste is concentrated, oxygen gas may be depleted. The
residence time of ocean water is very high, so if we damage a particular area, it
can take a long time before it can repair itself. The effect of ocean disposal
could lead to a longer term of disaster. It seems to be too late to eliminate all
wastes but also as early as now, we can still save the future generations by
redirecting our ways.
