This article was downloaded by: [Indiana Universities]On: 18 August 2014, At: 12:21Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Environment: Science and Policy for SustainableDevelopmentPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/venv20

Acid Pollution: The International Community'sContinuing StruggleJohn McCormickPublished online: 25 Mar 2010.

To cite this article: John McCormick (1998) Acid Pollution: The International Community's Continuing Struggle,Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 40:3, 16-20, DOI: 10.1080/00139159809603189

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00139159809603189

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitabilityfor any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinionsand views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy ofthe Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands,costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution inany form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

The International Community’s Continuing Struggle By John McCormick

cid pollution was at the top of the list A of environmental policy concerns in many countries during the late 1970s and 1980s, after scientists revealed that sulhr dioxide and nitrogen oxides (gases produced by burning fossil fuels) were leading to increased acidification of the environment. Improved monitoring soon provided a clearer picture of the problem, sounding an increas- ingly familiar litany of dying forests, declin- ing crop yields, acidified lakes and soils, coc- roding buildings, and threats to human health. By the 1990s, however, public and media interest in acid pollution had tailed off as other pressing issues, notably global warm- ing and threats to the ozone layer, competed for their attention. Without significant media coverage, the impression has been created that acid pollution is no longer a serious problem. Nothing could be furcher from the truth, however.

In the positive column of the ledger, the industrialized countries signed an internation- al convention on transbound- ary air pollution in 1979 and have adopted five subsequent protocols, with a sixth cur- rently under negotiation.

Driven by pressure from downwind states such as Sweden and Canada and policy changes in Germany and the European Union, the con- vention and its protocols have had measurable success. Although the precise goal of these efforts is still undefined, they have led to a halving of sulfur dioxide emissions in Europe and to reductions of more than one-third in North America.

While emissions of sulfur dioxide in most industrialized countries have fallen, however, the battle to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions is still far from won. New research has also shown that other pollutants, notably volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and ammonia, are involved in the chemical processes that lead to acidification. More worrying, emis- sions of many of these pollutants are increas- ing in much of Eastern Europe, Asia, and Latin America. Acid pollution, long associated with industrialized countries, has become a problem for newly industrializing ones as well.

This article assesses the progress to date of

This article is the jirst of a three-part update on midi- f i ing deposition. Future articles will explore the role o f integrated assessment models and the politics of arid rtrirr in North America.

- - international negotiations to reduce acid pollution and reviews the relationship between science and politics in addressing the problem. It

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

argues that policymakers need to pay more attention to effects-based re- sponses to acidification as well as the emerging problems in Eastern Europe ilnd the developing world.

Early Political Responses

I t was in Britain-the world's first industrialized country-that the prob- lem of acid pollution was first recog- titled. I n 1872, a Scottish scientist named Robert Angus Smith pub- lishcd the results of his studies of the chemistry of rainfall in the British midlands in the 1850s and 1860s, arguing that there was a link between the w l f u r dioxide that was released

in particular by a smog episode in December 1952 that was implicated in the deaths of an estimated 4,000 Lon- doners. Efforts by antipollution cam- paigners contributed to a tightening of regulations on smoke and to the pas- sage in 1956 of the world's first com- prehensive national air pollution law, the British Clean Air Act.2 Unfortu- nately, while European governments began to address local pollution prob- lems, most did so by building tall smokestacks at power stations and fac- tories. These cleaned up local air but shifted the problem to neighboring countries or even another continent. The result was that in parts of Scandi- navia, which lies downwind from the

An t i t i d i f i d wetland in sourhwestem Sweden. The Swedish government has been c . o r u / r r t tin<? ( I rw~r.rrive liming campaign since IY82.

when coal was burned and what he called "acid rain."' He warned that plants and materials were being dam- aged; showed how the acidity of rain, fog. nnd snow were affected by wind direction. proxiniily to the sea, and the amount and frequency of precipi- tation; and drew up a detailed strate- gy for analyzing the chemistry of s w h precipitation.

I t was not until the 1950s that a polit- ical response emerged, however. This was prompted mainly by concerns about worsening urban pollution, and

industrial centers of Britain and Ger- many, the acidity of the rain doubled between 1956 and 196S.3

Research in Sweden and Norway in the 1960s illustrated the links between acid pollution and forest decline, along with the changes in soil che.mistry, the increased acidity of lakes, and the decreases in freshwater fish popula- tions that acidification was causing. In 1972, the Organisation for Econom- ic Cooperation and Development (OECD) launched a four-year study of air pollution in its 11 European mem-

ber state^.^ The results were published in 1977 and provided convincing evi- dence of the chemistry and transport of acid pollution: Pollutants were being carried across national borders, and i ti Finland, Norway, Sweden, Austria, and Switzerland, more than half the total deposition of sulfur was estimated to have come from foreign sources.5 The survey clearly showed that precipila- tion in one country was affected by emissions in other countries, nnd i t revealed that the problem involved all European countries north of the Alps.

In North America, meanwhile, there were similar concerns about the inter- national dimensions of air pollution, with Canada complaining that emis- sions from the United States were causing fish populations in lakes in southern Ontario and Nova Scotia lo decline. By 1980, joint U.S.-Canadian research had documented the trans- boundary flow of air pollutants ant1 shown that 1 1 times more nitrogen oxides and 2 to 4 times more sulfur dioxide was being transported from the United States to Canada than vice versa." That same year, the Unilcd States created the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) to conduct comprehensive research on acid pollution.

Regional concerns about acid pollii- tion ultimately led to efforts to forge an international response to the prob- lem. Although the Scandinavians began calling for such a response dur- ing the early 197% no action was taken until the Conference on Securi- ty and Cooperation in Europe was convened in Helsinki in 1975. A sym- bol of detente, this conference was held to discuss a very wide range of issues, including security, econoniics. science and technology, the environ- ment, and humanitarian concerna. When it came to reaching agreements, however, the environment proved to be the least politically charged 0 1 the items on the conference agenda, and Sweden and Norway used the oppor- tunity to propose air pollution as ;I

major theme for discu~sion.~

18 ENVIRONMENT April 1998

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

It was agreed that the best pre-exist- ing international body through which discussion could be promoted was the United Nations Economic Commis- sion for Europe (ECE), which is head- quartered in Geneva. This forum offered a number of advantages: The ECE had 34 European members from both the East and West blocs; it had been arranging meetings among those countries for more than 30 years; it had an organizational structure already i n place; it operated on the principle of trying to build consensus among its members; it included the United States and Canada; and it had interests that went beyond economics into the realms of science, technology, and the environment.8 The ECE accepted the project in 1977.

The 1979 Convention As a result of the discussions held

under the auspices of the ECE, 34 states and the European Community (now called the European Union (EU)) signed the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP) in November 1979; i t came into force i n March 1983. The convention obli- gated ratifying states to “endeavor to limit and, as far as possible, gradually reduce and prevent air pollution, including long-range transboundary air pollution . . . [using] the best avail- able technology which is economical- ly feasible in new and retrofitted plants.”9 While these goals were criti- cized for their lack of substance, the absence of strong rules and hard obli- gations may have been one of the con- vention’s greatest strengths because it emphasized the importance of build- ing consensus.IO Among other accom- plishments, it led to the strengthening of the Co-operative Programme for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Long-Range Transmission of Air Pol- lutants in Europe (EMEP), which was designed to provide information on the transboundary flow of air pollutants. A 1984 protocol to the convention en- sured long-term funding for EMEP.

(See the box on this page for a synop- sis of the convention and its subse- quent protocols.)

Concerned about the lack of a Euro- pean consensus in favor of the conven- tion, the slowness of signers to ratify it, and the lack of public awareness about acid pollution, in 1983 Sweden, Norway, and Finland proposed a pro- tocol that would commit states to a 30 percent reduction in sulfur dioxide emissions by 1993 (from 1980 levels).

The ECE rejected the proposal, but in 1984 a group of countries led by Aus- tria, Canada, France, and Sweden informally committed themselves to reductions of at least that amount (some went as high as 50 percent). These countries subsequently became known as the “Thirty Percent Club.”

The pressure for reaching an in- tern ational agreement was mean w h i 1 e increased by developments in the European Community. Motivated by

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS TO CONTROL ACID POLLUTION

he principal international agree- T ment to control acid pollution is the Convention on Long-Range Trans- boundary Air Pollution, which was iidopted by the members of the Econom- ic Commission for Europe in Geneva in November 1979 and which came into force in March 1983. This agreement requires ratifying states to limit or, if pos- sible, to gradually reduce air pollution within their boundaries. By July 1% (the latest date for which information is available), 40 countries and the European Union (EU) had signed this convention and 38 had ratified it. Five protocols have subsequently been adopted, with a sixth currently being negotiated:

* The EMEP protocol was adopted in Geneva in September 1984 and came into force in January 1988. It created a trust fund to provide long-term financ- ing for the Co-operative Programme for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Long-Range Transmission of Air Pollu- tants in Europe. By July 1996,34 states and the EU had signed and ratified this protocol, which continues to play a central role in building an international scientific consensus on acid pollution.

The 6rst sulfur protocol was adopted in Helsinki in July 1985 and came into force in September 1987. It required rat- ifying states to reduce their emissions or transboundary fluxes of su lhr at least 30 percent (from 1980 levels) by the end of 1993. By July 19%. 2 I states had signed and ratified this protocol and all had complied with its requirements.

The NOx protocol was adopted in Sofia, Bulgaria, in October 1988 and

came into force in February 1991. I t required ratifying states to freeze their emissions of nitrogen oxides at 1987 levels by the end of I994 (although I:! states are aiming for reductions of at least 30 percent (from 1980-86 levels) by the end of 1998). By July 1996, 27 states and the EU had signed the proto- col and 25 had ratified it. Six signato- ries, however, have experienced signif- icant increases in their emissions of nitrogen oxides.

The VOC protocol was adopted in Geneva in November 1991. I t requires ratifying states to reduce their emis- sions of volatile organic conipounds 30 percent (from it base year of their choice between 1984 and 1990) hy the end of 1999. Most countries have cho- sen 1988 as the base year, but the LJni t - ed States and Switzerlund have opted for 1989. By July 1996, 22 states and the EU had signed the protocol. hut only 13 had ratified it.

The second sulfur protocol wits adopted in Oslo in June 1994 to replace the previous one. Signatories agreed to reduce the gap between existing and critical loads 60 percent by 2MN). By July 1996, 28 states and the EU had signed the protocol, but only 4 had rati- fied it. Sixteen ratifications are needed to bring the protocol into force.

In 1996. work began on a protocol to control emissions of nitrogen oxides. ammonia, and volatile organic com- pounds. The initial goal of having iin agreement by the end of 1997 proved 11) be too ambitious, however, and aegoti- ations are continuing.

Volume 40 Number 3 ENVIRONMENT 19

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

-- Percent

(Thousands of metric tons) change (Thousands of metric tons) change Emissions Percent Emissions

_. - ___

North America Canada United States Total

European Union Austria Sweden Finland France Netherlands Denmark Belgium Italy Luxembourg Germany United Kingdom Spain Ireland Portugal Greece Total

1980

4,614 23,779 28,393

397 507 584

3,338 489 45 1 828

3,800 24

7,486 4,898 3,319

222 266 400

27,009

1993

3,042 20,621a 23,663

71 103 121

1,136 168 157 304a

1,600 10'

3,896a 3,069 2,200

1 60a 290 51 Ob

13,795

-34 -1 3 -1 7

-82 -80 -79 -66 -66 -65 -63 -58 -58 -48 -37 -34 -28 +9

+28 -49

Other Europe Norway Romania Turkey Slovakia Switzerland Russia (European) Hungary Ukraine Belarus Czech Republic Poland Bulgaria Slovenia Bosnia-Herzegovina Yugoslavia Iceland Cyprus Croatia Albania Total

Grand Total

1980

142 1 ,762c

860 780 126

7,161 1,633 3,850

740 2,257 4,100 2,050

235 500' 406

6 36e

150 50

26,844 82,246

1993

37 559a 354d 325 58

3,456 827a

2,194 433

1,419 2,725 1,422

182 480b 401

6' 43

1800 60

15,161 52,619

-74 -68 -59 -58 -54 -52 -49 -43 -4 1 -37 -34 -31 -23 -4 -1 0

+19 +20 +20 -44 -36

-

*estimate al 992 bl990 c1 987 "1 986 "1 985 SOURCES: Data for Albania, Russia, former Yugoslavia (1980), and Romania (1980) are from UN Environment Programme, Environmental Data Report 1993-94 (Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell, 1993), Tables 1.8 and 1.9. The remaining data are from UN Economic Commission for Europe, Strategies and Policies for Air Pollution Abatement, ECE/EB.AIR/44 (New York and Geneva: United Nations, 1995), Tables 1 and 2. Data for Poland (1980) are not based on the EMEPKORIN- AIR methodology.

Ihc growing influence of its Green t'nrty and the widespread damage to its I'orests, in 1983 West Germany declared that i t planned to halve its sul- Iur dioxide emissions within 10 years nnd passed a new law on air pollution from power plants. The European Community, in turn, proposed new leg- islation airncd at reducing emissions froin large combustion plants to the cxtent of 23 percent for sulfur dioxide and I 0 pcrcent for nitrogen oxides by I993 (froin ii 1980 baseline). The main target was conventional thermal power stations, which accounted for more than 80 percent of sulfur dioxide emis- .;ions and 30 percent of nitrogen oxide emissions within the Community."

In 1985, a protocol was adopted that committed its ratifiers to the same goals as the Thirty Percent Club. By now, nitrogen oxide emissions had begun to be taken more seriously,12 and in 1988 a third protocol was adopted by which the parties under- took to freeze such emissions by the end of 1994. In 1989, the emphasis switched to a problem that had barely been mentioned in previous discus- sions: the control of volatile organic compounds such as solvents, cleaners, and other chemicals. Because the for- mation of ozone depends in part on a combination of nitrogen oxides and VOCs, addressing the former without the latter would have only limited ben-

efits. After three years of negotiation. ;I VOC protocol was opened for signa- ture in 1991, committing ratifying states to reduce their VOC emissions 30 percent by 1999 from baseline years between 1984 and 1990.

By the early 1990s. the effects o t the negotiations on acid pollution were beginning to become clearer. The rnosf progress had been made in reducing sulfur dioxide emissions, with Austria and Sweden leading the way with reductions of 82 percent and 80 per- cent, respectively, by 1993 (see Tabk I above for reductions by major coun- try groups). Thirteen other European countries more than halved their cmis-

(cotitinucw' oti ptrgc, -It)

20 ENVIRONMENT April 1998

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

sions between 1980 and 1993, and nine others cut them by more than one-third. The European Union as a whole nearly halved its emissions, and i t would have done even better if there had not been increases in Greece and Portugal. On the other side of the Atlantic, Canada cut its emissions by one-third, but progress in the United Statea was slow-the latter country managed only a 13 percent reduction hy 1992.

The results for nitrogen oxide emissions were less positive (see Table 2 on this page). Some of the higgest reductions came in Eastern European states such as Bulgaria and

the Czech Republic, but these were less a result of deliberate antipollu- tion efforts than of political changes that led to the closing of old and highly polluting industrial plants. While Austria and Belgium made reductions of 26 percent and 21 per- cent respectively by 1993, several of the more progressive northern coun- tries (such as Sweden, Finland, and Denmark) made reductions of only 4 to 8 percent. At the same time, 12 countries (including Britain, Italy, Norway, and Russia) saw their nitro- gen oxide emissions increase by 15 to 40 percent. Overall emissions among ECE member states fell by just 2 percent between 1980 and 1993 owing to the growth of road traffic and problems dealing with nitrogen emissions from agriculture.

These developments suggest that i t is time for a new approach.

Acid Pollution Control Strategies

Pollution control is expensive. In the United States alone, the sulfur dioxide controls required by the 1990 Clenn Air Act Amendments may be costing $ 1 billion to $5 billion per year, i1nd

nitrogen oxide controls a further $75 million to $90 million per year.'' In Europe, it was estimated in 1992 that EU legislation aimed at cutting cmia- sions from large combustion plant\ could cost $ I . IS billion annually, for ;I

potential overall cost of $20 billion to $30 billion (although these figure4 have to be offset by ECE estimate\ that acid pollution may be causing

Emlsialons Percent (Thousands of metric tons) change

Emlaslona Percent (Thousands of metric tons) change

North America Canada United States Total

European Union Austria Belgium Luxembourg France Germany Sweden Finland Denmark Netherlands Greece United Kingdom Spain Italy Portugal Ireland Total

1980

1,959 18,672 20,631

246 442 23

1,823 3,440

424 264 274 582 306b

2,392 950

1,480 166 73

12,885

1993

1,952 18,217a 20,169

182 350a

1 gb 1,519 2,904a

391 253 264 568 306

2,752 1 ,257c 2,053'

245 1 25a

13,188

0 -2 -2

-26 -21 -17 -17 -16 -8 -4 -4 -2 0

+15 +32 +39 +48 +7 1

+2

Other Europe Bulgaria Czech Republic Ukraine Hungary Poland Switzerland Belarus Iceland Slovakia Yugoslavia Slovenia Romania Norway Russia (European) Croatia Cyprus Total

Grand Total

1980

416d 937

1,145 273

1,500 196 234

13 197d 47 48

36gd 186

1,734 60* 9 b

7,364

40,880

1993

238 574 700 183'

1,140 150 206

1 2b 184 54 57

443a 225

2,269 83C 14

6,532

39,889

-43 -39 -39 -33 -24 -23 -12 -8 -7

+15 +19 +20 +2 1 +31 c38 +56 -1 1

-2

'estimate a1992 b1985 c1990 "1 987 SOURCES: Data for Russia and former Yugoslavia (1980) are from UN Environment Programme, Environmental Data Report 1993-94 (Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell. 1993), Tables 1.8 and 1.9. The remaining data are from UN Economic Commission for Europe, Strategies and Policies for Air Pollution Abatement,, ECE/EB.AIR/44 (NQW York and Geneva: United Nations, 1995). Tables 1 and 2. Data for Poland (1980) are not based on the EMEP/CORINAIR methodology.

ENVIRONMENT 41 Volume 40 Number 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

The iletivYoration o j this gargoyle on Lincoln Cathedral, England, shows the corrosive ffiect on wid pollution over time.

damage ranging from $3.25 billion to !$ IS billion every year). l 4 Unfortunate- ly, while the costs of remedial action are relatively easy to estimate, it is dif- ficult to put a precise value on those of acidified forests and lakes, dead ani- mals and plants, corroded buildings, or impaired human health. This has com- plicated attempts to develop workable pollution controls.

So far, the most common approach to air quality management has been to set ambient air quality standards and then to control the emissions from spe- cific sources to make sure that those standards are met. This method is rel- atively straightforward: The sources are clearly identifiable, progress on reductions can be measured easily, and the benefits are usually seen right away. (It is also relatively inexpensive

42 ENVIRONMENT

if pollution control devices are fitted to new rather than existing sources.) However, there can be problems in reaching agreement on acceptable standards and in ensuring that the costs of pollution control are distrib- uted equitably. Also, given the mil- lions of different sources of pollution (both stationary and mobile), this approach unavoidably leads to the cre- ation of a complex and often confus- ing regulatory framework. Standards can vary by locality, are often changed to reflect changing political and eco- nomic circumstances, and are rarely the same from one country to another. Ensuring that they are met requires accurate information on existing emis- sions so that trends can be measured; an effective and well-maintained mon- itoring system; an understanding of

the varied environmental effects 0 1 different pollutants and of the inilu- ence of changing climatic and meteor- ological conditions; and a careful nnd workable balance between all the con- trol options.I5

The efforts undertaken under the auspices of the ECE during the 1980s focused on cutting emissions from the major sources of acidifying pollution. This led to a phenomenon thal ha\ been described as “tote-board diplo- macy,” meaning that the negotiation\ leading up to the convention and i t \

protocols were characterized hy attempts to encourage national gov- ernments to keep up with their neigh- bors and agree to comparable o r greater absolute reductions in eniis- sions.I6 While this helped reduce emissions, not all ECE members actu- ally kept up, either because they could not (for technical and economic rea- sons) or would not (for political and economic reasons).

Recently, questions about the co\t- effectiveness of such source-based approaches have led to new approaches based on economic incentives or limiting the effect!, of acidifying pollution. The most com- monly used economic incentives :ire emissions charges and permit5 The former are charges levied on pol- luters in accordance with the amount of pollutants they emit; these c h a r p encourage them to invest in pollution control equipment, to develop I ~ C W

manufacturing techniques, to t ihe

fuels with less sulfur, and to use energy more efficiently. The major drawback to this approach is that i t assumes that large polluters will iiot

simply pass the charges on to con- sumers in the form of higher prices.

For recommendations of tho best Internet resourcf)s on acidifying depositlon, see Bytes of Note on page 3 of Environment‘s Decem- ber 1997 issue.

April 1998

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

I t also demands continuous and effective monitoring.

The LISC of tradable emissions per- mits avoids some of these problems. I t is also a more purely free-market approach to pollution control that gives industries more positive incen- tives. Since the early 1980s, the Unit- ed States has been developing an emis- sions trading system in which in- dustries are allowed to increase acidi- fying emissions in one area as long as they make compensatory reductions in another. If they need to increase their overall emissions, they can buy credits from other industries; if they are able to reduce their emissions, they can sell credits to other industries or “bank” them to use against future increases. The system has been successful, but it depends o n accurate monitoring of emissions and effective regulation.

Concerned about the mixed record on pollution control, the ECE set up ;I Working Group on Abatement Strategies in 1988 to take a new and broader look at the problem. In the report that i t presented in 1991, this group came out in favor of a more flexihle approach that recognized the different levels of risk faced by different environments.IR In other words, instead of requiring set per- centage reductions in emissions, pol- icymakers should set reduction tar- gets based on the effects of pollutants on different environments. To make this work, the states involved would have to determine the critical loads ilnd critical levels within their bor- ders and then compare actual acid deposition with those criteria. (Criti- cal loads and levels are essentially thresholds for the effects of environ- mental pollution. The box on this page discusses the differences be- tween source-based and effects- hitsed control strategies in more detail.) This would provide policy- makers with a more precise idea of the relationship between the largest sources of pollution and the most sensitive environments, thereby al- lowing them to focus on reducing

emissions in those states or regions causing the worst problems.

While the first two protocols to the LRTAP convention required percent- age emissions reductions, when dis- cussions began on the development of a second sulfur protocol in 1989, it was agreed that there should be an effects-based approach aimed ulti- mately at keeping acid deposition below critical loads. Although the same methods would be used to reduce emissions, the targets would be

based on the extent to which critical loads were actually being exceeded in the different parts of Europe.

The protocol on further reduction of sulfur emissions that was signed i n 1994 by 21 countries and the Euro- pean Union (the fifth protocol to the LRTAP convention) requires ratifying states to reduce the gap between exist- ing deposition loads and the corre- sponding critical loads by 60 percent by 2000 (this has become known iis 60 percent gap closure). To reach this

SOURCE-BASED VERSUS EFFECTS-BASED METHODS OF POLLUTION CONTROL

lthough setting emissions stan- A duds and introducing tradable pollution permits have been useful in controlling air pollution, they fail to take into account the complexity of the environmental impacts of the pollutants involved. For example, soils with a high buffering capacity (the chemical ability to neutralize acids) can tolerate higher levels of acid deposition than soils with a low buffering capacity. At the same time. some soils are affected more by sulfur deposition and others by nitrogen deposition. Not only are dif- ferent environments susceptible to the effects of pollutants to different de- grees, individual pollutants do not act in isolation from one another-they have different effects depending upon the proportions in which they are pre- sent. It is also important to recognize that the major pollutants involved in iicidification cause other problems as well, such as haze and reduced visibili- ty, ground-level ozone, and distur- bances to ecosystems. Because all pol- lutants need to be seen as part of a wider problem, a broader strategic approach is needed.

The growing realization of this in recent years has led to a trend away from source-based percentage reduc- tions and toward effects-based policies revolving around the twin concepts of critical loads and critical levels. A criti- cal load has been defined as “a quanti- tative estimate of an exposure to one or more pollutants below which signifi- cant harmful effects on specified sensi- tive elements of the environment do not occur, according to present knowl-

edge.”’ Put iinothcr way, it ineiisures the sensitivity ol‘ different enviroii- ments by indicating how much expo- sure to pollution they can tolerate before damage occurs. Critical loads vary considerably from onc site to another. Critical levels, on thc other hand, are defined as “thc conceiitr;i- tions of pollutants in the atniosphcri: above which direct adverse efrects on receptors such as plants, ecosystems, or materials may occur. according to pre- sent know I edge .”?

The effects-based system is still under development, and critical loads for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides. ozone, and animonia still need to be agreed on, but preliminary results make it clear that the most sensitive ccosys- tenis (where critical loads are lowest) are in central and northern Europe. especially Sweden, Finland, northern Britain, and northern Germany. In some areas, sulfur deposition is 10, 20, o r ( i n one case) 60 times greater than the crit- ical load. As a result, in some parts of Europe, it may take emissions reduc- tions of 90 percent (for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides) and more then SO percent (for ammonia) t o bring acidity below the critical load.’

I. See D. Stunners uncl P. Bndwi i , cda.. EirnJpr ’.\ Envininmenr: 7he thhris As.te.smnicnr (Liixeni- hnurg: Ofice for Otficial Puhliciitionh of the Fhri)- p a n Communities. 1995). 544. 2. Ihid. 3. G . Lovhtad et at., ”Deposition of Sulphiir imd Nitrogen in h e Nordic Countries: Present and Future,”Anibici 21 (1991): 330-47.

Volume 40 Number 3 ENVIRONMENT 43

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

goal, European countries will have to reduce their sulfur emissions from as little as 38 percent (in Russia) to as much as 80 percent (in Austria, Fin- land, and France) and 90 percent (in Germany) within the next two years.19 The ultimate goal, of course, is 100 percent gap closure.

In 1996, work began on a sixth pro- tocol that will not only take the same critical-loads approach but also reflect multiple effects and multiple pollu- tants. That is, i t will attempt to deal with the problems of acidification, air quality, and ground-level ozone jointly through reductions in nitrogen oxides, ammonia, and VOCs. The target date for completing the protocol was to have been late 1997, but the negotia- tions involve such a significantly dif- ferent approach-and a different way

of calculating the necessary reduc- tions-that work was still under way as this article went to press.2o

The Future

Whatever the achievements of the LRTAP convention, at least three sig- nificant problems remain. First, this convention has always focused pri- marily on Europe. Canada and the United States have tended to have a peripheral relationship to the ECE, being involved in it largely because of the benefits of scientific collaboration and the political peculiarities of their own bilateral relationship. (Canada used the ECE to put pressure on the United States to reduce its acidifying pollution, while the United States could not risk the political embarrass-

Trees killed by ucid pollution near Litvinov, the Czech Republic

44 ENVIRONMENT

ment of withdrawing from the negoti- ations or not cooperating with Ihe ECE.2') Because the 1990 amend- ments to the United States' Clean Air Act largely removed the tensions between the two countries, however, the significance of the ECE to them has declined. Furthermore, the Unired States is skeptical of the critical-loads approach, arguing that it is incompati- ble with the system of tradable emis- sions permits introduced by the Clean Air Act amendments.*? For these rca- sons, Europe and North America may increasingly part company in their efforts to control acid pollution.

The second problem pertains Io Russia and Eastern Europe. While the changes that have come to these coun- tries since the end of the cold war hilve brought stronger controls on air pollu- tion and reductions in industrial emis- sions, these reductions appear to be largely the result of economic decline and the closing of inefficient, polluting factories. Russia and Eastern Europe now have two possibly conflicting objectives: They must clear the way for accelerated economic growth lo improve living conditions for their people, and they must make the invest- ments in pollution control that will allow this to happen without increased emissions. Failure to control pollution would compromise the aspirations of several Eastern European states to join the European Union. In late 1995, the EU began looking into ways of harmo- nizing environmental standards across current and potential members, a process that has included biannual meetings with representatives from the nine aspiring entrants from Eastern Europe. As of 1996, however, ques- tions were still being raised about the amount of work that remained,?3 and environmental issues could beconie ;L

major obstacle to EU membership for several Eastern European states when negotiations begin later this year.

At a meeting of Eastern Europcan environment ministers that was hosted by the ECE in April 1993, an Environ- mental Action Programme for Central

April 1998

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4

and Eastern Europe was adopted with the intention of helping Eastern Euro- pean governments set priorities as they reorient policy, spending, and institu- tional structures relating to the envi- ronment. The program, which was drawn up by the World Bank and OECD. initially emphasized the effects of pollution on human health but has since shifted to more wide- ranging environmental concerns.24 A channel of a different kind is being explored in Poland: The United States, Switzerland. Finland, and France have agreed to write off part of the coun- try’s national debt if it invests the cor- responding amount in projects that include reductions in transboundary air pollution.2s

The final problem with the LRTAP convention is that except as an exam- ple of international cooperation, it does little to resolve the emerging problems of acid pollution in Asian and Latin American countries, where the economic and political handicaps to taking action to control emissions are much greater. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions grew by about SO percent in countries such as India, China, South Korea, and Indonesia during the 1 9 8 0 ~ . ~ ~ Will agreement on action be reached as eas- ily in countries that are keen to devel- op their industrial base and that wish to avoid being handicapped by the additional costs of emission controls? Although the ECE member states have made significant progress toward reducing acid pollution, potentially much bigger problems are emerging in countries where solutions may not be so easy to fashion.

John McCormick is an associate professor in the Departnieiit id P”olitica1 Science at Indiana University. l i e iniiy be coillacled at Indiana University, 425 Uni- versity Roulevad, Indianapolis, IN 46202 (telephone: R 17-274-4006; c-mail: jmcconiiiOiupui.edu).

NOTES

I K. A. Smith, Air and Rain; The Beginnings of a (‘hmicu/ ~l in inro/ogv (London: Longmans, Green, IH7?).

2. For a detailed discussion of the politics of clean air legislation in Britain in the 1950s. see E. Ashby and M. Anderson, The Politics of Clem Air (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1981). chapter 9. 3. B. Lundbolm, “Interactions between Oceans and Terrestrial Systems,” in S. F. Singer, ed., Global Effec1.s of Environmental Pollulion (Dordrecht, the Nether- lands: Reidel, 1970). 4. This effort was called the Co-operative Technical Programme to Measure the Long-Range Transport of Air Pollutants. 5. OECD Environmental Directorate, The OECD Programme on hiIIg-RUnge Tmn.rpr,rt of Air Pollu- tunts: Summuq Report (Paris, 1977). 6. Bilateral Research Consultation Group on the Long-Range Transpolt of Air Pollutants, The k ing- Runge Trunsport if Air Pollurunls Problem in North America: A Preliminury Overview (Washington. D.C.: Canadian Embassy, 1979). A follow-up report was pub- lished in 1980. 7. I. McCormick, Acid Eurth: The Pulitics of Acid Pollution, 3rd ed. (London: Earthscan. 1997). 58-60,

8. See C. 1. Jackson, “A Tenth Anniversary Review of the ECE Convention on Long-Range Tranfiboundaly Air Pollution,” Internurional Envimnmental Affuirs 2. no. 3 (1990). 9. “Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution:’ final act. Geneva, 1979. 10. M. A. Levy. “European Acid Rain: The Power of Tote-Board Diplomacy,” in P. M. Haas, R. 0. Keohane, and M. A. Levy, eds.. Instirutiunsfur the Earth (Cam- bridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1993). I 1. McCormick, note 7 above. chapter 6. 12. ‘*Conference Says Abatement Programs Have Not Reduced Acidification Enough,” lnternutionul Envi- mnment Reponer 9, no. 6 (1986): 183-84. 13. National Acid Precipitation Program, 1992 Repon to Cungress (Washington, D.C., 1993), 12. 14. Estimates of damage costs are from Economic Commission for Europe, Economic Evuluntiun uf Ben- e f i s .f Abutin8 Nitrugen 0xide.s und Reluted Sub- stances, Draft report hy the secreturiat of the Executive Body of the Convention on Long-Range Transbound- ary Air Pollution (Geneva, 1995). Estimates of the cost of the EU directive on controlling emissions from large combustion plants are from G . Bennett, Dilemmus: Cuping with Envimnmenral Pniblerns (London: Earth- scan, 1992). 103-04. 15. D. Ehom, Atmospheric Pollution: A Glohul Prub- [em, 2nd ed. (Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell, 1992). 170-74. 16. See Levy, note I0 above. 17. Elsom, note 15 above. page 177. 18. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Reporr of the WrrkinR Gruup on Abutemenr Strutegies (Geneva. 199 I). 19. AcidNews 4, October 1994. 10. 20. Instead of fixed percentage reductions, variable reductions based on environmental factors would be required. 21. Levy, note 10 above. 22. Acid News 1 . February 1994, 13.

23. Financial 7imes Environmenrd Liability Repon 029, January 1996,7-8. 24. Financial nines Envimnmentd Liubility Rcport 025, September 1995.6-7. 25. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Envirunmenlal Peflormance Review: P u l d (Paris, 1995).

26. United Nations Environment Programme. Envirun- mentcil Data Reporr 1993-04 (Oxford, U.K.: Black- well, 1993),Tahles 1.8 and 1.9.

x 7 1 Yesterdav.

Don Hmley. founder of The Waldm Wwdr P r o ~ c t Phoio Firm7 &he&

Famous B Historic Trees Bring History Alive!

Yesterday ... Henry k v i d Tnoreau moved to

Walden Woods, in Concord Massachusetts, 150 years ago. For over two years, he con-

templated man’s spiritual relationship with the natural

- . world. Today ... The red maple trees in Walden W a d s cast their shadows on the paths and ponds that inspired Thoreau Their seed has heen hand picked and grown into small, direct*ofkpring trees Each tree, and a complete planting kit, fi accompanied by a Certificate of Authen- ticity which 15 suitable for framing Wa(HanyaadThmallI

Tomorrow. .. You can own and plant your historic Walden

C a h ” Wm W& P d

Woods Red Maple and help AMERICAN FORESTS - the nation’s oldest nonprofit conservation organization - continue our work to prewrve trees and forests, far into the

twentyfirst century Your purchase will also benefit The Walden Woods f‘rojecr. a non- profit group engaged in protecting Walden Wwds and Thoreau’s legacy.

AMERICAN FORESTS Famous & Historic Tret 8555 Plummer Road ]acksonville, Florida 32219

call 1-904-766-3093

Volume 40 Number 3 ENVIRONMENT 45

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ities

] at

12:

21 1

8 A

ugus

t 201

4