The Montreal Protocol, finalized in 1987, is a global agreement to protect the stratospheric ozone layer by phasing out the production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances (ODS). The Montreal Protocol has proven to be innovative and successful, and is the first treaty to achieve universal ratification by all countries in the world. Leveraging this worldwide participation, the Montreal Protocol has spurred global investment in alternative technologies, many developed by U.S. companies, and placed the ozone layer, which was in peril, on a path to repair. The ozone layer filters out harmful ultraviolet radiation, which is associated with an increased prevalence of skin cancer and cataracts, reduced agricultural productivity, and disruption of marine ecosystems. The United States ratified the Montreal Protocol in 1988 and has joined four subsequent amendments. The United States has been a leader within the Protocol throughout its existence, and has taken strong domestic action to phase out the production and consumption of ODS such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons. With full implementation of the Montreal Protocol, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that Americans born between 1890 and 2100 are expected to avoid 443 million cases of skin cancer, approximately 2.3 million skin cancer deaths, and more than 63 million cases of cataracts, with even greater benefits worldwide. The Montreal Protocol’s Scientific Assessment Panel estimates that with implementation of the Montreal Protocol we can expect near complete recovery of the ozone layer by the middle of the 21st century. The United States was instrumental in negotiating the Montreal Protocol. In the 1970s, evidence began to surface that CFCs, which were used in everyday household products such as air conditioners and refrigerators, were depleting the Earth’s protective ozone layer and increasing the level of ultraviolet radiation reaching our planet’s surface. The United States, along with allies and stakeholders, advocated for strong controls on the production and consumption of ODS, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons; promoting international cooperation; and building consensus to phase out ODS. The U.S. Senate unanimously approved U.S. ratification of the Montreal Protocol in 1988, and the treaty has continued to receive bipartisan support over the past thirty years. Over its history, the Montreal Protocol has received support from the vast majority of U.S. industry as well as environmental advocates. The full text of the Protocol, information on its institutions and past actions, and related publications are available through the UN Environment Montreal Protocol Ozone Secretariat website. KIGALI AMENDMENT TO THE MONTREAL PROTOCOLOn October 15, 2016, Parties to the Montreal Protocol adopted the Kigali Amendment to phase down production and consumption of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) worldwide. HFCs are widely used alternatives to ODS such as hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which are already controlled under the Protocol. This amendment creates market certainty and opens international markets to new technology that is better for the environment, without compromising performance. It calls on all countries to gradually phase down their production and consumption of HFCs in the coming decades using the flexible, innovative, and effective approaches the Montreal Protocol has used for three decades. Global stakeholders endorsed adoption of the Kigali Amendment, including most of the major U.S. companies working in related sectors. ADDITIONAL RESOURCESFurther information on the science of the Stratospheric Ozone Layer can be found on the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) websites, and information on the U.S. domestic implementation of the Montreal Protocol can be found on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) website.
Quick Overview
Detailed Summary: Clean Air Act ResultsFor more than forty-five years the Clean Air Act has cut pollution as the U.S. economy has grown.
Because of the Act, Americans breathe less pollution and face lower risks of premature death and other serious health effects.A peer-reviewed EPA study issued in March 2011 found that the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 are achieving large health benefits that will grow further over time as programs take full effect. This chart shows the health benefits of Clean Air Act programs that reduce levels of fine particles and ozone.
Environmental damage from air pollution is reduced.
The value of Clean Air Act health benefits far exceeds the costs of reducing pollution.
New cars, trucks, and nonroad engines use state-of-the-art emission control technologies.EPA has required dramatic reductions in emissions from new motor vehicles and non-road engines - such as those used in construction, agriculture, industry, trains and marine vessels -- through standards that require a combination of cleaner engine technologies and cleaner fuels. In 2013, EPA estimated the benefits of five key standards to cut emissions from vehicles, engines and fuel to 2030.
New power plants and factories use modern pollution control technology.
Power plants have cut emissions that cause acid rain and harm public health.
Interstate air pollution has been reduced.Further reductions in power plant pollution have been achieved by state and EPA efforts to cut interstate air pollution, achieving additional public health benefits and helping downwind states meet health-based air quality standards for fine particles and ozone.
Mobile and industrial pollution sources release far less toxic air pollution than in 1990.
Actions to protect the ozone layer are saving millions of people from fatal skin cancers and eye cataracts.
The scenic vistas in our national parks are clearer due to reductions in pollution-caused haze.
EPA has taken initial steps under the Act to limit emissions that cause climate change and ocean acidification.
The Act has prompted deployment of clean technologies, and has helped provide impetus for technology innovations that reduce emissions and control costs.
<Learn more about the CAA and the economy> References1 Pope, C.A. III, E. Majid, and D. Dockery, 2009. “Fine Particle Air Pollution and Life Expectancy in the United States,” New England Journal of Medicine, 360: 376-386. 2 EPA, Air Toxics Web Site, About Air Toxics. (For the latest information about reducing air toxics, see the webpage, Reducing Emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants. 3 EPA, Air Toxics Web Site, Rules and Implementation. 4 Mobile emissions estimates are based on modeling runs conducted using the MOVES2010 highway vehicle emissions modeling system and the NONROAD2008 emissions model for nonroad sources, as well as historical and projected activity and emission rate data for aircraft, marine vessels and locomotives. 5 Estimates of the change in national benzene emissions are based on benzene ambient air monitoring data in EPA's Air Quality System (U.S. EPA, 2010), using the subset of benzene monitoring stations that have sufficient data to assess trends since 1994. 6 Mercury emissions data for 1990, 2005, and 2008 featured in table 7 in the EPA 2008 National Emissions Inventory, Version 2 Technical Support Document, June 2012 draft. 7EPA, (April 2012) Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks; 1990-2010. What name was given to the studies that focused on how work conditions affect productivity multiple choice question?Industrial-organizational psychology is the branch of psychology that applies psychological theories and principles to organizations. Often referred to as I-O psychology, this field focuses on increasing workplace productivity and related issues such as the physical and mental well-being of employees.
What is the name of the job screening examination that is designed to assess whether a candidate will likely be dishonest on the job?Overt integrity tests (also referred to as clear-purpose tests) are designed to directly measure attitudes relating to dishonest behavior.
What does industrial psychology focus on?Industrial and organizational (I/O) psychologists focus on the behavior of employees in the workplace. They apply psychological principles and research methods to improve the overall work environment, including performance, communication, professional satisfaction and safety.
What specific field studies human relations in the context of the workplace such as how relationships at work affect satisfaction and performance?Organizational psychology is a discipline interested in how the relationships among employees affect those employees and the performance of a business. This includes studying worker satisfaction, motivation, and commitment.
|