cycles. It is a well-known phenomenon that temperatures in large metropolitan areas are consistently warmer than in the countryside and fogs are more frequent. This is an example of local modification. The bulk of the air resource is in a relatively shallow envelope six miles in depth (the troposphere). There are global, regional and local air movements within the troposphere which make up nature's ventilation system, modified by topography, climate and latitude. If the mass of air pollutants continues to build up, the global capacity of the wind systems to disperse pollutants may be seriously impaired. Thus modern man in the United States and other industrialized nations has created a menace. It lurks in the very air he breathes and takes an increasing toll in lives, health and the economy. It is seriously disturbing the delicate balance that has existed in the environment, of which man is becoming a ruthlessly disrupting factor. He worships at the shrine of personal cleanliness, creature comforts and new techniques while surrounding himself with an environment of ugliness, filth and poison. What has been done in recent years to clean up America's polluted air? The federal government did not move into the picture until 1955, when legislation was enacted creating a federal program. The Public Health Service of the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare was authorized to conduct research on the problem and provide technical assistance to state and local governments. The 1960 amendments to the basic federal act provided for a special study of motor vehicle pollution. The federal program under this law brought more scientific knowledge to bear on causes and effects. The public attention was becoming more aware that polluted air was a national problem, was damaging to the public health and welfare, and that control of many of the larger sources of poison was feasible. Although knowledge about the causes, effects, scope and control techniques was steadily advancing, there was little done by local, state or federal levels of government to clean up the air. The federal program was research-oriented. Outside of Los Angeles and the state of California, there were few local or state programs. Those in existence were basically ineffective. The federal Clean Air Act of 1963, however, broadened the scope of the federal program. It authorized federal grants-in-aid directly to state and local air pollution control agencies to establish or improve their programs and empowered the federal government to take necessary action to abate interstate air pollution situations. The Clean Air Act also expanded research, technical assistance and training activities of the U.S. Public Health Service. It directed the Service to do research and development on motor vehicle and sulfur oxide pollution from coal and oil burning in power generation and other industries, and to develop criteria on air pollution effects on human health and property. The 1965 amendments to the Clean Air Act authorized the Secretary of HEW to establish standards to control emissions into the air from new motor vehicles and to investigate and develop methods of controlling new air pollution problems. In 1966, further amendments enlarged the grants-inaid program to states and localities to assist in maintaining control programs. The Congress also established a three-year authorization of $46 million for fiscal 1967 and $66 million and $74 million for fiscal years 1968 and 1969, respectively. Between 1955-63, federal funds expended on air pollution control programs had risen slowly from $2 million to about $11 million a year. But in the 196366 period, the total rose to $35 million a year. What Have the States Done? Sixteen years ago, the first state law dealing with air pollution was passed. Until 1963, when the Clean Air Act was passed, only 13 more states had enacted such laws. Since then, 32 more states have acted, so there are now 46 out of the 50 states with anti-air pollution statutes on the books. In 1961, the budgets for state air pollution control programs totaled only $2 million, of which California alone accounted for 57 percent. By 1968, 39 states were budgeting an aggregate $14.5 million, $7.5 million of which was in the form of federal grants-in-aid, according to the Dept. of HEW. While there was an improvement of state resources applied to the problem, the situation is still far from satisfactory in this respect. Moreover, there is wide variation among the states in the kind of agency assigned program responsibility, in standards and regulations, in enforcement and compliance procedures and punishment of wilful offenders by fines, jail or both. Although the Clean Air Act encouraged the formation of interstate compacts to aid in the control of air pollution, very few states have acted. New York and New Jersey were inspired to act because of the serious smog over the New York City metropolitan area. Illinois and Indiana are negotiating a compact and so are West Virginia and Ohio. The New York-New Jersey compact, which is furthest along, seeks legislative authority to set air quality standards and to make and enforce regulations. An innovation in this proposed compact would provide for both local and federal representation. What Have the Cities Done? Since the late 1800s, there have been many local smoke abatement ordinances passed by hundreds of communities, dealing with this aspect of air pollution as a nuisance. Beginning with Los Angeles, recent years have seen a greater community effort to attack poisoned air, not merely smoke. By late 1968, according to the U.S. Public Health Service, there were about 133 city, county and multi jurisdictional air pollution regulatory agencies in operation and located in 35 states serving more than 63 million people. The total 1968 budget for all these local administrative areas was about $26.5 million, of which $11.0 million was in federal grants-in-aid. This represented a sizable rise over the $2.6 million budgeted in 1952. The largest single local agency budget was that of Los Angeles County-$3.7 million. Control agencies in California made up 38 percent of total 1965 local air pollution control budgets in the nation. The seven largest agencies made up 58 percent of the total local air pollution control budget for the nation. While the towns and cities are now doing more about the problem than a decade ago, much of the larger urban areas still lack programs. There are manpower problems, both in funds available to hire personnel at adequate salaries and trained manpower. The U.S. Public Health Service estimates that at least a fourfold expansion of programs is required to do a reasonably good job in terms of money and staff. Moreover, there is a lack of definition of the full range of pollutants to be monitored and controlled. There is less than adequate support by local officials for a sustained all-out air cleanup effort. As with the states, regulations are too permissive, enforcement is weak or lacking and long-range planning is neglected. The Air Quality Act of 1967 took the nation another step toward cleaning up its air. It directed the Department of HEW to map out the broad atmospheric areas of the United States and to designate air quality control regions crossing state lines and based on meteorological, technical, social and political factors. The newly-established National Center for Air Pollution Control administers the federal program and is directed by the 1967 Act to develop and publish air quality criteria, which defines the extent to which dirty air is harmful to people and living things and damaging to property. The National Center is also directed to develop information on control and prevention of air pollution. With federal criteria, the states are expected to develop air quality standards and place them into effect in the air quality control regions, their plans being subject to review by the Secretary of HEW before approval, and before federal grants-in-aid can be made to state and local control agencies and to regional air quality programs. If the state fails to do an adequate job, the Secretary of HEW can institute abatement action. The Act also allows federal intervention to abate crisis situations which threaten. In addition, the 1967 Air Quality Act expends federal programs regulating motor vehicle pollution by providing federal grants to states to develop adequate inspection programs, and provides for registration of fuel additives and intensified efforts to control air pollution from federal facilities. The Act enables setting up various advisory groups, including a 15-member Presidential Air Quality Advisory Board, and special studies on jet aircraft emissions, the need for national emission standards and manpower and training needs. The National Center for Air Pollution Control has designated atmospheric areas of the 48 continental states-two on the Pacific Coast, the Rocky Mountains, Great Plains, Great Lakes-Northwest, Mid Atlantic Coast, Appalachian and South Florida areas. It is now in the process of defining air quality control regions. Air quality criteria for particular matter and sulfur oxides are supposed to be ready for publication this year, that for carbon monoxide by late 1968, photochemical oxidants and atmospheric fluorides in 1969, with preliminary work under way on other classes of pollutants. New and stiffer emission standards on motor vehicles were published by HEW earlier this year for 1970 models. By these means, it is possible to move in with federal, state and local programs to control poisoned air emitted from stationary sources, factories, power stations, oil refineries and the like. One of the large national problems posed by emissions from motor vehicles is that while it is possible to reduce pollution, the continually increasing numbers of cars will result in the total amount of pollutants increasing in direct ratio. Unfortunately, Congress did not see fit to retain the provision in the 1967 Act calling for a research program in alternative low-pollution vehicle systems, such as the electric-powered car or an improved steam driven vehicle or a gas turbine engine. The problem with respect to electric cars is to find an energy source, either a battery or fuel cell which operates on chemicals, which will enable faster pickup, higher speeds and longer periods between refueling. The problem with respect to steam driven vehicles -slow warm-up time, high water consumption and explosion hazards can be solved but will require additional engineering refinements and reduction of high costs per model. The use of gas turbines must first overcome high manufacturing costs and high fuel consumption. While industry is grudgingly accepting the disagreeable inevitability that there will be some kind of control over air pollution, it wants a major voice in setting the terms. Industry wants federal activities restricted to research and development, and it seeks federal tax writeoffs as well as state and local financial incentives for air pollution control equipment. Recently, the chairman of the board of Humble Oil Refining Company said to a meeting in Houston, Texas, that if industry did not voluntarily clean up its own mess "... in the near future our actions in this area will be spelled out by congressional legislation." The AFL-CIO, in its 1967 policy statement on air pollution, found that while the 1967 Act was a slight gain in the fight for clean air, the weaknesses of activities at all levels of government "must be rapidly corrected if the new and expanded programs are to have any real effect." Organized labor urged these amendments to the Air Quality Act: (1) Establish national emission standards governing the release of pollutants into the atmosphere from stationary sources. (2) Strengthen and streamline federal enforcement procedures. (3) Federal research to assist in developing efficient electric powered motor vehicles as an aid in reducing the largest and most rapidly growing source of pollution; (4) A thorough evaluation of the effects of the expansion of nuclear power on air and water pollution is needed. The policy statement also urged participation of all AFL-CIO affiliates in helping establish strong state and local air quality programs and opposition to any tax incentives to industry to help pay for costs of controlling air pollution in its own operations. The nation is only in the beginning of a long journey toward cleaning up its dirty air. The fight will be lost or won over the decision made by citizens in the big cities, the towns and the villages: Have the people had enough foul air and are they ready to demand a tough and sweeping program to clean it up? The continental United States is favored with a general abundance of rainfall and yet suffers from a growing crisis in water. Unless the nation moves soon towards rational planning in the conservation and use of its water resources and acts to end man-made pollution, the economic and social consequences will be enormous. Regions of the nation now enjoying rapid growth will find they have built on sand; as they outrun usable water supplies, economic decline will set in. And social and political problems will follow. Many people now easily perceive the problem. The Middle Atlantic and New England states have been hit by a long cycle of low rainfall. Short water supplies are forecast in the areas of the Upper Missouri, the western Great Lakes, the Upper Arkansas-Red River, the Upper Rio Grande and Pecos, the Great Basin, the Colorado River Basin and western Gulf region. Severe shortages lie ahead in the Pacific Southwest. In recent years, the easy assurance that the nation had plenty of water has been dealt a fatal blow by the postwar population upsurge, the concentration of more and more people in supercities, the expanding uses of water, the proliferation of human and industrial wastes reducing the available clean supplies and by the surging demand for outdoor water-based recreation opportunities. Grave concern was expressed in the 1961 summary report of the Senate Select Committee on Natural Water Resources: In comparison with most other nations, the United States is blessed by a general abundance of water. An annual average of about 30 inches of precipitationin the form of rain and snow-falls on the surface of the 48 continental states.. This produces a runoff of about 4.4 trillion gallons a day. With this kind of endowment, why is there a growing water problem-local, regional and national? In the first place, nature takes most of the 4.4 trillion gallons of precipitation by processes outside human control. After evaporation from water and land surfaces and withdrawals by vegetation and for human use have taken their toll, there remain only about 8 inches of the 30 inches of precipitation, or a runoff of 1.1 trillion gallons per day of water that can be considered as potentially usable. It is a fixed amount. But even the 1.1 trillion gallons per day is not available for human uses in even proportion across the country. The basic reasons for this are: 1. Large variations among regions in the amount of annual precipitation. 2. Natural and man-made pollution. 3. Failure to provide facilities for development and conservation of water for present and future demands. After all these factors have been assessed, the U. S. does not have an available supply of more than a trillion gallons of water a day, but only 515 billion gallons a day. In 1900, Americans used 8 percent of this supply. By 1960, they were using 60 percent, and by 1965, nearly 70 percent. Over this period, daily per capita use increased at twice the rate of population growth. Sometime in the late 1970s, there will be in excess of 225 million Americans, of whom 165 million will be depending on surface water supplies. More than 75 percent will be living in vast supercities occupying hardly more than 1 percent of the nation's total land area. At least 200 million persons will be served by sewage systems. Up to 70 percent will probably be located in the 31 states east of the Mississippi River. Hardly more than 5 percent of the population will be supported by direct agricultural production. Longer range water requirement forecasts indicate a possible withdrawal of nearly 900 billion gallons a day by the year 2000. “. the situation with respect to the nation's water resources indicates that serious problems lie ahead. Adequate measures must be adopted to deal with situations which can now be foreseen to make sure that shortages of water will not control the future destiny of the nation." 29-061069-15 According to many water experts, the nation's water requirements will climb steeply beyond the 515 billion gallons now available. Recent estimates suggest that by the next decade water demand may aggregate well over 600 billion gallons per day. To bring the problem into common focus: Presently a one-family house with four people living in it uses 550 gallons of water a day; a large apartment complex with 300 apartments housing 1.000 people requires 50,000 gallons a day; a 20-story office building with 200 persons a floor will use 120.000 gallons of water daily and a 400-bed hospital about 100,000 gallons a day. To produce a ton of paper out of pulpwood, 38,000 to 184.000 gallons of water are required; a ton of processed aluminum needs 32.000 gallons; a ton of synthetic rubber, 660,000 gallons; to refine one gallon of crude oil, 44 gallons of water are needed. Each automobile coming off the assembly line has been the product of a process using 16,000 gallons of water and each new truck or bus, 20.000 gallons. Whereas in 1954 nearly 60 percent of total U.S. water requirements were for irrigation, it is indicated that by 1980 this use will require less than one-third of total national requirements. Nearly two-thirds of national needs will fall in the area of industrial uses (steam power cooling and manufacturing). It is perfectly clear that the increasing population, the jamming of people into a few great metropolitan areas, the expansion of water use stimulated by revolutionary changes in technology all combine to exert a major drain on water supply. The water supply itself is governed by the impersonal operations of the hydrologic cycle. Simply stated, the hydrologic cycle is the eternal circulation of water from the mother reservoir, the ocean, to the atmosphere, then over land and back again to the ocean through either surface or subsurface flows. All water resources projects affect the water cycle in some fashion. Thus a comprehensive rather than single-purpose approach to such planning is indispensable. The essential of a dependable water supply is that it is available when needed, in the amount needed and of a quality which permits the widest possible range of human uses. The first difficulty encountered is variability. National averages are misleading, as water short areas can grimly testify. While the U.S. as a whole has a yearly average of 30 inches of precipitation, there are large deviations between geographic regions. Annual precipitation rates are equal to or greater than the national average from the Mississippi Valley eastward, in the Rockies, Sierra and Cascade mountain ranges and along the Pacific Coast from Washington to south-central California. From the Great Plains to the eastern slopes of the Rockies, precipitation becomes progressively less than |