While the early to mid 70s saw many hostile work environments exposing employees on the sly, employers today are required to alert employees to the potential for health risks upon hiring.

Daily exposure to even small hazards can create a health risk that you have a right to have remedied under certain circumstances. If your employer did not tell you about a potential health risk upon hiring there are legal actions that you can take in order to secure a cleaner work environment.

There are some industries which are seemingly inevitably hostile to work in. For example, an oil change station deals in used oil and other products that have been shown to cause cancer, not to mention the toll the spilled oil takes on the natural environment. Other workplace issues can involve inadequately recycled air such as some airlines still use today despite the attempts to clean up the breathability of plane air throughout the industry.

The most recent battles for a cleaner work environment include the battle for a smoke free workplace. Secondhand smoke exposure has been shown to have a significant impact on the health of workers, especially those that have worked in the environment for a long period of time. Restaurant workers, casino workers, and those who work in buildings with “smoking rooms” are generally considered to be at the highest risk.

The legislation that has banned smoking from these industries has come from the state level and is almost never a decision made by the company or industry itself. Smoking bans have been sweeping across the nation one state at a time in an effort to give all workers the chance to minimize risks associated with their work environment.

Creating a safe work environment is low on the priority list for many companies. Production at a minimum cost is the name of the game and any additional expenditure that is devoted to employee comfort or safety is not in the budget. Many companies skate by on the minimum safety requirements allowed by law, which in reality are really not very healthy or safety conscious. Minimum health and safety requirements still expose employees to the hostile work environment that can cause serious risks to one’s health. Yet these are the requirements that they are mandated to stick to by law.

It’s not so easy to replace an income that provides for a family. It’s not easy to walk away from a hostile work environment and find a safer, cleaner place to work. This is a quandary that everyone from coal miners to fire fighters to casino workers have faced over the years.

Walking out on an income can cause more problems than it solves. When asbestos was found to be detrimental to shipyard workers and the families of the shipyards, the turnover rate went up only about ½ % because there was no way for the workers to replace the income and benefits that they needed for their family. Many of these workers and their family members ended up paying a high price for that income.

Stronger legislation that calls for vast improvements in hostile work environments is highly necessary. While governmental interference might not take care of all problems, forcing companies to accept their responsibility in providing a safe workplace for employees is essential. If they aren’t forced to clean up the work place it really won’t happen. There are too many companies that are currently in violation of the existing standards that face no consequences because employees are fearful of losing their jobs should they complain. There are too many companies that provide the bare minimum and offer only limited benefits to their employees who fall ill from the hostility of the work environment.

Making the necessary changes within high risk industries and creating safer and cleaner work environments is the beginning of an entire workplace revolution. These changes have already been shown to improve worker moral, increase productivity, and create solidarity between the company and employees within the companies that have taken a strong initiative to offer a safer workplace. People by nature are more likely to respond positively to being protected from environmental dangers related to their work when the company imposes safety standards that exceed the minimum requirements for workplace safety.

While it costs money to clean up a hostile work environment and it is not a quick fix, companies all over the world that have invested the money find that they experience a higher profitability all around. Everything from turnover to worker’s compensation claims and insurance costs decline while worker productivity increases. Employees who feel protected and cared about are more productive than employees who feel like they are nothing more than a meaningless number.

According to the EPA and other sources, there are more than 1,000 brand new environmental toxins introduced into our environment annually. Environmental toxins are responsible for more than 95% of diagnosed cancers. More than 3,000 environmental toxins are found in food and drinking water. Processed foods contain at least 9,000 varieties of toxic substances in the form of preservatives, chemically based solvents, and emulsifiers, which is not well digested or eliminated by the body.

A healthy American can have at least 400 various chemically based environmental toxins stored in their fat cells. Some Americans can have as many as 800 versions of toxic elements stored in their fat cells. These numbers are staggering considering that it was only about 50 years ago when most Americans had less than 300 toxins stored in their fat cells.

The biggest health problems that come with such toxic storage in the fat cells include everything from neurological disorders to obesity to reproductive disorders. Cancer, asthma, allergies, and metabolic issues can all be traced back to environmental toxins.

So how do you avoid these toxic environmental issues? For starters, change the foods you eat. Processed foods have a very high percentage of carcinogens in the form of chemicals. Cooking does not decrease the level of toxins found in processed foods, and thus sticking with natural raw and whole foods is much healthier than eating foods that are made from a box.

Organic foods help to eliminate a large percentage of environmental toxins. Pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides are found on at a minimum of 50% of food in North America. Some tests have revealed numbers as high as 95%. The chemically treated fruits, vegetables, and meats can hold onto the residue and become ingested despite washing before eating.

Just because it looks healthy doesn’t mean that it doesn’t house environmental toxins. Organic foods are at least 75% organically grown, eliminating a huge chunk of pesticides and other contaminants. Foods that are certified 100% organic are at least 99.5% organically grown. This means that you can eliminate one of the biggest sources of potentially deadly carcinogens from your daily consumption.

All farm raised salmon should be avoided. Farm raised salmon tends to hold a percentage of the contaminant known as polychlorinated biphenyls, which is a substance that is highly toxic to human health. The use of the substance has been outlawed but can still be found in many of the natural environments that are home to the fish that become meal to farm raised salmon.

When the salmon eat the fish meal, the PCB remains in their tissue and then remains in your when you eat the salmon. Only wild caught salmon should be considered, although many fish oils are much healthier than eating fish.

Daily use cleansers, antiperspirants, and even fabric softeners can hold heavy metals and other contaminants. Fortunately, the industries have caught onto the idea of selling plant based organic materials that are found in nature and have no heavy metals or other contaminants.

By using these products, you can reduce your daily contact with potentially dangerous environmental toxins by as much as 50%. If you also alter your diet to include only organically grown foods, you can further eliminate your risk exposure by another 30%. These two major changes can reduce your risk exposure by 80% as compared to daily exposure that most people face by simply eating processed foods and using daily products that are loaded with carcinogens.

There are some environmental toxins that are out of our individual control but can be changed through mass efforts. Buildings loaded with molds, asbestos, and other contaminants are still in existence and still threaten our general health. The contaminated air we breathe thanks to high emission production factories and high emission vehicles are still threatening our daily health.

A combination of personal responsibility and concerted public efforts can help decrease these threats through stricter regulation and reduced use. With a dedicated effort to reduce the output of environmental toxins, we can all band together to improve our health while helping the planet live a longer, healthier natural life.

Using environmental science articles to gauge our progress in the environmental race can be filled with conflicting messages. While our progress is working on commendable, we are very far from where we need to be. Some of the current environmental articles praise our progress, as though we have somehow arrived because we are finally paying attention to the fact that our human activity has been destroying the world. As our level of destruction increases, there is a call to action for every member of society.

Recycling, changing buying habits, and living in a more conscientious manner is all part of changing the fate of the world, and the information reflected in environmental science articles either encourages or discourages the general public from becoming more conscientious.

When the information presented makes it seem like we are progressing nicely, environmental activism goes down. When the information reflected makes it seem as though we are struggling to combat pollution effects and natural resource harvesting, environmental activism increases. Thus, the information contained in environmental science articles can alter the state of conservation and environmental awareness.

This naturally poses the question should there be responsible reporting in such articles? If we want to see an improvement in conservation, environmental awareness, and efforts to create a healthier planet we can report the negative aspects regarding the state of the planet. Yet the advancements we make are worthy of reporting as well. Is there a way to report the positive while stressing the need for more concerted efforts for increased environmental awareness and conservation?

When environmental science articles reflect all aspects of the state of the planet the general public responds with a sense of honorable duty toward the environment while recognizing and celebrating the achievements that we have been able to attain. With every passing day, there are new developments that help the planet and there are developments which harm the planet. The best way to counterbalance the natural ebb and flow of public interest is to offer up a balanced view of the state of the world.

Who reads the majority of environmental science articles? Some of the more technical articles are aimed at the scientific community. These articles are generally highly technical and offer the scientific community an accurate report on progress, failures, ideas, and potential.

General articles are usually consumed by the public. The most read headlines by the general public include information articles that point out damage that most have not considered. When a headline reads as a potential disaster, curious people read the article. When the headlines read of promising new developments, fewer people read the articles. Does this play to human nature? Is it more likely to attract the attention of the public by playing up the negative headlines? Probably.

As a society we tend to focus on problems rather than progress. When progress happens, we often move on to the next thing on our agenda list. When problems face us, we look toward the government to focus on such problems. This can be present difficulties for the scientific community that wishes to reach the general public. We want the government to implement plans, actions, and regulations that will preserve the planet, but few people want to really put the effort into their own personal responsibility when it comes to ecological issues.

Using the environmental science articles to encourage the public to engage in their own conservation and environmental awareness in their personal life could be done without much effort. However, we have to keep the issues on the forefront of the minds of the people.

Without the headlines, the dramatization, and the playing up of the negative it is hard to get the attention of the general public. Keeping the public informed with honesty presents a very unique challenge for writers of environmental science articles. It is a challenge that a great many writers are meeting effectively.

The history of air pollution is a long and involved one. From the Middle Ages and beyond, there have been issues regarding air pollution that have proven that air quality is affected by nearly every substance that we insist on burning. Coal burning created smog, and its associated health problems, since the Middle Ages. The 18^th through the 19^th centuries saw serious health effects on the environment thanks to the burning of coal. Smog is certainly far from a new problem, and in our environment pollution still plagues the cities and towns of the world.

Water pollution is yet another plague that compounds the health of the natural world. Water pollution contaminates everything from the sea life to the sea grasses and flora that support the sea life. Our waters have become so polluted that fish harvesting to swimming have become significantly dangerous. The Hudson River became so polluted that the EPA banned the eating of all sea life harvested from the river in the 70s and 80s at various points.

Moreover, the 80s saw an influx of trash along the shoreline from dumping of medical waste, causing hypodermic needles to collect along the East Coast shorelines. Water pollution threatened the health of every sea creature and child along the country’s oceans.

Water pollution reached levels that were so high that the natural aquatic environment suffered great damage that lead to a major movement to “Save the Bay.” The Chesapeake Bay lost most of its natural grasses, which hurt the blue crab and oyster populations. This cut into the watermen’s ability to produce a reasonable living while also cutting sea life populations down to dangerously low levels. It took nearly a decade of concerted effort to reproduce the sea grasses that were demolished through human activity. Boating, dumping, and overharvesting all played a role in reducing the bay’s ability to filter the pollutants and produce healthy grasses.

Land pollution and water pollution are interconnected. Land pollution is a hazardous form of environment pollution that affects everything from our drinking water to our crops to our natural ecosystems. Land pollution can be caused by runoff from the roadways, hazardous chemicals that most households use on a regular basis, and construction sites. Natural waste can also cause environment pollution that affects our ground water, making it highly dangerous to drink unfiltered. Microbes can enter the digestive tract and cause illness. These microbes can come from unprocessed waste that can seep into the groundwater and cause serious implications.

Environment pollution that comes from land pollution is a serious problem for natural ecosystems. Mining can cause the destruction of trees, streams, and the life that is supported by these elements. As the ecosystem is destroyed, the entire ecosystem from insects to large animals find that they do not have enough food or drinkable water and starve to death. As with mining, these effects can happen from the runoff thanks to construction sites.

Chemicals and even sediment disruption can impact the land in unimaginable ways. What looks like a simple construction project can have ramifications from the immediate natural environment to the surrounding environment.

Environment pollution is on the rise. With more construction, industrial pollution, ground water threats, and air pollution causes, nearly everything we do has an environmental impact. Environment pollution is a chronic, widespread problem that seems no longer containable. Our cars, our electricity needs, and our housing needs all contribute to the destruction of our natural environment.

It is difficult to predict exactly how much destruction will be caused over the next ten years, but it has already been proven that the predictions from just five years ago were woefully inadequate and our destructive environment pollution is growing faster than our remedies. Saving the planet from this perpetual destruction requires immediate action on everyone’s part.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report has indicated that the global warming trend has reached what is feared to be the “tipping point.” This tipping point was determined to have been reached in the year 2005, despite the initial predictions that we would not see such catastrophic numbers until at least 2015. The 10 years of lost time make global warming one of the most urgent current environmental issues of today. The greenhouse gases that have been measured in the last few years have proven that the 455 parts per million readings are the result of environmental neglect.

The basic studies are convinced that the tipping point will mean that we will start to see some irreversible effects from global warming and that ecosystems around the world are already starting to suffer. This has unfortunately already been well illustrated by the polar bears’ plight to find food as their ice caps melt around them. The 1990s were a more environmentally friendly era as greenhouse gas emissions grew at a rate of less than 1% annually.

Measurements since the year 2000 have shown that greenhouse gas emissions grew steadily at a rate of 3.5% annually. Simply put, policies that destroyed the planet but lined pockets were established throughout the early 2000s and now the greenhouse gases are at a dangerously high tipping point.

Global warming is one of today’s most pressing current environmental issues but it is far from the only one. The loss of our natural resources is of great concern to environmentalists. With nothing more than the population growth, the dwindling resources would have experienced a serious toll. Add to that the intentional destruction of resources and we are soon facing crisis level depletion.

The Earth was created as a well balanced system that could maintain itself and sustain life. While progress has removed us from the daily dealings with the natural world, we still rely heavily on the natural balance of the Earth for survival. No matter how intense our technology becomes, there is no substitute for the balanced nature of the Earth.

For most of the planet, the natural resources that were once available even just twenty to fifty years ago have been significantly diminished. While there are companies that will plant a section of trees that have been cut down, they do not replace as much as they take.

A diminished natural resource issue can lead to all kinds of potentially dangerous situations including the loss of water for drinking and land for living upon. It is even speculated that there will be a shortage of food since farmers are being forced into sales for land development. If we buy up all the farms and put communities on them, where will our food come from?

Of course, pollution is one of today’s current environmental issues. Pollution of all kinds has a serious impact on the health of the planet, but also a serious impact on our health. The more we produce emissions from cars and industrial sources that help to make up ground level ozone, the less healthy the lungs of our society.

Pollution within the waters, some of which comes from runoff and some of which comes from illegal dumping, contaminates the entire ecosystem for miles around. Entire waterways can be affected, and our ground water is far from immune to the effects of waste disposal.

The fight against pollution has been a long one. From Giving a Hoot and picking up your own litter to restricting the use of pesticides and other chemicals, we all have the ability to contribute positively to the fight against pollution. While we can’t enforce our neighbor’s emissions, we can choose to ride our bike, recycle, and choose our activities based on the planet’s health. Every individual regardless of economic standing, origin of birth, or country of residence, plays a role in solving the current environmental issues of today, together we can improve the air quality standards.

Outdoor air quality standards are regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency and can be addressed regularly regardless of the high or poor quality of the air.

Indoor air quality standards simply state that all employers are required to make sure that every employee has freedom from recognized hazards which have the potential to contribute to or cause serious health implications or death. While these are some pretty low standards, they have to remain low in order for some jobs to exist. Outside the basic regulations of preventing serious illness and death, OSHA is unable to regulate basic air quality throughout most work environments.

Outdoor air quality standards are set by the EPA and require that pollution levels are measured, monitored, and tracked over a period of time in order to determine the levels of pollutants that are present or absent from any given air sample.

In 1990 the Clean Air Act was amended once again to include the measurement of air quality standards. This record keeping allows scientific communities to monitor the progress of air clean up projects. These measurements can also let the scientific community know when the pollution levels start to rise. This data is then accounted for over a period of time and the results can be interpreted in order to alter the clean air programs.

Over a period of three years, the air quality must not decline beyond a set point more than once per year, on average. This is the basic air quality standard set by the EPA, and is measured regularly. Over the past ten years there have been interesting developments when it comes to interpreting the results of the air quality readings. The strict regulations regarding vehicle emissions have shown a direct correlation to the decline of daily produced ozone, despite the fact that there needs to be tighter regulations to prevent the decline altogether.

The EPA set up two basic air quality standards when it comes to measuring the air quality. The primary pollutants are measured which are set to measure the potential health effects for individuals who are considered to be sensitive to air quality. The secondary standard is set up to measure the potential health effects on the general healthy population. The blend of primary standards and secondary standards has helped to set up the EPA’s air quality indexing system, alerting sensitive individuals to the possibility of ill health effects. This early, primary standard has helped to set up a systematic warning for sensitive individuals, which in turn helps them to live healthier lives through management and protection.

Jobs for the Environmental Protection Agency are plentiful, as they need qualified people to help keep an eye on many different aspects of their role in the community. The role of environmental compliance inspector is a role that is sorely needed throughout many diverse areas.

In order to fully explore careers in environmental science, it might be best to understand what type of education is required in order for employment to be considered. In most cases, an applicant will need an undergraduate degree as well as completion of the appropriate graduate degree. This requirement naturally varies as the job description applies.

The environmental sciences are a highly regarded area of study that can lead to some interesting job opportunities. You can find yourself in the position of an Ecotourism guide or a zoo keeper or you can aim for specialized work like a geological engineer or the ocean sciences. What makes environmental careers so interesting is the vast and broad spectrum of potential careers that they encompass.

There are numerous areas of law enforcement that are combined with environmental science careers. Fish and Wildlife and Fish and Game employ agents to oversea and enforce legal issues surrounding the natural environment including the animals that live within it.

Many of the scientific jobs such as ocean sciences, paleontology, zoology, or herpetology require higher education degrees and entail environmental sampling, testing, and a dedicated scientific effort to determine damage done to presenting alternatives to damaging practices.

These fields involve a great deal of collecting scientific data and applying it to everyday life. Scientific environmental careers are the backbone of developing environmentally sound products and practices.

It is possible to land a career in environmental science without a college degree. Many of these ecojobs include services like building the wind generators and solar panels that are required to offer the consumer green energy.

Green energy jobs are expected to grow considerably. If the green energy plans are done correctly, there will be jobs for the construction of alternative energy sources as well as the landscape repair needed after the construction is complete. It is speculated that green energy jobs will be the future of construction.

For any career in environmental sciences, the qualifications will change over the years. It is recommended to finish out the educational degree that corresponds with your field of interest. The environmental careers that are developing now will need fresh skills in another five years.

These ecojobs are essential to conservation efforts and protection efforts. Without these jobs the environmental issues that we face today would not receive its due attention, funding, or public understanding. Air quality testing , is a pefect example of a career in environmental science.

Nearly every career in environmental sciences involves educating. Whether you are educating just one person about the impact of their behavior or congress about the impact of the world’s behavior, evidence leads to education, which eventually leads to change.

Indoor air pollution is a serious problem. Most people spend between 80% to 90% of their lives living inside a building, whether it is an office or their home. This means that the air quality inside a home or building can pose a larger threat than outdoor air pollution, and according to some scientific studies, can be more deadly than highly polluted cities.

Indoor air quality testing is the only way to know exactly what types of pollutants are floating around the home or office. Air pollution inside a building can come from a wide array of different sources including the heating system, insulation that still has asbestos, cooking elements and Teflon, as well as the outdoor air pollution that enters the home. If you live with a smoker or work in a building that allows smoking even in a partitioned area, tobacco pollution can be added to the list.

Air quality testing within the workplace should be required, although technically it is not. Even in high risk industries, air quality testing is not a requirement for maintaining healthy standards. Many companies won’t test for air quality because it leaves a record of the company’s knowledge of indoor air pollutants. This means that they will then open themselves up to a wide variety of Worker’s Compensation claims. Requiring all office, manufacturing, and even health care buildings to perform routine air quality testing would eliminate potential health problems.

Natural pollutants like mold, fungus, and other irritants can cause significant health problems. Long term exposure to mold and fungus can cause serious illness, especially in those that are already suffering from respiratory ailments like asthma and COPD. Other natural pollutants, like radon, can be like living with a destructive ghost that causes asthma and other respiratory problems.

Most of us live with air pollution in our homes and offices and show no obvious ill effects. In many cases, there aren’t any detectable ill effects while in other cases there could be immediate or long term damage to one’s health. This is part of why there is a push for air quality testing throughout industries and it is recommended for homes. The potential effects can range from the development of asthma to respiratory failure in severe cases.

Fortunately, air quality testing isn’t terribly expensive or time consuming. One simple test can show you exactly how many different airborne pollutants are in your home. Once you know what you are facing it becomes much easier to deal with the problem. Good air quality inside the home is one of the most important elements of providing a safe home for your family. The cleaner the air that they breathe, the healthier they will be for life.

The air quality index has gone from a basic system that was once used to track measurements of the pollution levels in the air to a systematic public health information posting that can be found on numerous public access locales. Weather reports and internet bulletins provide constant updates to the public to inform individuals of the potential for health effects caused by poor air quality.

The EPA structured the system in a convenient color coded messaging system for easy public conversion. In the United States, the system is based on 6 colors, ranging from green to maroon. There are basic numeric measurements that correspond with each color. The numeric measurements start at 0 and go up through 500. The Environmental Protection Agency has set the standard for reasonable air quality to reach no higher than 100. 100 or below generally poses no real health threat to the general population.

Green air days measured by the air quality index are measured from 0 to 50, and mean that the air quality is really very good for outdoor activities and that there should not be any adverse effects from breathing outdoor out that day. Yellow, which is the next color, indicates that the numeric measurement ranges from 51 to 100 and is considered to be reasonable air quality. Yellow air days might affect just a few very sensitive individuals, but generally the population should not find the air quality to be problematic.

Orange air days fall on the numeric range from 101 to 150 and indicate that people with asthma, respiratory ailments or diseases, young people, the elderly, and those with health problems that increase sensitivity are likely to experience mild to moderate effects from the air quality. Any day that is listed at orange or beyond should result in limited time out doors and special care for those who are considered to be vulnerable.

151 to 200 on the numeric scale equals a red day on the air quality index. Red signifies that there could be significant problems for the sensitive or high risk groups and that the general healthy population are likely to experience at least some adverse effects from the quality of the air. Red air days come with an automatic recommendation to limit or restrict time outside.

The purple range on the air quality index indicates that the numerical scale is between 201 to 300 and the air is considered to be dangerous for everyone. The sensitive individuals of the population are going to need to stay indoors and take preventative action in order to reduce the chance of health effects caused by the air quality.

Last on the air quality index scale is maroon. Maroon indicates that the numerical number ranges in between 301 to 500 and is considered to be hazardous. Hazardous conditions mean that those who are sensitive to air quality are likely to suffer ill effects while healthy individuals are also likely to be affected by the poor air quality. Overall, anything over a red day is considered to be serious, but maroon is likely to kill those who are more sensitive to air quality.

The air quality index scale is derived from a mathematical equation once the area’s air quality is assessed. The equation includes a calculation of the initial, healthy air quality, the concentration of the pollutant levels, and a high and low index. The calculations equal a corresponding number on the air quality index scale and then converted to the color.

The air quality index has become a necessary tool around the world. While the color coding and numerical scale might be different, countries such as Singapore, Canada, the UK, and Hong Kong all have their own air quality index reporting system. In countries like Malaysia, the air quality index can result in several state of emergencies throughout the year should the quality decline sufficiently. Throughout the world, there are those countries with better air quality than some, although everywhere seems to have a struggle with smog air pollution. Soon it will be standard procedure in every single country to report the daily air quality for public health and safety.

The Environmental Protection Agency became adamantly involved an scientific communities joined forces to help reduce the smog back down to levels that were previously recorded. What this incident really drove home was that the aspects of air pollution could not be ignored, and there are still many places (including Los Angeles) that suffer from poor air quality days due to smog.

Smog air pollution is essentially a combination of various particle elements that have a chemical reaction with the sunlight. This is why smog is a much more prevalent problem in regions where the sun is stronger for most of the year and the temperature remains higher throughout most seasons.

Worldwide, London, Tehran, and Mexico City have historically suffered from smog air pollution. In the United States, Los Angeles, New York, and various cities in Pennsylvania have had death tolls from smog air pollution.

Smog is not a new phenomenon. In US history, 20 people in Donora, Pennsylvania died from smog. New York has had three major smog air pollution incidents in 1953, 1963, and 1966. Each incident was recorded to have killed between 160 and 250 people. The dangers of smog are serious, and every year there are a number of deaths and hospitalizations due to this ugly killer.

As early as 1306 smog that was related to the emissions caused by the burning of coal fires settled over London, which led to a relatively brief ban on coal fire burning. Of course, since coal was the main source of heat for so many, this ban was lifted as early as possible. While this is not the same type of smog air pollution that we see today, the health effects were just as great.

Later, London experienced what was deemed The Great Smog of 1952, which led to a 4 day death watch that killed over 4,000 people. The remaining 8,000 people who died from this particular smog event took up to six to eight weeks to pass away. This was a smog air pollution event that had catastrophic results.

Smog air pollution has the ability to create or irritate existing health problems. For instance, asthmatics and other people with lung diseases can suffer greatly during a high smog event and in some cases the potential for death is very high.

Living in a smog intense area is more likely to affect the overall health including causes lung diseases, causing interference with normal eye and nose functions, the removal and drying of the protective membranes found in the eyes, nose, and throat, and it can even decrease the body’s ability to fight off infections.

The hearts of many have suffered significantly from the effects of smog, including sudden onset heart attacks. Children and the elderly are greatly susceptible to smog related illnesses, and it is imperative that those living in high smog areas go out of their way to protect themselves.

So if this danger is lurking around us why have we not been able to remove the threat from our world? Basically because we like to drive, or feel we have to drive. We like the convenience of being able to hop in the car and run to the store to buy products that were made in high emission factories.

Car exhaust is a leading cause of smog. In short, smog air pollution is a “fog” of ground level ozone, which includes carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide. There are tiny particles of these pollutants that mix with other pollutants and then react in the presence of sunlight. When smog settles over an area it can seem like there is a fog of smoke that covers the ground.

While the standards for vehicle and industry emissions are still tighter than ever, they simply are not tight enough. If we want to eliminate the health effects that go hand in hand with smog air pollution then we have to investigate and support new forms of transportation and industry. The more we can limit the use of emission creating vehicles and factories or power plants, the closer we get to containing the smog monster that has a deadly and frightening power.