Jesse Taylor-Waldman

One of the best ways to learn about something, particularly an important environmental issue like acid deposition, is to consult the experts, bring them all together to share their ideas, and listen to what they have to say. In this way the audience is offered the most accurate and up to date information regarding the issue at hand. Additionally, the speakers are given the opportunity to hear from their fellow colleagues in various fields, initiating a scholarly dialogue among the experts. This was exactly the scenario that occurred during the acid rain conference here at Connecticut College on April 1 st and 2 nd . Using an interdisciplinary approach, the conference presented three perspectives to examine acid deposition in the world: economics, environmental policy, and technical scientific research. Each perspective shared important considerations and findings related to their focus, while contributing to the overall understanding of the problem of acid deposition. During the two days I learned a considerable amount about acid deposition and what is currently being done to fight this problem.

Because it is a global issue with no boundaries and a phenomena that has caused noticeable ecological changes in many parts of the world, acid rain is currently a high priority environmental issue. From the Eastern United States to Germany and Finland , its effects are being felt. Acid rain occurs when airborne pollutants, namely sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, mix with water and various particles in the atmosphere and return to the ground in rain. With the acid rain comes increased levels of sulfate, nitrate, and hydrogen ions. These chemicals offset and disrupt the normal balance of the ecosystem and have a negative effect on streams, lakes, forests, soils and coastal areas. The effects of transboundary acid rain were first recognized in the Nordic states during the 1960's. Before this time, the concept that acid rain deposition was actually a transboundary issue, with polluter's emissions affecting distant down-wind countries, was unheard of. Yet countries like Sweden and Finland eventually discovered that the acid deposition disrupting their environment was coming from emissions in Germany and Western Europe .

The first day of the conference was dedicated to the ecological impacts of acid deposition. In exploring the effects that acid rain has had on the environment, the speakers shared studies and figures concerning changes of pH in rivers and streams and the effects of nitrogen deposition in aquatic ecosystems. The day kicked off with a keynote address from Anthony Janetos, Vice President for the Heinz Center for Science, who really set the tone for the conference. Janetos touched briefly on his experience with acid rain deposition research and the scientific programs used to shape policy during the 1980's and 1990's. He also stressed the importance of using a multi-disciplinary approach in discussing acid deposition and the need for collaboration across all academic and political fields.

The next three speakers, Peter Dillon, Robert Howarth and Knute Nadelhoffer all spoke about the biology and chemistry of acid rain deposition. Dillon centered specifically on sulfur emissions from acid rain and how the environment has reacted to a reduction in sulfur during the last fifteen years. It was interesting and encouraging to note that policy in recent years has created a reduction in sulfur emission levels in the U.S. Nonetheless, they remain at considerable levels and are still a problem. Howarth and Nadelhoffer talked primarily about the effects of nitrogen pollution caused by acid deposition. Nadelhoffer's presentation targeted the effects of nitrogen pollution on terrestrial organisms and described the problems this creates within various ecosystems on land. Howarth focused on eutrophication in coastal marine ecosystems. Eutrophication is a process where a body of water becomes saturated in dissolved nutrients, in this case nitrogen, subsequently promoting the growth and decomposition of oxygen-depleting plant life. As these plants grow and grow, they dramatically harm other organism in the ecosystem and cause a major loss of biodiversity.
While I didn't understand many of the scientific technicalities of this presentation, I was struck by how damaging the effects of acid deposition could be. Overall, I enjoyed learning about the scientific perspectives of acid deposition. At times these presentations were so technical and full of scientific jargon that I really could not follow what was being said, and it seemed that most others around me were similarly confused. But this is to be expected at a conference with academic experts. While I was lost at times, I was always able to understand the main points of the lectures and pick up new information with each presenter.

The last speaker on Friday was Paul Portney, the President of Resources for the Future. Portney's talk, “Economics and Air Pollution Control,” initiated the transition from the scientific perspectives of acid deposition to the perspectives of policy and economics. He focused mainly on the progress in the U.S. of various policies regarding acid deposition, particularly Title IV in the Clean Air Act. Portney did a nice job of stressing the importance of collaborative efforts between economics and policy, an important theme for the remainder of the conference.

Saturday was devoted to looking at acid emissions as they relate to energy policy and market-based economic systems. Saturday began with Daniel Sosland addressing acid emissions and energy policy. Sosland looked at energy policy in the U.S. relating to the “Transmission of Acid-producing Emissions Across State Boundaries.” In his talk he discussed the shortcomings of several federal proposals aimed at increasing energy production, proposals that seemed to work against the reduction of air pollutant emissions. It was interesting to note that in the face of this governmental inaction, many states are sidestepping the federal government and employing their own approaches to dealing with emission problems. These approaches include settlement pacts with power generators and various regulations that support energy efficiency and renewable energy. The next speaker, Don Munton, touched on the history and current state of cooperative transboundary emissions policies between the U.S. and Canada . Munton was an impressive and captivating speaker, using no notes or Powerpoint presentation, and provided a thorough explanation of the efforts between the U.S. and Canada to combat transboundary emissions.

The final two speakers in the policy perspective, Miranda Schreurs and Liliana Andonova, discussed acid rain policy in Europe . Schreurs' presentation looked at the issue of transboundary acid rain in Western Europe, and compared Europe's approach to this problem with the approach taken by U.S. policymakers. A lot of her presentation was about the relationship between the U.S. and the European Union, and what both groups have learned from each other in shaping policy. In her conclusion, she noted that efforts in the U.S. are definitely helping to fight acid rain emissions, but that our policies are still ten years behind those in Western Europe . Andonova related the efforts of acid emissions policy in Eastern Europe and much of her presentation was based around LRTAP. She focused her investigation on three countries of transitional governments, Bulgaria , the Czech Republic , and Poland , and explored the various experiences that each country has had in forming acid rain emissions policy. Her presentation was very informative and it was nice to hear the perspective of an Eastern European speaking on the state of the environment in her native country.

The last section of the conference, “S02 and the Market,” was devoted to the economics side of acid rain deposition. This segment featured four speakers: Richard Morgenstern, Ronald Shadbegian, Joseph Kruger and Timothy Tear. Of the three groups of presentations, the economics side may have been the most technical of all. Ronald Shadbegian's talk was particularly difficult to follow, and it was hard to understand the context that his analysis of costs and benefits fit into. A big theme in this group of presentations was the market-based “cap and trade” program in the U.S. , and specifically trading of S02 among U.S. companies and businesses. Joseph Kruger noted an interesting fact, that while there are cap and trade programs in the U.S. that deal with conventional pollution, there is still no federal agenda to employ these programs in addressing greenhouse gasses.

Overall, I feel that the acid rain deposition conference was a huge success. We had the opportunity to hear from a diverse group of experts on a variety of environmental topics and to participate in an important, relevant dialogue concerning the ecological state of the world. I learned a lot in just two short days, and I highly anticipate the next environmental conference that we will hold.