[ABANDONED] Clean Air Act (C.A.A)

[The Kies]

Clean Air Act
A resolution to improve the air quality of all member nations.

Category: Environmental
Strength: Mild
Proposed by:The Kies

Description:

RECOGNIZING all industries have contributed to air contamination and the adverse health effects shown due to said contamination;

APPALLED at the lack of realization and policy in multiple nations and the failure to protect the health of citizens from these contaminants; and

SHOCKED that the WA has failed to act on this situation;

The World Assembly hereby mandates the following:

1. The establishment of the World Assembly Air Control Bureau (WAACB) with the duties and responsibilities of:

i. enforcing standards and policies mentioned in section 5 through the assistance of cooperative/compliant nations or economic sanctions against those who resist or are not cooperative/compliant;
ii. introducing and informing citizens of an Air Quality Index (AQI);
iii. limiting pollutants and contaminants through a cap-and-trade/emissions trading system with nations and businesses;
iv. educating citizens, nations, regions, and businesses of the importance of air quality;
v.promoting lower emission transport;
vi. gradually improving global atmospheric conditions through the use of all subsections;

2. All member nations are strongly encouraged to:

i. educate their citizens without the assistance of the WAACB;
ii. cooperate with businesses and express their concerns with solutions to the WAACB;
iii. lower emissions past the standards set by the WAACB independently; and
iv. address air quality issues without the assistance of the WAACB;

3. All member nations are heavily encouraged to independently create legislation to improve and address the health of already or possibly suffering citizens from air pollutants/contaminants; and

4. Member nations are heavily encouraged to independently address air quality issues by;

i. contracting businesses, passing legislation, educating citizens on the issue, or setting individual standards; and
ii. applying subsection 1 (i), as long as the solutions above do not interfere or contrast with the WAACB policies and standards mentioned in subsection 5 (Definitions and standards);

5. Definitions and standards;

i. ppm (parts per million);
ii. ppb (parts per billion);
iii. µg/m³ (micrograms per cubic meter of air);
iv. Carbon Monoxide (CO), 9ppm to 15 ppm not to be passed in/during an hour;
v. Lead (Pb), 0.15 µg/m³ to 0.20 µg/m³ not to be passed at all;
vi. Nitrogen Dioxide (NO₂) 53ppb to 60ppb not to be passed in/during a year;
vii. Ozone (O₃), 0.070 ppm to 0.075 ppm not to be passed in/during 8 hours;
viii. Particle Pollution (PM), see subsections 9-10 (ix-x);
ix- PM_2.5 15.0 µg/m³ to 35 µg/m³ not to be passed in/during 24 hours;
x- PM₁₀ 150 µg/m³ not to be passed in/during 24 hours;
xi- Sulfer Dioxide (SO₂), 75 ppb to 80 ppb not to be passed in/during 1 hour.

-GAR#445 has already dealt with the issue at hand, there is nothing to add on to and so this proposal has been abandoned.

[Tinhampton]

EDIT-3 days until proposed

Why do you think that you, a first-time author, can rush such a comprehensive proposal about air pollution to the proposal queue over the course of a weekend? Will offer very long feedback tomorrow.

[The Kies]

EDIT-3 days until proposed

Why do you think that you, a first-time author, can rush such a comprehensive proposal about air pollution to the proposal queue over the course of a weekend? Will offer very long feedback tomorrow.

You're right, I shouldn't. Thank you for pointing it out!

[Untecna]

I disagree with the requirement to make and pass legislation in our own nations in accordance to this act. I believe it should be a moderate suggestion or heavy suggestion.

[The Kies]

I disagree with the requirement to make and pass legislation in our own nations in accordance to this act. I believe it should be a moderate suggestion or heavy suggestion.

Thanks for the feedback! I will edit the proposal in accordance of what you said.

[Big Boyz]

I think this has a lot of promise. If you are willing to work through the drafting process, I believe it has the potential to become an excellent proposal.

I have compiled my suggestions below as a new draft. Mostly formatting corrections and changes for clarity.

If you don't know how to use the list tag, information can be found here.

RECOGNIZING all industries have contributed to air contamination and the adverse health effects shown due to said contamination;

APPALLED at the lack of realization and policy in multiple nations and the failure to protect the health of citizens from these contaminants; and

SHOCKED that the WA has failed to take the matter of the to act on this situation;

The World Assembly and its members hereby mandates the following:

1. The establishment of the World Assembly Air Control Bureau (WAACB) with the duties and responsibilities of:
   
   1. instating air quality and emission standards;
   2. enforcing said standards through the assistance of cooperative/compliant nations or economic sanctions against those who resist or are not cooperative/compliant;
   3. introducing and informing citizens of an Air Quality Index (AQI);
   4. limiting pollutants and contaminants through a cap-and-trade/emissions trading system with nations and businesses;
   5. educating citizens, nations, regions, and businesses of the importance of air quality;
   6. promoting lower emission transport;
   7. lowering noise pollution in order to improve health; and
   8. gradually improving global atmospheric conditions through the use of all subsections;
2. All member nations will be are strongly encouraged to:
   
   1. educate their citizens without the assistance of the WAACB;
   2. cooperate with businesses and express their concerns with solutions to the WAACB;
   3. lower emissions past the standards set by the WAACB independently; and
   4. address air quality issues without the assistance of the WAACB;
3. All member nations may independently create legislation to improve and address the health of already or possibly suffering citizens from air pollutants/contaminants; and
   
4. Member nations may independently address air quality issues by the following:
   
   1. contracting businesses, passing legislation, educating citizens on the issue, or setting individual standards; and
   2. Nations may applying subsection 1 (i), as long as the solutions above do not interfere with the WAACB policies and standards.

[The Kies]

I think this has a lot of promise. If you are willing to work through the drafting process, I believe it has the potential to become an excellent proposal.

I have compiled my suggestions below as a new draft. Mostly formatting corrections and changes for clarity.

If you don't know how to use the list tag, information can be found here.

RECOGNIZING all industries have contributed to air contamination and the adverse health effects shown due to said contamination;

APPALLED at the lack of realization and policy in multiple nations and the failure to protect the health of citizens from these contaminants; and

SHOCKED that the WA has failed to take the matter of the to act on this situation;

The World Assembly and its members hereby mandates the following:

1. The establishment of the World Assembly Air Control Bureau (WAACB) with the duties and responsibilities of:
   
   1. instating air quality and emission standards;
   2. enforcing said standards through the assistance of cooperative/compliant nations or economic sanctions against those who resist or are not cooperative/compliant;
   3. introducing and informing citizens of an Air Quality Index (AQI);
   4. limiting pollutants and contaminants through a cap-and-trade/emissions trading system with nations and businesses;
   5. educating citizens, nations, regions, and businesses of the importance of air quality;
   6. promoting lower emission transport;
   7. lowering noise pollution in order to improve health; and
   8. gradually improving global atmospheric conditions through the use of all subsections;
2. All member nations will be are strongly encouraged to:
   
   1. educate their citizens without the assistance of the WAACB;
   2. cooperate with businesses and express their concerns with solutions to the WAACB;
   3. lower emissions past the standards set by the WAACB independently; and
   4. address air quality issues without the assistance of the WAACB;
3. All member nations may independently create legislation to improve and address the health of already or possibly suffering citizens from air pollutants/contaminants; and
   
4. Member nations may independently address air quality issues by the following:
   
   1. contracting businesses, passing legislation, educating citizens on the issue, or setting individual standards; and
   2. Nations may applying subsection 1 (i), as long as the solutions above do not interfere with the WAACB policies and standards.

Thanks for the feedback! I will get to work on the changes.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Leave your current draft visible, only spoiler old drafts.

And if you want there to be standards, write them out. Invisible standards (up to the committee to decide) do not necessarily do anything since everyone can roleplay them being ok with whatever smog conditions they might have.

[The Kies]

OOC: Leave your current draft visible, only spoiler old drafts.

And if you want there to be standards, write them out. Invisible standards (up to the committee to decide) do not necessarily do anything since everyone can roleplay them being ok with whatever smog conditions they might have.

Thanks for your feedback! I will add standards soon.

[Outer Sparta]

This is a good concept (surprised a resolution on air pollution hasn't yet been done) and I agree it has a lot of potential.

1vi. is about noise pollution, which I don't know if it's necessary to include it unless you can tie in noise pollution to air pollution. Then again, it's a different subject entirely and detracts a little from the focus on air pollution.

I'm not sure about 4i. that says member states could set individual standards would also fit. Don't you want a set of international standards on air pollution? Then if you allow countries to independently set their own standards, doesn't it defeat the point of WA enforcement?

Additionally, I would advise you set standards on the levels of air pollution to reduce in regards to PM 2.5 and 10.

[The Kies]

This is a good concept (surprised a resolution on air pollution hasn't yet been done) and I agree it has a lot of potential.

1vi. is about noise pollution, which I don't know if it's necessary to include it unless you can tie in noise pollution to air pollution. Then again, it's a different subject entirely and detracts a little from the focus on air pollution.

I'm not sure about 4i. that says member states could set individual standards would also fit. Don't you want a set of international standards on air pollution? Then if you allow countries to independently set their own standards, doesn't it defeat the point of WA enforcement?

Additionally, I would advise you set standards on the levels of air pollution to reduce in regards to PM 2.5 and 10.

Thanks for the feedback! I will edit the proposal accordingly and fix what is needed.

Edit: Also, member states can set individual standards lower than those set by the WA. I made sure to address this in 4ii.

[The Kies]

EDIT-3 days until proposed

Why do you think that you, a first-time author, can rush such a comprehensive proposal about air pollution to the proposal queue over the course of a weekend? Will offer very long feedback tomorrow.

Not to rush you or be rude, but there still is no feedback. I would appreciate it if you could provide it soon, so I can get to fixing the proposal. Thanks!

[Tinhampton]

Article 5 is taken almost verbatim from the IRL EPA's air quality standards. That is all the feedback I will give for now.

[The Kies]

Article 5 is taken almost verbatim from the IRL EPA's air quality standards. That is all the feedback I will give for now.

Thanks for replying! I edited the proposal so it differs more from the EPA standards, however they are still based off of them.

[Outer Sparta]

This is a good concept (surprised a resolution on air pollution hasn't yet been done) and I agree it has a lot of potential.

1vi. is about noise pollution, which I don't know if it's necessary to include it unless you can tie in noise pollution to air pollution. Then again, it's a different subject entirely and detracts a little from the focus on air pollution.

I'm not sure about 4i. that says member states could set individual standards would also fit. Don't you want a set of international standards on air pollution? Then if you allow countries to independently set their own standards, doesn't it defeat the point of WA enforcement?

Additionally, I would advise you set standards on the levels of air pollution to reduce in regards to PM 2.5 and 10.

Thanks for the feedback! I will edit the proposal accordingly and fix what is needed.

Edit: Also, member states can set individual standards lower than those set by the WA. I made sure to address this in 4ii.

Okay, that makes sense. I was just confused at what you mean by member states setting their own standards.

[Outer Sparta]

I see you already submitted it. In its current state, I doubt it would pass.

I advise you to withdraw your submission and keep on working, preferably for a couple of more weeks to like a month. Quality resolutions aren't made overnight, and feedback generally takes a while.

[Ardiveds]

OOC: Those are some absurdly specific air quality standards to be enforced upon multiple planets inhabited by multiple species. And don't we already have a emission cap trading system already?

[Outer Sparta]

OOC: Those are some absurdly specific air quality standards to be enforced upon multiple planets inhabited by multiple species. And don't we already have a emission cap trading system already?

I suggested the OP add some standards in terms of air quality, but I do agree that they are way too specific.

[Bananaistan]

OOC: What does this do that GAR#445 doesn't already do (aside from the arbitrary numbers ofc)?

[Araraukar]

OOC: Please withdraw the submission; it's been under a week and not many people have yet had time to comment. This is a complex subject, so it's not like giving grammar assistance, to give proper advice.

Also clause 5 is currently a "WTF???" mess. Do I need to read the link to EPA stuff that was posted to see how you copied them? If they're directly copied (or you just changed a number or two), it's plagiarism. Submitting plagiarized content can get you kicked out of the WA, because it's taken very seriously. A GA resolution should always use the REASON WHY the limits exist in Real Life, rather than the actual numerics, especially without any reasoning given.

This especially suggests it's direct plagiarism: "see subsections 9-10 (ix-x)".

And we DO have this which you should read, as it looks like you're contradicting it, especially with clause 5. (The previous resolution gives the WASP the right to set the limits for emissions, you can't take it away from it without contradiction.)

The proposal's current language is nonsense, assumes all WA nations exist on a single planet, and makes the committee a bottomless pit into which all the WA's funds slide into, because of 1.vi.