After learning about setting pollution standards using health-based and tech-based standards:

(1) Find examples of the successes & criticisms of each type of standard 

(2) Do you support health-based and/or tech-based standards? What are the circumstances you would choose one of the approaches over the other? How would you combine them?

Clean Air Act

Health-based standard: Power plants have cut emissions that cause acid rain and harm public health. Thus, reducing acid rain, which has significantly reduced damage to water quality in lakes and streams, and improved the health of ecosystems and forests. During observation periods (1989-1991 & 2009-2011), wet deposition of sulfate (cause of acidification) decreased by more than 55 percent across the eastern US. The dramatic emissions reductions achieved by the acid rain program have helped to reduce atmospheric levels of fine particle pollution, avoiding numerous premature deaths.

Technology-based standard: The Act requires that when new industrial facilities are designed to focus on pollution control. This means that as new, cleaner facilities are built, the country's industrial base becomes cleaner overall. In areas not meeting air quality standards, to avoid making pollution worse, new and modified large plants and factories must meet the lowest achievable emission rate.

I support both health and tech based standards. Circumstances that involve public health risks and do not consider costs would prompt health-based standards, whereas, those that deal with future goals centered around pollution levels and efficiency that consider cost would prompt technology-based standards. To combine them would require cooperative federalism – federal government focusing on pollution efficiency and the states focus on the lowest acceptable amount of discharge that promotes better health conditions.