were maneuvered into place and mortared with sand and underwater cement. Surveys done just weeks after the reconstruction, which was completed in September, showed algal recolonization and egg-laying by fish within reef crevices. The next phase in the project will be "ecological restoration," in which adult corals and sponges will be transplanted to the restored reef in an effort to accelerate the slow process of recolonization. Several marine biologists, however, said protection is the best course to save reefs. Reconstruction projects are sometimes useful, said Jack Sobel of the Center for Marine Conservation in Washington, D.C., but they are economically and biologically less efficient than preventing damage in the first place. Wahle conceded that the rebuilding process is not a panacea for the gradual degradation of reef habitats by humans. NOAA plans to try the engineering approach at other sites, but Wahle added that globally coral reefs are "going to hell in a hand basket." He reflected the prevailing mood among reef biologists at the symposium that a fundamental protective program is needed. —ROBIN EISMAN
California electric vehicle delay may boost introduction of cleaner cars nationwide A proposal before the California Air Resources Board (CARB) may slow down the market for electric cars there but speed introduction of cleaner cars to the rest of the country. On March 28, board members are expected to sign off on a staff-negotiated plan that gives automakers more time to meet a state electric vehicle mandate in return for their agreement to a quicker introduction of lowemission vehicles throughout the United States. The deal has been initialed by CARB's chair and the seven major automakers in the California market, and the board is expected to support it or a similar version. "There is pretty widespread agreement on the need to modify the ZEV [zero-emission vehicle] mandate," said a source close to CARB. In exchange for relaxing the California 1998 ZEV mandate from 2% to less than 1% of all cars sold in the state, automakers promised to market Californiastyle low-emission vehicles (LEVs) throughout the country by 2001, three years earlier than required by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. According to CARB, these
BUSINESS Growth projected for global environmental markets The demand for environmental goods and services worldwide is expected to grow 5% over the next five years to more than $570 billion, according to a new study commissioned by EPA. Developing countries are the fastest growing environmental markets for firms seeking foreign business, the researchers say, especially in Asia and Latin America, where growth rates are projected at 17% and 12%, respectively. The projected major market sectors worldwide are water delivery, water treatment, and solid waste management, which combined constitute 60% of the demand in developing countries, according to Environmental Business International, Inc. (EBI), the San Diego, Calif., environmental market research firm that conducted the study. Having privatized their water utilities, France and the United Kingdom now dominate the water services market, EBI reports. French and British companies have won all the major water project contracts in developing countries. U.S. firms are the most competitive internationally in solid waste management, according to EBI. They also are superior in the hazardous waste management, analytical services, instrumentation, and remediation markets, although there is less demand outside the United States for these. U.S. environmental firms, however, have been largely complacent internationally, EBI said. Instead, they have focused on the $165.5 billion domestic market, the world's largest, and captured 97% of it. —DANIEL SHANNON
LEVs emit 70% less pollution than current models. In justifying the plan, CARB officials said some 20% of cars registered in California were purchased out of state and the introduction of LEVs nationwide would more than offset any emissions increase from the lower number of electric cars. CARB officials also noted that the rest of the state's far-reaching ' vehicle requirements will stay in place, including the mandate that 10% of all vehicles sold in California in 2001 be electric. The delay in the early years is intended to give automakers and battery manufacturers some temporary breathing room to firm up designs. CARB and the auto industry noted last year that although the companies will not make the 2% mandate in 1998, they will introduce a few electric vehicles this year and in 1997 (ES&T, Jan. 1996, 18A). However, CARB's decision may upset other states that have planned pollution reductions based on the California mandate. According to EPA and Northeastern state officials as well as spokespersons for the American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA), after the California vote is taken attention will turn to the 12 Northeast states and the District of Columbia, which make up the Ozone Transportation Commission (OTC). These states have put together their own plan to require emissions reductions based on the California model. Automakers and OTC states were close to an agreement to require a phase-in of LEVs in Northeastern states beginning in 1997 and full implementation by 1999. But negotiations between automakers and OTC states have stalled over a demand by the states that "advanced technology vehicles" powered by natural gas and clean fuels be included in any agreement. Additionally, two states—Massachusetts and New York—adopted California's requirement for electric cars, and officials in those states want to retain that requirement despite California's decision to restructure
VOL. 30, NO. 4, 1996/ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS • 1 5 7 A
NEWSGOVERNMENT Commission report to focus on real-world needs of risk managers Zero-emission vehicles "will define the General Motors of the future," said GM Chair John Smith, when announcing early this year that the EV1 will be marketed in four southwestern cities this fall.
it. They need the emissions reduction to comply with the Air Act, sources close to OTC said, and without them they may face federal sanctions. However, automakers believe Northeastern states will have to change their approach. "Under the Clean Air Act, there are only the federal law and the California law," said Max Gates, AAMA communications director. "You can't do your own law, and we are convinced that when California changes its LEV program, any state that has chosen to adopt California's plan must change its own." Massachusetts disagrees, according to John Rodman, assistant secretary of environmental affairs. Because of related court decisions, Rodman said, the governor believes the California revision does not bind Massachusetts. He added, however, the state has "always supported flexible implementation." "We're glad to sit down with automakers and work something out. In fact, we've offered seven proposals, and the automakers have rejected all of them," Rodman said. In response, Gates said, "They want the 49-state LEV program, advanced technology vehicles, and the original California ZEV plan, and they're not going to get it." Rodman predicted that negotiations would start up again once CARB votes. "I can see why automakers would want to wait and keep their powder dry until after the California deal is down," he said. Rodman, Gates, and other EPA and state sources predicted negotiations would begin again in earnest this month. —JEFF JOHNSON
Managing—not assessing—risk will be the main thrust of a draft report from the Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management to be released April 24, according to the commission's chair. Created by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, the 10member commission has held public hearings or working meetings almost monthly since May 1994. Its report is intended to influence regulatory development, standard setting, legislation, and the gamut of activities to which risk assessment and risk management are now being applied. "For the first time, we've put the spotlight on risk management and the role of risk assessment and scientific information in decision making," said Chair Gilbert Omenn, dean of the University of Washington School of Public Health and Community Medicine. It is Omenn's hope that the commission's report will fundamentally advance how risk assessments and other scientific information are used to make real-world decisions. In particular, the commission's goal is to provide risk managers with the tools to use risk assessment numbers to determine qualitatively what the effects of a pollution problem are, how serious the ef-
fects may be, and how they should be addressed. "What busy decision makers need to know is whether or not there is a problem," said Omenn. "It this something that has to be on the top of my list or is it deferrable?" Omenn said the commission's report will cover a broad array of topics, such as appropriate exposure scenarios, uncertainty, risk communication, consistency across federal programs, risk comparison, cost-benefit analysis, and ecological risk assessments. The report will recommend significant modifications of current policies, Omenn said in an interview, including moving away from reliance on the theoretical "maximum exposed individual" who lives for 70 years with "his or her nose pressed against a polluting factory's fence line," which he termed "one of the most awkward, truly ridiculous aspects of the way risk assessments have been done routinely for years." Instead, the report will support EPA's move toward high-end exposure estimates. He added that the report will discuss exposure estimates in depth. The commission is strongly considering a safety factor or
REGULATIONS EPA particulate matter review extended The deadline for an EPA decision on revising its air quality standard for particulate matter has been extended to give more time for scientific review of the issue. The new deadline for deciding whether to propose a new standard or stay with current regulations is Nov. 29. Any new regulation would have to be published by June 28,1997. By law, EPA documents establishing the scientific foundation for a new standard have to be reviewed by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. Under a court order stemming from a lawsuit brought by the American Lung Association, the committee had originally been limited to a single look at the documents. But when the committee refused to sign off on the documents last year [ES&T, February 1996, p. 68A), EPA prevailed on the court to allow another chance to comment. The five-month extension was granted on Feb. 7. The final review will take place in May, with a report due to EPA Administrator Carol Browner in June. —TONY REICHHARDT
1 5 8 A • VOL. 30, NO. 4, 1996 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS
