NAPAP: A unique experience
..
By Stanton S. Miller
On September 5 and 6, the US.National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program had its final task force meeting. The program had a statutory responsibility to prepare comprehensive scientific, technological, and economic information to assist decision makers in developing policies for the control and mitigation of acid deposition effects. At the meeting the program was said to be a unique experience in big science funding because scientists worked at their best and the federal government worked at its best to produce an assessment of the science that can be used now and in the future. Funding for the IO-year program will cease at the end of the year. At this fmal public meeting there were nothing but kudos for NAPAP. James R. Mahoney. director of NAPAP for the last three years and the third director Since 1980, turned in an impressive assessment record of acid deposition effects.
i The NAPnP studies have.. . reduced the scientific uncerI
I
tainties about acid deposition process and elf-+-
Government and nongovernment officials praised Mahoney for a job well done. Mahoney joshed about a capsule summary, “the one-minute summary,” being adequate to describe the findings about acid deposition. But he did offer one: “The NAPAP studies have significantly reduced the scientific uncertainties about acid deposition process and effects. Many (but not all) of the scien-
0013-936w90/0924-1781$02.50/0 0 1990 American Chemical Society
tific consensus views reported in the early 1980s have been supported by the more recent studies, but the more extreme views (in both directions) expressed by some individual scientists and in some of the media have been rendered unlikely to be correct.” He continued, “Acidic deposition is correctly viewed as a long-term problem which should be resolved by permanent measures that are efficient in the use of our nation’s economic and energy resources, and that have minimum adverse impact on other environmental goals, such as greenhouse gas and tropospheric ozone reduction. Overall energy conservation is first on the list of preferred coneol measures.” Milton Russell, chairman of the NAPAP Oversight Review Board, said that the lessons leamed would be used for some time to cane. NAPAP has been a success never before experienced in a governmental big science progmm.In NAPAP scientists followed the path of their studies and did it
Environ. Sci. Technol., VoI. 24, No.
12, 1990 1781
Support the American Chemical Society’s
*
*
*
Benefits of a 10 million ton SO, reduction Recovery of some Adirondack lakes Protection of lakes and streams, especially in the Adirondacks and midAtlantic highlands Reduced stress on high elevation red spruce Reduced impacts on exposed materials Reduced health risk associated with acid aerosols Improved visibility in the East Levelized annual direct cost estimate (1990 dollars): $2.7 billion to $4.0 billion Marginal cost for 10 million ton reduction is approximately $800-$1200 F ton of SO, removed.
I’
I NAPAP director James Mahoney
right NAPAP gave us a body of knowledge on which the United States can s u p port valuable analyses now and mid-course ColTectiOn if needed in the future. In 1980 acid deposition was believed by many to be a crisis; then it became an issue for scientific study and federal funding. Scientists have now completed their deliberations. The legacy of the program is the 21 State-of-Science and State-of-Technology (SOSm) reports and the Integrated Assessment based on these reports. The 21 SOSE reports contain more than 10,000 pages, involved 350 scientific authors and more than 100 peer reviewers, and used a “weight of evidence” approach to the 1782
scientific conclusions expressed. In other terms, the report did not, and understandably could not, rely solely on statistically valid data. A half billion dollars were spent on NAPAP, the areas of research funding are shown in Table 1. At the meeting it was clear that oral summaries of the SOSE and Integrated Assessment reports can only scratch the surface; 10 years of work cannot be covered in half-hour presentations. The scientific uncertainties are recorded in the reports for present and future deliberations. One question from the floor had to do with whether the expenditure of more than a half billion dollars was worth it. Mahoney, more eloquently than reported here, said in effect that that is not a scientific question, but one for policy makers. The benefits of a 10 million ton Eduction in SO, emissions and its associated cost are shown in the box. Remember NAPAP was not an exercise in basic science; it was a unique assessment of the science. We agree and add our congratulations to NAPAP for a job well done.
Stanton S.Miller is the managing editor of ES&T.
Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 24. No. 12. 1990
CAMPAGN FOR CHEMlSTRY + to promote scientific literacy.
+ to ensure a future gen+
eration of scientists and researchers. to meet the long-term technical demands of our society.
...
When it’s your turn to give remember your investment in the Campaign for Chemistry is an investment in everyone’sfuture.
For details:
Phone 202/872-4094
CAMPAIGN FOR CHEMISTRY
