Taking Action on HFCs to Protect our Climate at Home and Abroad

By Gina McCarthy

This week, EPA took another important step in a series of recent actions to help reduce our country’s use and emissions of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) – a potent greenhouse gas. I signed a proposed rule under the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program that will expand the list of climate-friendly HFC alternatives and phase out certain HFCs in favor of safer options that are already available. 

HFCs are predominantly used in air-conditioning and refrigeration and can be up to 10,000 times more damaging to our climate than carbon pollution. Left unchecked, growing HFC emissions would undo critical progress we’ve made to act on climate and protect the planet. 

That’s why cutting their use and emissions is a key part of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan. The new proposed rule not only supports the President’s goals, it also recognizes the key role of innovative companies in bringing new HFC alternatives to the marketplace. 

This is an example of the important work we’re doing at home. But we’re also making tremendous progress with our international partners to fully address HFCs.

Just yesterday, in a joint announcement, President Obama and China’s President Xi Jinping committed to working bilaterally and with other countries to achieve successful outcomes this year in related multilateral fora, including on an HFC amendment under the Montreal Protocol.

And I’m pleased to announce that I’m planning to lead the United States delegation at the Montreal Protocol’s Extraordinary Meeting of the Parties (ExMOP) this July in Vienna. I had the honor of leading the United States delegation to the Montreal Protocol’s 27th Meeting of the Parties in Dubai last November. At that time, the world took a significant step by agreeing to work together on a 2016 Amendment to the Montreal Protocol to reduce the production and consumption of harmful HFCs and achieve substantial greenhouse gas reductions. 

Next week is the first preparatory session for the 2016 negotiations in Geneva. This will be the first opportunity since Dubai for countries to come together and make concrete progress on our 2016 phase down amendment. 

As we saw with the historic Paris Agreement, the world can unite in action when the health of our kids and shared home is at stake. The U.S. is ready to build on this spirit and follow through on our commitments to reduce HFCs at home and abroad.

We are making tremendous progress with our international partners. This July in Vienna, I look forward to making more progress on adopting an HFC amendment that will protect our climate for future generations.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

EPA Partners Leading the Way On Climate Action

By Janet McCabe

Climate change is one of the most critical challenges of our time. We are committed to partnering with industry, communities, and government at all levels to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change, and to prepare for the changes that are already underway.

Some important collaborations are our voluntary climate partnership programs. For decades, we have been partnering with the private sector to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote the use of cleaner energy sources, and improve energy efficiency efforts. These voluntary programs have achieved significant environmental benefits: in total, more than 19,000 organizations and millions of Americans have participated in our climate partnerships and, together in 2013 they prevented greenhouse gas emissions equal to the annual electricity use of more than 57 million homes.

Today, we launched a new voluntary program to reduce harmful methane emissions from the oil and gas sector and 41 companies have stepped up as founding partners. Our Natural Gas STAR Methane Challenge Program builds on the success of our Natural Gas STAR Program and encourages partner companies to make company-wide commitments to cut emissions from sources within their operations by implementing a suite of best management practices.

We expect program participation to grow over time and are actively working to expand the options for participation by finalizing an additional Emissions Intensity Commitment option through the ONE Future Coalition. The ONE Future coalition is a group of companies from across the natural gas industry focused on increasing the efficiency of the natural gas supply chain.

To understand the potential of this program, let’s look at the successes of the Natural Gas STAR Program. When Gas STAR began in 1993, it promoted six best management practices that companies could take to reduce methane emissions; that list has increased to over 50 mitigation best practices. In 2015, a total of 103 oil and gas companies from across the natural gas value chain were U.S. Natural Gas STAR Partners. Since the Natural Gas STAR program started, our partners have collectively achieved over 1.2 trillion cubic feet of methane emission reductions, equivalent to the emissions savings associated with the use of over 1.4 million barrels of oil or reducing over 606 million metric tons of C02 equivalent emissions.

Our other voluntary programs are making similar strides. Since 1992, ENERGY STAR has helped consumers save $362 billion on their utility bills while significantly reducing their greenhouse gas emissions at the same time. Since the Green Power Partnership was introduced in 2001, more than 1,200 organizations have committed to using about 33 billion kilowatt-hours of clean, renewable green power each year. Through the Combined Heat and Power Partnership, more than 480 partners have installed nearly 6,800 megawatts of new combined heat and power since 2001. And in 2013 alone, our methane and fluorinated greenhouse gas program partners used our tools and resources to prevent emissions equal to the annual electricity use from more than 12 million homes in 2013.

Our country has been building momentum towards a cleaner energy economy for quite a while, and with the help of our voluntary programs, our partners have been helping to pave the way. To address the global challenge of climate change, we need to use all the tools in our toolbox, and voluntary programs are an important complement to regulatory action. Through the innovation and leadership of our partners, our voluntary climate partnership programs have proven to be an important lever for change.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

A New Chapter in the Fight against Radon Exposure

By Janet McCabe

Nearly five years ago, we launched an ambitious and far-reaching radon action plan with eight other federal agencies to help save lives and create heathier indoor environments in government-influenced buildings like housing, schools, and childcare facilities. Why? Each year an estimated 21,000 Americans die from radon-induced lung cancer, which is unacceptable. Radon exposure is preventable.

So far our shared efforts have reached an estimated 1.6 million homes, schools and childcare facilities and led to testing for and mitigation of high radon when necessary in nearly 200,000 of those units. And we’ve nearly completed all of our Federal Radon Action Plan (FRAP) commitments like the General Services Administration’s goal to test its 103 childcare facilities for radon and the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s goal to establish radon testing and mitigation requirements for participants in its multifamily housing mortgage insurance programs. You can view the progress we made by visiting our FRAP Scorecard.

While we have made significant progress — in 2013 and 2014 we saw the highest rates of radon mitigation and radon resistant new construction ever recorded in the United States — there’s still more work to do. Elevated radon is still a serious challenge in an estimated 1 out of 15 homes across the United States. The good news is that we have help. Led by the American Lung Association, twelve organizations representing government, nonprofit and industry sectors have crafted and launched an expanded game plan known as the National Radon Action Plan (NRAP).

NRAP builds on, leverages, and accelerates the momentum we created at the federal level. The new and improved strategy aims to incorporate radon testing, radon mitigation and radon-resistant construction into the systems that govern the purchase, financing, and construction and renovation of homes and other buildings. It will have a huge impact on improving public health and in cutting health care costs. Our near-term goal is to reduce the radon risk in a total of five million homes and save 3,200 lives annually by 2020. Our ultimate goal is to eliminate avoidable radon-induced lung cancer in the United States.

As we close the chapter on the Federal Radon Action Plan, I’m excited to see what we will accomplish through our National Radon Action Plan.

I also encourage you to test your home for radon. Affordable do-it-yourself radon test kits are available online, at many home improvement and hardware stores, or you can hire a qualified radon professional. For more information on how to test your home, visit http://www.epa.gov/radon. Test. Fix. Save a Life.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

Location is important, especially when it comes to household products

By Jim Jones

Where do you keep your cleaning supplies? If you’re like most of us, you probably said under the sink. What about other household products like insect repellents and flea or tick products? Where you store your household products might seem like a small detail. However, storing cleaning and other products incorrectly could be putting your kids at risk for an accidental poisoning.

Here are some interesting statistics from the American Association of Poison Control Centers:

  • Poisoning is our country’s leading cause of injury-related death.
  • 91% of poisonings occur at home.
  • Exposure to household cleaning products is the second leading cause of pediatric poisonings.

The good news is that most poisonings are preventable. Storing cleaning and other household products out of children’s reach, is one of the easiest things you can do to protect your kids from accidental poisonings.

One of the most common cleaning products kids are exposed to is bleach. In 2014, the American Association of Poison Control Centers reported over 15,000 poisoning incidents involving only bleach for kids 12 and under. Making cleaning products inaccessible to kids by simply moving them to a higher shelf or installing safety latches on cabinets where cleaning products are stored could have prevented some of these incidents from occurring.

Here are a few more things you can do every day to prevent poisonings:

  • Read the label first. Follow the directions as they are written on the label before using a product.
  • Use child-resistant packaging correctly by tightly sealing the container after every use.
  • Never put cleaning or other household products in containers that could be mistaken for food or drinks.

When you think of environmental protection you probably don’t automatically associate it with poison prevention. However, an important part of our mission involves ensuring the safety of public health around the country. But we can’t do it alone – we need your help!

Check out more poison prevention tips at http://www.epa.gov/safepestcontrol/reduce-your-childs-chances-pesticide-poisoning.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

E-Manifest: Tapping into America’s Expertise to Build a National System

By Mathy Stanislaus

Last year, I wrote about the progress we’re making on creating an electronic system for tracking hazardous waste shipments. It’s the system that will modernize the nation’s cradle to grave hazardous waste tracking process while saving valuable time, resources, and dollars for industry and states. The e-Manifest program is the vanguard of the Agency-wide e-Enterprise initiative to develop new tools to reduce the reporting burden on regulated entities and provide the Agency, states and the public with easier access to environmental data.

Today I’m pleased to announce another important step toward this goal, the selection of members for our E-Manifest Advisory Board. We chose experts with diverse backgrounds to help ensure that perspectives from manifest users across the country will be incorporated into the recommendations for improving effectiveness of the e-Manifest system.

We followed a robust process to select the Advisory Board members. First, we solicited nominations through a variety of outlets, including the Federal Register, various professional associations, our e-Manifest ListServ, and the Office of Small Business Programs. We received an enthusiastic response from candidates with expertise in information technology and from stakeholders in the sectors affected by the future e-Manifest system, including state governments, transportation, and hazardous waste management. From this excellent slate of nominations, we selected eight members who we believe reflect a wide array of valuable expertise, including:

  • Decades of experience managing hazardous waste at generator, transporter, and hazardous waste management facilities;
  • Vast systems development knowledge, including one contributer to the OnStar Automotive assistive technology; and
  • Hands-on, in-depth experience managing state hazardous waste programs in the states of Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Washington.

As required by the e-Manifest Act, the Advisory Board will be composed of nine members consisting of the EPA Administrator (or her designee), two members from the information technology sector, three members from state agencies and three members from the regulated community. We are excited to start working with the Advisory Board to gather their thoughts on several complex issues surrounding the development of the e-manifest system, including effectiveness and performance, user fees and processes, regulations and guidance, and outreach to our stakeholders. We will convene the Advisory Board periodically beginning in 2016, and we intend to deploy the e-Manifest system in the spring of 2018.

For those stakeholders who are not part of the Advisory Board, there are several ways you can provide your input and expertise to the e-Manifest system project. Our system development work is focused on ensuring that user requirements are met from day one of national system deployment. To accomplish this, we are conducting user-centered design and development and are utilizing agile software development methodologies. This approach embodies continuous improvement through pilots and testing, using iterative processes, and continued regular engagement with users and stakeholders throughout the process to provide on-going opportunities for input.

I encourage you to follow progress on the development of the e-Manifest system on our website. There, you may also subscribe to the e-Manifest ListServ to receive project updates in real time and information about opportunities to provide feedback. You may also submit your ideas and questions to eManifest@epa.gov. And finally, once we publish our proposed fee methodology this spring, I encourage you to submit comments on the proposed rule through regulations.gov.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

Promoting Resource Efficiency By Focusing On Supply Chains

By Mathy Stanislaus

I recently attended a G7 Alliance for Resource Efficiency workshop in Yokohama, Japan on Promoting International Cooperation for Improving Global Resource Efficiency and on the Kobe 3Rs (reduce, reuse & recycle). In Yokohama, I described our current activities promoting Sustainable Materials Management (SMM), which analyzes the entire life cycle of products and services to identify the best ways to use materials while minimizing environmental impacts (e.g., use of energy, water and land). That means looking at use of resources from the point of materials extraction, through production, all the way to the end of a product’s life and beyond to reuse and recycling.

From left to right: Kazuhisa Matsuda, Japan; Benedetta Dell'Anno, Italy; Mathy Stanislaus; Gwenole Cozigou, European Commission.

From left to right: Kazuhisa Matsuda, Japan; Benedetta Dell’Anno, Italy; Mathy Stanislaus; Gwenole Cozigou, European Commission.

By advancing systems-based approaches such as SMM, we can reduce often-overlooked sources of significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, such as those from the supply chain of the manufacturing sector. The Paris Climate Agreement, for example, set a global goal to limit global warming to less than 2o Celsius by reducing GHG emissions. More than 40 percent of these emissions are attributable to materials management, and the G7 Alliance offers an important new mechanism to help meet the goal.

We are working collaboratively with the G7 Alliance for Resource Efficiency (G7 members from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States, with representation from the European Union) and the private and public sector to foster a circular economy, one in which materials are used for as long as possible and materials and products are recovered at the end of their life. Our work is important because, as the G7 Alliance found last year, “for every one percent increase in gross domestic product (GDP), raw material use has risen by 0.4 percent . . . much of raw material input in industrial economies is returned to the environment as waste with[in] one year. . . Unsustainable consumption of natural resources and concomitant environmental degradation translates to increased business risks through higher material costs, as well as supply uncertainties and disruptions.”

The U.S is hosting a G7 Alliance for Resource Efficiency workshop in Washington, D.C. on March 22-23, 2016. At this forum participants from across the globe will explore how to use life-cycle concepts to advance resource efficiency and focus on significant upstream impacts in supply chains, specifically the auto sector. Why focus on the auto sector? That sector is an important part of our industrial and service economies and is significant to the gross domestic product of several G7 countries. It is also a global economic driver with supply chains reaching across the world. Additionally, automobile manufacturers and their suppliers are innovatively using life-cycle concepts to identify and address significant impacts and resource use.

Sessions will address a wide range of topics designed to benefit all participants – overcoming SMM barriers, the use of innovative materials and eco-design, information tools to foster life-cycle thinking, industry “hotspot” identification, supply chain transparency, incentives for change, and more. Participants will identify best practices that are transferrable to other sectors. Follow the conversation with the #G7CircularEconomy hashtag.

Building on the results of the workshop, we plan to host subsequent workshops to support the global transition to sustainable materials management. We know that there will be challenges ahead, but I am proud we are working with our fellow G7 countries in taking actions that will be beneficial to others for years to come.

Continue the discussion by following @EPAland’s conversation on #G7CircularEconomy.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

EPA Taking Steps to Cut Methane Emissions from Existing Oil and Gas Sources

By Gina McCarthy, EPA Administrator

Today, as part of the Obama Administration’s ongoing commitment to act on climate, President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau committed to new actions to reduce methane pollution from the oil and natural gas sector, the world’s largest industrial source of methane. These actions build on the historic agreement that nearly 200 nations made in Paris last December to combat climate change and ensure a more stable environment for future generations.

Methane is upwards of 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide in warming the planet and is a key constituent of natural gas. By tackling methane emissions, we can unlock an amazing opportunity to spur U.S. action to protect our environment, but also unleash opportunities to think creatively and lead the world in developing a clean energy economy.

That’s why the Administration has been moving quickly and working hard to reduce emissions of this potent greenhouse gas. In 2012, we set emissions standards that cut pollution, including methane, emitted by fractured and re-fractured natural gas wells. This past summer, we proposed standards to directly address methane from new and modified sources in the oil and gas sector. Each of these steps moves the United States toward our goal of cutting methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40 to 45 percent below 2012 levels by 2025.

But as science advances and new data emerge, we need to make sure we’re continuing to address the biggest climate challenges in the best ways possible. Over the past year, EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, along with studies from groups like the Environmental Defense Fund and industry and researchers at Colorado State University, Carnegie Mellon, the University of Texas, Washington State University, and others have provided significant new data on methane emitted by existing operations in the oil and gas sector.

The new data show that methane emissions are substantially higher than we previously understood. So, it’s time to take a closer look at regulating existing sources of methane emissions.

And, today, President Obama committed to doing just that. EPA will begin developing regulations for methane emissions from existing oil and gas sources. We will start this work immediately to address methane from existing sources. We intend to work swiftly, and will involve stakeholders in meaningful ways, as we have been doing all along.

We will begin with a formal process to require companies operating existing oil and gas sources to provide information to assist in the development of comprehensive regulations to reduce methane emissions. An Information Collection Request (ICR) will allow us to gather information on existing sources of methane emissions, technologies to reduce those emissions and the costs of those technologies in the production, gathering, processing, and transmission and storage segments of the oil and gas sector.

This is a routine step to assist in the development process for regulations to reduce air pollution. It helps EPA identify the most significant sources of emissions, the kinds of technologies that work best to reduce them, and how those technologies can be applied effectively.

There are hundreds of thousands of existing oil and gas sources across our country; some emit small amounts of methane, while others emit a lot. The Information Collection Request will help EPA identify, among other things, which existing sources are big emitters and how they can be effectively controlled. EPA will begin preliminary outreach to states, industry, environmental groups, communities and other organizations in the coming weeks and will launch the formal information collection process in April. This engagement will give us the opportunity to hear feedback from the public on our plans.

Throughout the process we will continue to expand opportunities for industry to voluntarily step up now to cut emissions from existing sources through EPA’s Methane Challenge program. Voluntary action to reduce methane emissions will put leading companies ahead of the game in meeting future standards.

I am pleased and proud to fulfill President Obama’s commitment to reduce methane emissions and join our Canadian colleagues in the continued fight against climate change.

Additional information:

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

Preventing and Better Preparing for Emergencies at Chemical Plants is Job One

By Mathy Stanislaus

The chemical industry provides critical products we use every day, creates jobs, and is a staple of the U.S. economy. While numerous chemical plants operate safely, in the past 10 years nearly 60 people died, some 17,000 people were injured or sought medical treatment, and almost 500,000 people were evacuated or sheltered-in-place as a result of accidental releases at chemical plants. During that time, more than 1,500 incidents were reported causing over $2 billion in property damages.

To prevent and reduce the number of accidents and protect communities and first responders, we are proposing revisions to the accidental release prevention requirements under the Clean Air Act, also known as our Risk Management Program (RMP). In the Report to the President on implementing Executive Order (EO) 13650, Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security (August 2013), we committed to amending the RMP regulations in 2016.

This proposal is based on extensive engagement over two years with community leaders, first responders, local and state governments, industry and many other stakeholders – nearly 1,800 participants across the country in over 25 states. The Executive Order Working group reviewed existing programs, recommendations from the safety and security communities, and feedback from the EO listening session, as well as investigative reports of major incidents. In 2014 the EO Working Group published for stakeholder comment a preliminary list of options for improving chemical facility safety and security. The May 2014 Progress Report to the President, Actions to Improve Chemical Facility Safety and Security – A Shared Commitment, summarized the federal governments’ progress. Modernizing the RMP rule was identified as one of the top priorities to improve chemical facility safety and security. In July, 2014 we sought comment on potential revisions to modernize EPA’s regulations, guidance and policies by issuing a Request for Information. In 2015, prior to convening a Small Business Advocacy Review Panel, we conducted outreach with small entities potentially affected by these regulations. EPA invited the Small Business Administration (SBA), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and 32 potentially affected small entity representatives to a conference call and solicited comments from them on preliminary information. These comments and concerns have been reflected in today’s proposal.

The proposed amendments are intended to improve existing risk management plan requirements to enhance chemical safety at RMP facilities by:

  • •Requiring the consideration of safer technologies and alternatives by including the assessment of Inherently Safer Technologies and Designs in the Process Hazard Assessment
    •
  • Requiring third party audits and root cause analysis to identify process safety improvements for accident prevention
  • Enhancing emergency planning and preparedness requirements to ensure coordination between facilities and local communities
    •
  • Ensuring that  emergency response capabilities are available to mitigate the effects of a chemical accident
    •
  • Improving the ability of local emergency planning committees and local  emergency response officials to better prepare for emergencies
    •
  • Increasing public access to information to help the public understand the risks at RMP facilities, and increase community involvement in accident planning for when communities need to evacuate or shelter-in-place during an accident

I participated in many of the listening sessions and stakeholder conferences and heard first-hand from local responders and communities about their concerns about accidental chemical releases and their ideas to improve planning and prevent emergencies. Together we can work to strengthen preparedness and prevention efforts in our communities.

This proposal is a step in the right direction.  We want to build on the success of leaders in the chemical industry by enhancing their operations to prevent accidents, and we want to make sure that communities are fully prepared for a chemical plant accident, so that first responders, workers, and neighboring community members are protected.

The proposed rule is just one of the actions the U.S. government has undertaken to enhance the safety and security of chemical facilities under EO 13650. In addition to these revisions, we continue our work under EO 13650 by assisting local communities in developing local emergency contingency plans and facilitating a dialog between communities and chemical facilities on chemical accident prevention and preparedness.

Learn more about the proposal here: http://www.epa.gov/rmp/proposed-changes-risk-management-program-rmp-rule

Follow us on Twitter at @EPAland.

 

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

Cleaner Air Means Healthier Hearts

By EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy

February is Healthy Heart Month. There’s no better time than now to learn how to protect your heart.

Air pollution can affect heart health, and even trigger heart attacks and strokes. That’s important information for the one in three Americans who have heart disease, and for the people who love them.

And it’s why EPA is working with other government agencies, and with private and nonprofit health organizations, on the Million Hearts® national initiative to prevent 1 million heart attacks and strokes by 2017. This month, and every month, we want to make sure people understand how heart disease is linked to air pollution – and what people can do to protect themselves.

Scientific studies, including research by EPA scientists, shows that there’s not just an association between air pollution and heart disease, but that this association can have life-threatening consequences.

In a recent study in Environmental Research, EPA scientists looked at data from NASA satellites and EPA ground-based air monitors, and confirmed that heart disease and heart attacks are more likely for individuals who live in places with higher air pollution.  The study found that exposure to even small additional amounts of fine particle pollution averaged over a year could increase a person’s odds of a heart attack by up to 14 percent.

So, what can you do to help keep your heart healthy?

  • You can start by making sure to eat nutritious meals and exercise (just make sure to check with your health care provider first).
  • Check the Air Quality Index every day to learn about your local air quality and how can reduce your exposure to air pollution.
  • And we can all do our part to make choices that are better for the environment and our health – like taking public transit more often and driving cleaner vehicles.

This February, and every month, remember that cleaner air means healthier hearts.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

EPA Supports the Science that Makes a Difference for Heart Health

By Dr. Wayne Cascio

By Presidential proclamation, February 2016 is American Heart Month and once again we turn our attention to keeping our hearts healthy.  In his proclamation, President Obama asks us to, “remember those we have lost to this devastating disease, promote healthy lifestyles that mitigate its impacts, and pledge to continue our fight against it.”

Here at EPA we are doing just that. In the Office of Research and Development, scientists are working to understand how our experiences with our environment interact with genetic, social and health factors to contribute to the progression of blood vessel and heart diseases like high blood pressure, heart attacks, strokes and heart failure.  And we stand with our President and our partners at the CDC’s Million Hearts Initiative to promote a healthy environment and lifestyle to keep hearts healthy and prevent heart disease and stroke and eliminate health disparities.

In the U.S. the prevalence of high blood pressure is highest among African American men often leading to stroke, heart disease, and kidney failure.  So, today at 3 p.m. ET, we are joining Million Hearts and Men’s Health Network for a conversation on “What African American men need for a healthy heart” on Twitter using #HeartMonthChat.

The message is a simple one: Control risk factors for heart disease like high blood pressure, eat healthy, and stay active. Yet for some this is not an easy task.  Who we are and where we live may limit our ability to follow this simple guidance.  EPA is working to make a difference by helping communities benefit from healthier environments and enjoy healthier lives.

EPA researchers and research funded by EPA has greatly contributed to our knowledge of the connection between our environment and heart and blood vessel disease. Science shows that outdoor air particle pollution exposure increases blood pressure and increases the risk of stroke and heart attacks. And that improved air quality has translated into longer lives. Yet, it’s still the personal decisions we make about our lifestyles that have the biggest effect on our health. So taking action on lowering our risk factors for heart and blood vessel disease, making heart healthy food choices and increasing the availability of healthy environments to live and be active in can be a goal for all of us.

If you have heart or blood vessel disease the factsheet “Heart Disease, Stroke and Outdoor Air Pollution”  tells how to use the Air Quality Index and its daily forecast to reduce exposure to air pollution and protect your health.  It also includes information about risk factors and the warning symptoms of heart attacks and stroke.

You can access more information from EPA’s Healthy Heart Toolkit and learn about the science we are doing to protect heart health.Million Hearts twitter chat information

Reference:

  1. Mozaffarian D, et al; American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2016 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016 Jan 26;133(4):e38-e360.

 

About the Author: Dr. Wayne Cascio spent more than 25 years as a cardiologist before joining EPA’s Office of Research and Development where he now leads research on the links between exposures to air pollution and public health, and how people can use that information to maintain healthy hearts.

Editor's Note: The opinions expressed here are those of the author. They do not reflect EPA policy, endorsement, or action.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.