Talk:New Source Performance Standards

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on New Source Performance Standard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060928141953/http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nsps/nspstbl.html to http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nsps/nspstbl.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:59, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Archived URL replaced w/ active link. Moreau1 (talk) 16:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Critiques

Information to be Added: I think a couple things could be added to this article that would greatly improve it and provide some nice updates. 1) It would be beneficial to directly quote EPA's general definition of a "new source" considering that NSPS are put in place by the EPA. Even though definitions can vary based on the individual category regulations, knowing the EPA's basic idea of a new source would be helpful for readers. 2) Relating NSPS to the current day, I also think that mentioning President Trump's and the EPA's new ruling on relaxing NSPS would also be able to show how these standards can be changed depending on our nation's leadership (they are not always set-in-stone so to say). I believe this would show that this article is up to date with current USA politics. 3) Reaching back to addition #1, this article can also be strengthened by adding examples of new sources in each of the categories under the Clean Water Act (they are already provided in the Clean Air Act). 4) Discussing some of the preliminary testing and continuous monitoring that the new sources must go through would also demonstrate how they are regulated

Possible Reference to Add: I think this article does a great job of following facts with reliable references, considering they are from either the EPA itself or textbooks. However, I think a reference should be added for defining the EPA's New Source Performance Standard. Here is a possible link that can be used for this. It briefly goes over their compliance and application.

Representing Viewpoints: As a part of perhaps adding a detailed history of NSPS, I believe that it could be beneficial to represent the varying viewpoints different industries and agencies have had on NSPS. Right now the article does not discuss either side, but I think equally showing the arguments for and against NSPS could demonstrate the difficulties that the EPA and our government has had with implementing NSPS since they were created. It would also explain the fluctuations we see in the strictness of the standards with varying presidents. For example, the changes seen between Obama's and Trump's presidencies reveal Trump's desires to grow the coal industry despite the pollution they emit. Similarly, it can be discussed that stricter standards can lead to a greater dependency on renewable energy as a solution to pollution control.Cmbrotherton (talk) 00:14, 7 February 2019 (UTC)