leadership that can be provided by the Federal Government is essential because hardly any city, county, State, or university can afford to run a full-scale experiment with its own funds, and few cities, counties, or States can stand the political heat of a full-scale experiment that fails.

The possibilities of salvaging and conserving natural resources in the form of minerals, fuel values, or vegetation nutrients should also be given appropriate consideration. Some of the salvage methods that may be developed may be profitable in the ordinary business sense, as has on many occasions been found in the past. Other materials and resources may be shown to justify subsidy for national conservation reasons.

Another type of conservation could be practiced widely at present, if there were adequate technical training and dissemination of information. I refer to the fact that there are several isolated instances, not widely known to most people, of land reclamation with solid wastes without any local annoyance during the operation. There is even a solid waste hill, in a flatland area, that serves as a toboggan slide in the winter and a pleasant play hill in the summer. Good engineering control is the key to success, if it is supported and authorized by better informed local legislative bodies-city councilmen, aldermen, county commissioners, etc.—and not objected to by better informed general citizens who now only know the messes they have seen and hate.

New ways of reclaiming land from which minerals have been removed could also be developed, especially if economists, lawyers, sociologists, and psychologists will join with engineers in working out new practical solutions, including citizen education.

Motor vehicle exhaust control

Many, if not most, cities in this country have stationary sources of air pollution so poorly controlled, even though practical controls are fully available at present, that automobile exhaust pollution is a minor factor. Some of these cities are gassy, dusty, and hazy beyond anything Los Angeles has ever experienced. But even in these cities, on windless sunny days, the "sun-burned" gases make it worse. Motor vehicles, including both diesel and gasoline engined types, emit hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen that are photoreactive to form new gases and microscopic droplets after some 20 minutes to 4 hours of sunshine. This is true even when the vehicles are so properly fueled and so properly maintained that they cannot be classed as blue smokers or black smokers or oil burning jalopies.

Of course, the diesel engines cause additional troubles with malodorous gases, and the gasoline engines cause additional troubles with carbon monoxide.

As you have learned, the present generation of motor vehicle exhaust control devices do not handle the malodorous diesel gases, nor do they handle the oxides of nitrogen. We can expect that when a market is guaranteed by proper laws for such improved devices, they will be engineered and made available. In effect that is what we did when we wrote the laws in California. We wrote an X date into the law, which was the date any two devices were formally certified as meeting the standards for motor vehicle emissions.

We then set standards for carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons, and watched the competitors scramble to meet the market.

Some of these devices that were certified last year but are not being chosen by the automobile makers this year may still, with modification, meet the needs for even tighter hydrocarbon control, carbon monoxide control, and forthcoming oxides of nitrogen control and odorous diesel exhaust control.

In the legislation being considered by your committee there is some administrative leeway given to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare in spelling out standards for motor vehicle exhaust control. It is my opinion that this is a better procedure than writing the standards directly into the law because it permits newer technical developments to be incorporated faster. This is especially important because better air pollutant measuring instruments are being developed rapidly.

We may soon expect to see a diesel stink-o-meter to be available that is better than the present meter plus nose combinations. The spitting distance effects of a diesel you are caught behind makes this source especially adaptable to national standards. There is little or no question about how many are operating in a given area, as there might be with gasoline powered vehicles. Each diesel is one you, yourself, take evasive driving action to get around. And the 2-cycle diesels seem to be worse than the 4-cycle diesels.

An old field—and new developments

Air pollutants of various kinds have been controlled here and there in a few citywide control programs and as a result of individual court and prelegal pressures for 100 years in this country.

It is now more than 50 years since good electrostatic precipitators were used on a cement plant or two.

It is more than 60 years since good bag houses of cloth filter collectors were used on a smelter or two.

It is more than 25 years since Los Angeles began to feel some twinges that had a slightly different sting than just their uncontrolled refineries, foundries, incinerators, etc. It has turned out to be a good thing they cleaned them up reasonably well or I believe that area would have had some recognizable disasters there, as we have had elsewhere.

But the most important result of the Los Angeles air pollutants is that they grew so rapidly the people could see it all happen and get mad enough to insist that control measures be applied. People in other localities are slowly learning that dirty branch plants in their towns have already been cleaned up in other towns, and they are getting mad about it and insisting on cleanups so that they can enjoy their homes and their cities, and so they can be attractive to modern industries that prefer cleaner air for their production and their employees' families.

It was 9 years ago, at a Great Lakes States Industrial Development Conference in Madison, Wis., that there was the first presentation of Linsky's First Law of Social Physics: "Bad mannered (air polluting) industries drive out and keep out well-mannered industries." It was at that conference that I learned about a new mattress factory that decided not to locate near an uncontrolled chemical fertilizer plant. I already knew about the problems of a bakery near an uncontrolled foundry.

To place all of this in better perspective, I know that you have recognized that there is no single answer, permanent solution to air pollution troubles and problems, or to solid waste disposal troubles and problems, any more than there is a single, permanent solution to education or traffic needs. We need to keep asing our best minds and our best techniques and, hopefully, turn some of our roubles into opportunities for major gains.

It might be helpful to your committee to seek information about the costs of ir pollution controls in terms that are familiar to businessmen and consumers like:

(1) Percent of plant investment for equipment.

(2) Percent added increment to cost of the product.

I have taken the liberty of bringing along one table of figures giving such costs for cleaning up some gray iron foundry cupolas, which cause spitting distance As well as areawide troubles. It will also interest you to know that it costs less than 3 percent of plant investment to clean up a petroleum refinery, and the added cost increment on the product is just about zero, because some of the controls are profitable, although it may be at less than 2- or 3-year payout.

By comparison, 3 percent of a new car price of $2,500 is $75. In mass production, $75 pays for a lot of machinery, especially where there is a Government guaranteed marker. You can, for example, buy a sink garbage grinder, even after regular distribution for less than $50, and that is a lot of machinery. One last comment, as a professional engineer whose first field was safety engineering:

I look forward to the day when gasoline engine exhausts are so well controlled that the hazards and deaths from accidental carbon monoxide poisoning become a thing of the past. Somehow it doesn't hit me as being very civilized, especially now when engines idle so quietly that you can hear the clock tick and forget the engine is running. Perhaps an earlier step will be an engine shut-off device when the carbon monoxide becomes too concentrated in the passenger area.

My last comment as an educator and as a citizen is that our "untidy society" so aptly named by Dr. Paul A. Miller, president of West Virginia University, can move a long way from that title if you enact the proposed legislation on air pollution control and solid-waste disposal, and then see to it that it is adequately funded and vigorously implemented.

We, in the universities, will do our best to furnish trained men, sound concepts, and usable facts.

Single Sources: Nearby small source; farther large source

The few remaining are now subjects of enough or too little
engineering research and development.

More automated and precision industries want cleaner air for their
new plants and new employees' homes.

Need for Presenting Specialized Technical Information in Non-Technical
Language

More existing information is. needed by non-specialists in air pollution.

Revised, 1956
Revised, 1957
Revised, 1963

Revised, 1964

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your presentation. It is a very fine statement. That is, the discussion of this matter from the academic standpoint as well as from the practical standpoint.

Do you have any questions, Mr. Rogers?

Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I, too, appreciate your most thoughtful

statement.

Do you know of any research that would be helpful to require buses to place the exhaust pipe in the vertical position rather than in the horizontal position?

Mr. LINSKY. I know of work that has been done in the past. Right now my big fear is against it. My last recommendation, which was several years ago to the City Council of Detroit was against putting

the pipes vertically because there tends to be a collection of condensate while the bus is idling at the street corner, at a stop, and when the bus takes off, you get some of the condensates, which is black and dirty, raining down.

I have an ice cream colored suit which verifies that I have been caught in it myself. This by itself, I am afraid, would not be worthwhile. It would get you into other troubles. Even though it would minimize the spitting distance stink effect for the passenger, but I do not believe that it is a practical thing.

The CHAIRMAN. You could have one used for when it is raining and one used for when it is not raining.

Mr. LINSKY. This is condensate which develops because of the vapor formed in the combustion inside of the engine. It is not the rain. The CHAIRMAN. I understand. You could get a device to put more

air in and burn more of this.

Mr. LINSKY. If they burned it up, then it would be a solution.
The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Carter.

Mr. CARTER. You said that you could use the solid waste materials; that is, that that could be used to generate steam. Is that what you meant?

Mr. LINSKY. I am not taking personal credit for it. I am transmitting information which is known in our profession.

Mr. CARTER. That is a good idea. Are you suggesting that we build such? And then your idea about these sanitary landfills as ornaments which could be dressed up.

Mr. LINSKY. In a sanitary landfill, even when it is well engineered, you stop at the ordinary grade level, the established grade level of the area. There is no reason why they could not keep on going up and to screen it from view. You can build a dike around it, a solid dike, which you keep extending up, so that you are working inside and the people do not see it from around.

Mr. CARTER. This is part of the landfill proposal?

Mr. LINSKY. Correct. But it provides for more days and months and tons of material on the same acreage when acreage is in short supply and it provides a view spot for areas that are short of view spots in flatlands.

Mr. CARTER. Thank you very much. You have made an excellent statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Mackay.

Mr. MACKAY. I want to thank the witness for a tremendously interesting presentation. I was interested in his distinction between "troubles" and "problems."

Can you give us any percentage in the solution of pollution where you would acquire troubles and not problems?

Mr. LINSKY. I will make a stab at it, sir. If you will accept this simply as a ball-park estimate. In some areas that are in tight trouble and have done all that they could with their troubles-in Los Angeles their problems are 80 percent of their troubles. That is, their problems in Los Angeles. In the rest of the country the troubles are 70 to 80 percent of the troubles.

In other words, they are simply not doing as well as we know how to do given legislative determination and a policy budget and the like.