The information is indeed relevant to the case study on Jakarta, Indonesia Case Study. For instance, there has been an indication that the large population present in the city is being faced with a major challenge in terms of clean water. The sewage has been left to run without people caring to take much attention. A large population as is the case with JakartaCity deserves an effective exposure to clean water services which might limit an easy outbreak to diseases like cholera and typhoid which spread easily.
EPA is an international agency that is well recognized and which is mandated to propose changes as well as protecting human health. Furthermore the agency takes into consideration that the environment is well taken care of. The information, therefore, provided by Stacy Kika is credible information having been an experience that was witnessed in the five states of Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, New York and Maryland.
The author supports her evidence by using relevant information from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that reflected upon the Lafarge North America Inc. clean water act settlement. The author also points to the fact that Lafarge have to comply with the courts requirements in terms of compensation to the five states. It is also true that Lafarge implemented a nationwide evaluation as well as compliance program to that effect.
Having been authenticated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as well as evidence from the courts illustrating that Lafarge is guilty as charged, the information can be relied upon as evidence to be used to restore sanity to air pollution in Jakarta. The example only takes into account one company without illustrating several companies that are involved in draining waste materials to clean water without observing the need to preserve healthy living conditions.