Two Plus Two Does Not Always Equal Four
Time 2 Minute Read
Categories: Air, Water

We are taught from a young age that two plus two equals four; it is a given just as the earth is round, despite recent controversy. But two plus two may not equal four due to two concepts: significant figures and rounding. But why should you care about either of those two concepts? If you are subject to permit limits or standards those concepts can be the difference between compliance and noncompliance.

The stringency of a limit depends on the significant figures used in the numerical representation. Say, for example, you have a limit of two parts per million (ppm). If the limit is expressed numerically with one significant figure it would be 2, while it would be 2.0 if expressed with two significant figures. At first glance those numbers appear to be the same, but in reality they are very different. The trailing zero after the decimal point is considered significant for a reason and impacts rounding conventions.

If your limit is expressed numerically as 2, you would be in compliance with any measurement less than 2.5 ppm as those values would round down to 2. If instead your limit was expressed as 2.0, the measurement would have to be less than 2.05. That extra significant figure (.0) is very important when it comes to how stringent a limit is and demonstrating compliance.

So the next time you are negotiating permit conditions or comparing limits, be sure to take note of the number of significant figures and any policy the permitting agency may have for addressing significant figures in compliance determination.

And for extra credit, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says, “While the Earth appears to be round when viewed from the vantage point of space, it is actually closer to an ellipsoid.”

  • Counsel

    Penny represents clients on a broad range of environmental and administrative law issues arising under federal and state law, with emphasis on permitting and compliance with the Clean Air Act, water quality and stormwater ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 1 Minute Read

The California Consumer Privacy Act continues to drive significant enforcement activity—particularly when minors’ data is involved. In a recent action, the California Privacy Protection Agency imposed a $1.1 million fine on youth sports platform PlayOn Sports for alleged violations involving student data and inadequate opt-out mechanisms. The case highlights growing regulatory scrutiny around how companies collect, share, and provide transparency about personal information—especially when schools and students are involved. 

Time 9 Minute Read

Since its first day in office, the current administration has taken steps to curtail the development of renewable energy, and wind energy in particular. Just over a year in, the administration’s intentions do not seem to have changed, but there are signs that legal challenges are affecting implementation of its policies toward renewable energy development.

Time 4 Minute Read

On January 27, 2026, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership hosted a fireside chat with California Privacy Protection Agency General Counsel Phil Laird in honor of Data Privacy Day.

Time 2 Minute Read

On January 8, 2026, the California Privacy Protection Agency announced enforcement activity against Rickenbacher Data LLC d/b/a Datamasters and S&P Global Inc. for failing to register as data brokers in California.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page