US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
Libertarians says Smog Danger is a lot of Hot Air (english)
01 May 2003
Free Market analysts claim that the the American Lung Association 2003 "State of the Air" report is designed to generate alarming headlines and encourage charitable donations, but not to provide the media and the public with accurate information on air pollution.
State of the Scare
By Joel Schwartz and Steven F. Hayward, Tech Central Station

On May 1, the American Lung Association (ALA) releases its annual "State of the Air" report on air pollution levels in American cities. Like previous "State of the Air" reports, the news is alarming. The ALA claims "nearly half of the US population" lives in areas with dangerous levels of air pollution. Metropolitan areas from New York to San Diego are given letter grades of "F" for air quality. Before taking this year's ALA report at face value, reporters should ask the ALA report's authors a few questions to clarify the report's biases.

Q: Is air quality in California, and the U.S. as a whole, better or worse than it was 10 years ago? Five years ago?

Air pollution has been declining for decades. While southern California's air pollution remains the highest in the nation, southern California has made more progress than any other region. National compliance with the 1-hour ozone standard went from about 50% in the early 1980s to 87% today.

About 40% of U.S. monitoring locations still exceed EPA's stringent new 8-hour ozone standard, but 8-hour ozone levels have been dropping as well. Virtually the entire nation (>99%) now meets all federal health standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide. More than 96% of the nation complies with PM10 standards (particulate matter under 10 micrometers in diameter), and the compliance rate is about 70% for EPA's stringent new annual PM2.5 standard. PM2.5 declined 33% between 1980 and 2000, with the most polluted areas once again achieving the greatest reductions. These declining trends will continue in the coming decade.

Q: Is every single person in each city or county with an "F" grade exposed to dangerous levels of air pollution?

ALA "State of the Air" reports give an entire county an "F" grade if only a single air quality monitor within a county exceeds the EPA's strict new 8-hour ozone benchmark more than 3 times per year. But in most metro areas only a few monitors ever register an exceedence. In some metro areas, only a tiny percentage of the population lives in proximity to air quality monitors that exceed the EPA standard.

For example, ALA gave San Diego an "F" for air quality, claiming that San Diego experienced 16 exceedences per year of the EPA ozone standard. In fact, only a single rural location, Alpine, exceeded the 8-hour ozone standard more than 2 times per year. 99.7% of people in San Diego County breathe air that meets both the EPA 8-hour and 1-hour ozone standards. ALA greatly exaggerated ozone levels in other metro areas as well. This is one of the ways in which ALA was able to claim half of all Americans live in areas with unhealthy levels of ozone-they simply included tens of millions of people who actually breathe clean air.

One might argue that talking about the number of days smog is elevated somewhere in a region is not misleading and paints a fair picture of the nature of the regional pollution problem. But the health effects of smog depend on how often a given person is exposed. Since no one is exposed to smog anywhere near as often as the ALA claims, the public is being encouraged to vastly overestimate its risk from air pollution.

Q: Does ALA believe that air that exceeds EPA's 8-hour ozone standard poses a major health risk?

The EPA's new, stricter 8-hour ozone standard was selected to offer protection to those people who are considered "most sensitive" to pollution, chiefly the elderly and people with respiratory ailments. Most Americans do not face significant risk from current levels of ozone.

For example, the EPA projects that going from nationwide attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard to attainment of the 8-hour standard would reduce emergency room visits for asthma by 0.6 percent, even though the 8-hour standard is significantly more stringent. But comparison of air pollution levels in California counties shows that there is little relationship between air pollution levels and asthma prevalence, while a recent study of California's Central Valley, funded by the California Air Resources Board, found that emergency room visits and hospitalizations for respiratory disease were lower on days with higher ozone. While no one believes ozone protects against respiratory harm, the effects of ozone at current levels are small enough that epidemiologists have difficulty detecting any change in health outcomes with changes in air pollution levels. Nevertheless, ALA claims 40% of Americans are "at risk" when air pollution exceeds the 8-hour ozone benchmark on just a few days per year.

Q: Does the American Lung Association believe that, notwithstanding the decline in air pollution in the U.S. and California, air pollution is going to get worse in the future?

ALA claims in the "State of the Air" that "the improvement in ozone levels seen in 1999-2001 is likely due to favorable weather conditions rather than significant new measures to reduce pollution," and "much air pollution cleanup has been stalled during the past five years, because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has failed to take steps to enforce more the more protective ozone standard adopted in 1997." (p. 3, col. 1).

In fact, the downward trend in pollution levels has been ongoing and will continue. On-road pollution measurements show emissions from gasoline vehicles are dropping by about 10 percent per year, as the fleet turns over to more recent models that start out and stay much cleaner than vehicles built years ago. Diesel truck emissions are also declining, albeit about half as fast. Although motorists are driving more miles each year and population growth means more motorists on the roads, these increases in driving are tiny compared to the large declines in vehicle emission rates and will do little to slow progress on auto pollution.

Emissions from industrial sources will also continue to drop. Starting in 2004, EPA regulations require a 60 percent reduction in summertime NOx emissions from coal-fired power plants and industrial boilers-the major industrial sources of ozone-forming pollution, and a 20 percent reduction in PM-forming SO2 from power plants between now and 2010. These reductions are in addition to substantial declines in industrial NOx and SO2 emissions during the last 30 years.

Clearly "State of the Air" is designed to generate alarming headlines-and aid fundraising for the American Lung Association-rather than provide the media and the public with accurate information on air pollution. Last August Andrew Goldstein of Time magazine wrote: "Fuzzy math and scare tactics might help green groups raise money, but when they, abetted by an environmentally friendly media, overplay their hand, it invites scathing critiques. . ." (From "Too Green for Their Own Good?" Time magazine, August 26, 2002.)

Joel Schwartz
A senior fellow at the Reason Public Policy Institute, a think tank promoting choice, competition, and a dynamic market economy as the foundation for human dignity and progress. He is also an adjunct fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a free-market (Libertarian) think tank in Washington dedicated to preserving and strengthening the foundations of freedom—limited government, private enterprise, vital cultural and political institutions, and a strong foreign policy and national defense. Joel has worked as an environmental scientist for the California State Legislative Analysts' Office, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and the RAND Corporation.

Steven F. Hayward
A senior fellow in environmental studies at the Pacific Research Institute, a free-market think tank that champions freedom, opportunity, and personal responsibility for all individuals, and a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

by the Associated Press & Miguel Llanos, MSNBC (miguel.llanos (at)

The American Lung Association’s 2003 report on air quality ranks the worst urban areas by how many days* they reported high ozone, the key ingredient in smog. Its best cities are those with no high ozone days in the period studied. Click on the map above for the "best" and "worst" urban areas for estimates** on people with asthma, bronchitis or emphysema.

The ALA’s findings were based on the most recent Environmental Protection Agency data used to track ozone, or smog, which is formed when nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons from vehicles mix with sunlight. Among the other report findings:

* While 93 counties nationwide improved their marks from last year, 26 counties received lower grades this year.
* Improvements, mostly in the Southeast, were attributed to weather patterns that brought cooler temperatures or winds that diverted pollution elsewhere.
* Nearly half of Americans are living in counties with unhealthy smog levels.
* 55 percent of all monitored counties received an F rating.
* In California, 28 of the state’s 58 counties got failing marks for air quality.

Although nine California counties improved their grades, the ALA said 33 million of the state’s 35 million people are breathing dirty air. That number is up by nearly 4 million people from last year’s report.

Bush Proposals Criticized

The ALA defended its methodology and while recognizing past clean air gains claimed that Bush administration proposals threatened to undermine them. Of particular concern is what’s called the “new source review” - a Clean Air Act requirement for older power plants to install new pollution controls if they increase production. The Bush administration has proposed giving these older power plants more flexibility in meeting that requirement, saying that would still achieve cleaner air. But the ALA believes it would “drastically weaken new source review” and its president, John Kirkwood, called it “the tip of the iceberg of policy changes that would weaken the core of the Clean Air Act.”

1. Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA
Total pop: 16,373,645
Pediatric asthma: 258,237 - Adult asthma: 831,760
Chronic bronchitis: 528,572 - Emphysema: 162,952

2. Fresno, CA
Total pop: 922,516
Pediatric asthma: 16,197 - Adult asthma: 44,810
Chronic bronchitis: 28,598 - Emphysema: 9,037

3. Bakersfield, CA
Total pop: 661,645
Pediatric asthma: 11,689 - Adult asthma: 31,988
Chronic bronchitis: 20,330 - Emphysema: 6,250

4. Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA
Total pop: 368,021
Pediatric asthma: 6,871 - Adult asthma: 17,349
Chronic bronchitis: 11,078 - Emphysema: 3,503

5. Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX
Total pop: 4,669,571
Pediatric asthma: 74,988 - Adult asthma: 202,727
Chronic bronchitis: 147,772 - Emphysema: 41,960

6. Sacramento-Yolo, Calif. - pop: 1,796,857
Pediatric asthma: 26,911 - Adult asthma: 93,425
Chronic bronchitis: 60,425 - Emphysema: 19,841

7. Merced, CA
Total pop: 210,554
Pediatric asthma: 4,019 - Adult asthma: 9,808
Chronic bronchitis: 6,248 - Emphysema: 1,959

8. Atlanta, GA
Total pop: 4,112,198
Pediatric asthma: 60,592 - Adult asthma: 217,423
Chronic bronchitis: 133,668 - Emphysema: 37,034

9. Knoxville, TN
Total pop: 687,249
Pediatric asthma: 8,586 - Adult asthma: 36,394
Chronic bronchitis: 24,986 - Emphysema: 8,687

10. Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC & SC
Total pop: 1,499,293
Pediatric asthma: 21,069 - Adult asthma: 70,937
Chronic bronchitis: 50,198 - Emphysema: 15,683

*Based on EPA data for "unhealthy" ranges of ozone.
**Disease estimates are based on federal figures for the U.S., which were divided by urban populations to get localized figures.
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.