|
|
|
Uploaded: Friday, May 1, 2009, 3:36 PM
Updated: Monday, May 4, 2009, 8:52 AM
Santa Clara County fails air-pollution report
Bay Area counties receive mixed grades in 2009 'State of the Air' report of the American Lung Association
|
|
by Kris Young
Palo Alto Online Staff
Santa Clara County received failing grades in both smog and short-term particle air-pollution levels, according to the 10th annual American Lung Association report.
But San Mateo and four other Bay Area counties are among the most smog-free in the nation, according to the 2009 "State of the Air" report released this week.
Santa Clara County was ranked as the 24th most polluted county in the nation for short-term particle pollution, an improvement over the 17th position it held last year.
The association analyzed the two most widespread forms of air pollution -- ozone (smog) and particle pollution -- in 1,000 counties nationwide using 2005, 2006 and 2007 data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Air Quality System monitors. Unhealthy air pollution levels were determined by the EPA Air Quality Index and counties were graded and ranked.
Ozone gas, the most common ingredient in smog, is a pollutant that forms when fossil fuels are burned or chemicals evaporate and then react with heat and sunlight, the report stated.
"Ozone pollution immediately irritates the lungs when inhaled, resulting in something like a bad sunburn," Dr. Tony Gerber, a San Francisco pulmonary specialist and American Lung Association volunteer, said in a news conference Tuesday.
"Particle pollution is a toxic mix of soot, diesel exhaust, chemicals, metals and aerosols. It is the most dangerous and deadly of the outdoor air pollutants that are widespread in America," Gerber said.
According to the association, Studies show that both ozone and particle pollution cause premature death, decreased lung function, and increased rates of heart attacks, strokes, bronchitis, asthma and lung diseases.
Santa Clara County received failing grades for its number of high-ozone days and short-term particle pollution days in the report. Annual particle pollution levels for the county and the rest of the Bay Area counties received a passing grade.
Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo and Sonoma counties received an "A" for having zero days of unhealthy ozone levels from 2005 to 2007. Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara and Solano counties all had around five days annually of unhealthy ozone levels and received "F" grades.
Bay Area counties didn't do as well for unhealthy levels of short-term particle pollution, according to the report: Alameda received a "C"; Contra Costa, San Francisco and Santa Clara all received "F" grades; San Mateo and Sonoma received a "B"; Solano a "D"; and data was not available for Marin and Napa.
Santa Clara County received the same failing grade as some famously known polluted areas such as Los Angeles -- which has been listed as the most polluted metropolitan area 10 years running by the association.
"By and large we have cleaner air than what we see in Southern California," Lisa Fasano, a spokeswoman for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, said. The report highlights the importance of air quality but fails to show the public the progress the Bay Area has made, she said.
The yearly average number of days Santa Clara County has exceeded unhealthy ozone levels has dropped from 10 in the 2001 report to 5 in the 2009 report.
The report grades all counties for unhealthy ozone or short-term particle pollution within a fairly narrow range. Counties that recorded unhealthy air pollution levels more than a yearly average of 3.3 days received a failing grade. Counties that recorded less than 0.3 days of air pollution received an "A."
From 2005 to 2007, Santa Clara County surpassed unhealthy ozone limits an average 5.2 days a year. Southern California counties San Bernardino, Riverside, Kern, Tulare and Los Angeles reported 138.8, 129.5, 110.5, 101.2 and 96.5 days, respectively. They were also the top five most ozone-polluted counties, according to the report.
Santa Clara County surpassed unhealthy short-term pollution particle levels a yearly average of 11 days -- placing 24th highest in the nation. Number-two ranked Fresno reported 51 days.
"What we want to make sure the public understands is the air quality is unhealthy in the Bay Area counties, it is unhealthy in Los Angeles too. ... We have found that when we have that many days at those levels you have air that makes people sick, you have air that is unhealthy to breathe," Janice Nolan, assistant vice president of national policy and advocacy with the American Lung Association, said.
The State of the Air report concluded that six out of 10 Americans live in areas where pollution levels endanger lives.
"When millions of Californians and 60 percent of Americans are left breathing air dirty enough to send people to the emergency room, to affect how kids' lungs develop, and to kill, air pollution remains a serious problem that must be addressed," Gerber said.
Santa Clara County has historically had the worst air quality in the Bay Area, according to Jenny Bard, the Bay Area regional air quality director for the American Lung Association.
The county is home to 1.8 million residents and the most populous in the Bay Area, she said. Additionally, Santa Clara County has a limited mass transit infrastructure and 1.2 million autos (25 percent of the Bay Area) traveling its roads, she said.
According to Fasano, 69 percent of all smog pollutants during Bay Area summers are created by motor vehicles.
In the winter time, 33 percent of all short-term particle pollutants are created by wood smoke primarily burned by residents, said Bard.
Geography and weather patterns also have a huge impact on air pollution, Bard said. Counties like San Francisco and San Mateo benefit from winds that blow air pollution away. As a result, some cities such as San Jose are recipients of "second-hand smog," she said.
"The bottom line is we need to reduce the number of single-passenger vehicles and vehicles on the roadways," Fasano said.
Karen Holine, regional vice president of the American Lung Association in California, echoed Fasano's comments. "Now is the time to be more reliant on cleaner, low-carbon energy and fuels for transportation, power and heat generation," Holine said. "We need everyone to drive less, drive cleaner, use less energy and to stop burning wood."
For more information and county report cards visit www.stateoftheair.org.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by sarah, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 1, 2009 at 4:34 pm The pro-pollution lobby will try to dismiss this report, but the fact is you do not have to be super-sensitive to smell the pollution in the air. During the winter, so many people burn firewood that Palo Alto almost smells like a forest fire. On warm summer days, if you try to exercise outdoors, the pollution will burn your lungs. The "Spare the Air" people uses to recommend that people bicycle to work on "Spare the Air" days, but they no longer do so because the pollution is dangerous to bicyclists. I can't imagine what the quality of life is like for professional gardeners or carpenters who have to work outdoors every day to make a living.
|
|
Posted by pat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 2, 2009 at 11:36 am Why hasn't our ultra-green environmental city council banned all wood-burning fireplaces?
|
|
Posted by Kathy, a resident of Mountain View, on May 3, 2009 at 8:52 am Hi Pat, the Bay Area Air Quality District (BAAQMD) has banned wood burning during the winter months only on Spare the Air Days; it began this past winter and there were 11 such days. However, overall wood burning went down somewhat, probably due to fear of getting fined and not understanding the ruling. Please check their website--there is also a rule that smoke coming out of ANY chimney cannot exceed certain visibility standards that only BAAQMD officials can measure w/special instruments and this is true any day of the year. If you see someone w/especially thick smoke emanating from their home, call them and register an anonymous complaint. They will send an inspector to measure the smoke density and give a citation if necessary.
I agree however that all burning should simply go the way of the dinosaurs. It's like having people smoke in restaurants and hospitals. This is air we all breathe, that our children and the elderly breathe. I have asthma and allergies, and the smoke contains contains carcinogens, irritants, and particulates as well as CO2 which contributes to global warming. There is no earthly reason for this outdated harmful practice to continue. Let your views be known to the BAAQMD. I think they are afraid of the "wood burning lobby", whoever they are.
|
|
Posted by sarah, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 3, 2009 at 10:12 am Wood burning is only part of the problem. Most of the air pollution in Santa Clara County comes from private automobiles.
|
|
Posted by John, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 3, 2009 at 1:04 pm This is really scary for our children because Santa Clara has one of the highest rates of asthma and bronchitis.
|
|
Posted by Sarah, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 3, 2009 at 2:37 pm Yes, in the long run, most of today's pollution problems will hurt our children a lot more than they hurt their parents.
|
|
Posted by Family of 5, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on May 3, 2009 at 2:55 pm Why can't they produce electric cars that appear to be SUVs? Doesn't need the real power of SUVs but I refuse to drive a minivan and my Suburban offers the room and safety for my family. 3 large athletes cannot squish into one back row.
|
|
Posted by Sarah, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 3, 2009 at 4:52 pm Historically, SUVs have been terrible at air pollution because these vehicles and not popular in Asia and Europe, so Asian and European car companies don't focus on them. The American companies that specialize in SUVs are, as you can tell by recent news headlines, not among the world's best run companies.
Here are some guides to buying a lower-polluting vehicle. They do have SUVs on the list, if you must have one of those:
Web Link
Web Link
Web Link
Of course, the easiest way to reduce air pollution is to drive less (carpool, use public transit, group your trips, walk more, bicycle, etc.).
|
|
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 3:49 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online People with respiratory problems can be relieved by air conditioning, but the cost of owning and operating air conditioning has been driven skyward, going beyond middle class budgets. Like Lucy and the football, regulators keep moving the target to justify their salaries. Demanding that air and water be made cleaner than their pre-man conditions is just plain waste. The low hanging fruit was harvested decades ago, now we play a one-up game with the energy we need to differentiate ourselves from the animals.
The big advantage of air conditioning over de-industrialization is that it offers relief from the majority of asthmatic trauma caused by pollens and animal dander.
|
|
Posted by Sarah, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 7:58 am Air conditioning only helps if you are at home all day. California is full of young active people who like to spend time outdoors, but the air pollution makes that dangerous. Sitting at home watching TV causes obesity, which is even more dangerous.
|
|
Posted by Sharon, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 9:01 am
It could be worse-------
Chinese ordered to smoke more to boost economy
Local government officials in China have been ordered to smoke nearly a quarter of a million packs of cigarettes in a move to boost the local economy during the global financial crisis.
Even local schools have been issued with a smoking quota for teachers, while one village was ordered to purchase 400 cartons of cigarettes a year for its officials, according to the local government's website. Web Link
|
|
Posted by Mike, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 10:42 am Burning wood should be outlawed every day of the year.
There are times I cough and smell it and have to leave my house because my (otherwise lovely) neighbor is using an wood-burning fireplace and is unresponsive to my complaints of discomfort. Until it is illegal, this will continue.
|
|
Posted by energyman, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 11:00 am We have one of too few electric vehicles in Palo Alto. Toyota took it out of production when the Cal Air Resources Board gutted the Zero Emission Vehicle mandate in 2003 under auto industry pressure. Electric vehicles charged with California's mix of generation sources: hydro, wind, solar, ag waste, nuclear, contribute 3% of the greenhouse gases and pollutants of the average Infernal Combustion Engine.
There are also the lower hanging fruit like walking, biking, carpooling, and smarter traffic controls that reduce idling time.
|
|
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 11:48 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online Smart folk come in out of the rain, they don't demand an umbrella over the city.
Energyman, the misnamed Zero Emission Vehicle mandate stalled the development of the hybrid for a dozen years, effectively slowing the battery research that successful electrics ultimately depend on.
People are smart enough to carpool without compulsion whenever it makes sense. I concur with the benefits of better signal coordination, but we live in a city where impeding or blocking traffic has been the watchword.
|
|
Posted by Sarah, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 1:11 pm Air pollution in Santa Clara County is bad so many days per year that you cannot just stay indoors and hide from it. The smog is so bad on almost all summer days that if you go up to Skyline and look down at Palo Alto, you will not be able to see the bay.
|
|
Posted by Energyman is right, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 1:38 pm Walter, you forget the Freedom Car effort funded by the Clinton administration that gave American automobile manufacturers gobs of money to design and build hybrids. Toyota was scared about this funding and self-funded the Prius. The Prius came out in Japan in 1997, the next generation Prius came out in the US in 2000, well before the Zero Emission Vehicle mandate was terminated in 2003.
It was only after the success of the third generation Prius, released in 2003 that had nothing to do with the termination of the ZEV mandate, that American automobile manufacturers started to take notice of the hybrids for which they had received billions from the Freedom Car effort.
There is absolutely no reason to believe that battery research was slowed by the ZEV mandate. Rather it was slowed by the oil-promoting Bush administration killing the Freedom Car effort early this decade.
|
|
Posted by Dennis, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 3:21 pm As I write this, the pollution I am breathing is from restaurant emissions (even with all windows closed.)
|
|
Posted by Sharon, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 3:30 pm
The real poison in the Bay Area is from unfiltered coal plants in China, the vast majority of mercury pollution in our air and water originates from China.
The projection is that many fish in our waters, such as tuna, will be too toxic to eat in a couple of years.
The mercury from China rapidly turns to methyl mercury, which is among the most toxic pollutants.
We have reduced tail pipe emissions by 95% in the US in the last 35 years, what is the point if China dumps their toxic waste on us through, food, water,air, toys, drugs, building materials and pet food?
|
|
Posted by Sarah, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 4:08 pm The point is that air pollution in Santa Clara County is still unhealthy and most of the pollution is caused by local residents. I do not know how Sharon's "95%" number is measured, but the local air definitely does not 95% less ozone or particulate pollution than 35 years ago.
|
|
Posted by Sharon, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 5:11 pm
There is no issue in the Bay Area with ozone or particulate matter, you must be thinking of Mexico City.
The lethal threat we have is methyl mercury coming from the unregulated coal fired power stations in China as well as contaminated sea food, medicine, building materials, childrens toys(lead in huge quantities) and pet food originating from China.
You can view the pollution streams from space that originate in China and fall on the West Coast in real time.
In a sane world we would use property right to punish this and such action is coming.
Meanwhile check out the mercury levels in Chinese seafood( shrimp, etc), Trader Joes will not even sell it anymore, good for them.
|
|
Posted by Sarah, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 5:33 pm Yes there are problems with ozone and particulate pollution in Santa Clara County. The EPA regularly rates these as unhealthy. That is the whole point of the "Spare The Air" warnings that we get when the air is especially dirty. Maybe you can tolerate the pollution, but many children get sick from it (both immediately and long term).
|
|
Posted by Sharon, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 5:59 pm
The cause of asthma in the first world is lack of exposure to bacteria, mild viruses, dirt and dust at an early age.
Asthma is an auto immune disease, if the the immune system is not exposed early you have a problem, same with may other conditions.
The science is clear
Kids who are exposed to pets such as dogs, with all that means in terms of dirt, develop robust immune systems.
Read some science on natural selection rather than the "green goddess" religious tracts and cult.
The major source of ozone air pollution these day in the Valley is organic derived pollutants from the trees in the hills.
Methyl mercury is the threat, brain damage, cancer and many others.
It helps to get some sun and/or vitamin D
|
|
Posted by Sarah, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 7:40 pm The Spare the Air program is run by the Bay Area county governments, not some "green goddess". I trust them a lot more than the pro-pollution lobby propaganda that some people in this forum keep spewing.
|
|
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 4, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online So, Sharon, if we let babies wallow in pigsties they will live to be 100? Asthmatic children in 3rd world countries just die.
|
|
|
| |
2007 Awards from the California
Newspaper Publishers Association
Palo Alto Weekly
First Place
Local News Coverage
Local Breaking-News Story
Feature Story
Second Place
Feature Story
Environmental Reporting
Sports Coverage
General News Photo
Photo Essay
Freedom of Information
The Almanac
First Place
Environmental Reporting
Editorial Pages
Lifestyle Coverage
Second Place
Environmental Reporting
Mountain View Voice
Second Place
General Excellence
Editorial Comment
Front-Page Design
|
|
|
Send this story
Print this story
