Air Quality News from Around the World

Globally, air pollution and efforts to make the air cleaner are making big headlines. Here are a few recent stories from around the globe:

Air Pollution, Birth Defects, and the risk in China

Hong Kong to Raise Air Quality Standards and Cut Emissions

Tonawanda Coke Company found Guilty of Illegal Pollution

Bay Area Spare the Air

Bristol Councillor Calls for City Centre Low Emission Zone

Four Countries Bring Air Pollution Under EU Limit

Europe's Air Pollution Battle

The Government will argue in the Supreme Court this week that it has no obligation to reduce Britain’s harmful levels of air pollution within the time limits set by Europe.

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels are dangerously high in 16 regions of Britain, exceeding the EU limit which member nations were supposed to have complied with by 2010. Britain is the only nation not to apply for a time extension having failed to meet its 2010 deadline, because the Coalition has decided to fight European air regulations in court while lobbying to have them weakened.

The case comes just weeks after a World Health Organisation review found that exposure to nitrogen dioxide is harmful at even lower levels than the limits currently set by Europe.

Air pollution is estimated to cause 29,000 premature deaths each year in the UK at an average loss of life of 11.5 years. Nitrogen dioxide is one of the pollutants known to contribute to this figure, with links to conditions such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

London has the highest recorded level of NO2 of any capital city in Europe. Mean levels of the toxic gas are not supposed to exceed 40 cubic micrograms over a calendar year, but some of London’s busiest roads are routinely at triple this level.

The Department for Environment and Rural Affairs will argue on Thursday that it is not possible to comply with European limits by 2015, so there was no point asking for an extension to the 2010 deadline. Instead they have made plans that mean most regions (including Manchester, Birmingham, and Glasgow) will not achieve legal limits for NO2 until 2020, and in the case of London, 2025.

Alan Andrews, lawyer at Client Earth, the campaigning law firm which has brought the lawsuit said: “The science is getting stronger, but the Government’s response is as weak as ever. We know that the higher the levels of nitrogen dioxide, the more people die, and the more people are made sick. So the fact that the Government’s plans won’t achieve compliance with air quality standards until 2025 is nothing short of a disgrace.”

“This Government thinks that laws that are in place to save lives are “red tape”. That’s why they are refusing to act to tackle air pollution, while at the same time lobbying the EU to get the laws weakened. They are on the wrong side of the science, and they are on the wrong side of the law. We need the Supreme Court to step in and force the Government to live up to its legal and moral duty to protect us from air pollution”

Last year the Court of Appeal refused to force Defra to obey EU law and the issue was passed up to the Supreme Court. Though the Court of Appeal said enforcement of the law was up the European Commission, the commission says it has “considerable concerns” about any attempts to circumnavigate their deadlines using a technicality that Defra is expected to argue in court.

Frank Kelly, professor of environmental health at King’s College London, said: “There’s a public health problem here and the Government need to take responsibility. It’s not good enough to say that we can wait to 2025.”

A spokeswoman said Defra plans to reduce NO2 levels in the “shortest possible time,” adding: “Our air quality has improved significantly in recent decades and most of the UK meets EU air quality limits for all pollutants.”

Case studies: 'I can't go down the road now because it's too polluted'

Francis Davidson, 69, lives in North London and believes her health has been directly affected by levels of air pollution there.

“I live just off the Holloway Road, which has to be one of the worst polluted parts of London - there are lorries coming by all the time. My lung collapses regularly and I can’t go down the road now because it’s too polluted. I can’t breathe when I go out and I have to time it carefully for times when there’s less traffic, like one o’clock in the afternoon.

Unless they do something about it we’re all going to get terrible lung diseases. Children are coughing their heads off and I don’t understand why nothing’s being done. I remember the smog in the Fifties which made them pass the clean air act, because it was obvious fires were making people really sick. They need another clean air act now because the air is not clean anymore.”

Fiona Dawson, 35, from East London is concerned that her eldest daughter, Maya, 3, suffers from asthma symptoms because of pollution.

“I’ve become more aware of air pollution since my daughter has had chest problems. She had her first wheezy episode a year ago and it was really frightening. We’ve been back and forth at the doctors’ and hospitals since then. The doctor said ‘ah yes, we’ve had a lot of people coming in with similar conditions because of the weather and the rise in air pollution’. It makes me very angry that more isn’t being done. Maya will be 16 in 2025 - that’s a whole generation exposed to this and the Government just don’t seem to care at all.”

Source: The Independent

Asthma on the Rise

The prevalence of asthma and allergic diseases has increased dramatically during the past few decades not only in industrialized countries. Urban air pollution from motor vehicles has been indicated as one of the major risk factors responsible for this increase.Although genetic factors are important in the development of asthma and allergic diseases, the rising trend can be explained only in changes occurred in the environment.

Despite some differences in the air pollution profile and decreasing trends of some key air pollutants, air quality is an important concern for public health in the cities throughout the world.Due to climate change, air pollution patterns are changing in several urbanized areas of the world, with a significant effect on respiratory health.The observational evidence indicates that recent regional changes in climate, particularly temperature increases, have already affected a diverse set of physical and biological systems in many parts of the world. Associations between thunderstorms and asthma morbidity in pollinosis subjects have been also identified in multiple locations around the world.Allergens patterns are also changing in response to climate change and air pollution can modify the allergenic potential of pollens especially in presence of specific weather conditions.The underlying mechanisms of all these interactions are not well known yet.

The consequences on health vary from decreases in lung function to allergic diseases, new onset of diseases, and exacerbation of chronic respiratory diseases.Factor clouding the issue is that laboratory evaluations do not reflect what happens during natural exposition, when atmospheric pollution mixtures in polluted cities are inhaled. In addition, it is important to recall that an individual's response to pollution exposure depends on the source and components of air pollution, as well as meteorological conditions.

Indeed, some air pollution-related incidents with asthma aggravation do not depend only on the increased production of air pollution, but rather on atmospheric factors that favour the accumulation of air pollutants at ground level.Considering these aspects governments worldwide and international organizations such as the World Health Organization and the European Union are facing a growing problem of the respiratory effects induced by gaseous and particulate pollutants arising from motor vehicle emissions.

Source: 7th Space Interactive

Air Quality and Gestation

The observational study pooled data from 3 million births at 14 research centres in 9 countries, including the United States, South Korea and Brazil. It focused on two classes of hazardous air pollutants: inhalable particulate matter (PM) with a diameter of less than 2.5 micrometres (PM2.5) and of less than 10 micrometres (PM10). These particles are produced from the combustion of fossil fuels by industry and transportation and from burning firewood, but can also include particles of dust or sea salt.

“Those centres that have higher levels of air pollution report higher risks of low birth weights compared with those centres that have lower levels of pollution,” says Payam Dadvand, an epidemiologist at the Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Barcelona, Spain, who is first author on the study.

By the authors’ calculations, each increase in PM10 by 10 micrograms per cubic metre (μg m–3) was associated with a 3% higher chance of an infant being underweight and with an overall average weight reduced by 3 grammes. That reduction in average weight tripled to 9 g when the authors adjusted for local variables such as maternal age or tobacco use. The calculations took socioeconomic status into account.

The median PM10 value varied across the 14 sites, from 12.5 μg m–3 in Vancouver to 66.5 μg m–3in Seoul. For a subset of centres that included information on PM2.5 exposure, the odds of lower birth weight increased by 10% for each increase in exposure.

As Trasande explains, the risks are small at the individual level, but “on a population basis, a shift can produce large increases in the percentage of low-birth-weight infants”, he says. Smoking, alcohol and drug use and poor maternal health are also linked to low birth weights.

In a study of more than 220,000 US births published last month, Trasande and his colleagues found that outdoor air pollution was associated with longer hospital stays and greater health-care costs2. In 2010, 8.2% of infants born in the United States were of low birth weight.

Pregnant women who have been exposed to higher levels of some types of air pollution are slightly more likely to give birth to underweight babies, a large international study has found. The results are published online today inEnvironmental Health Perspectives1.

Low birth weight — defined as a newborn baby weighing less than 2.5 kilogrammes — increases the risk of infant mortality and childhood diseases, and has been associated with developmental and health problems later in life, including diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

Previous studies have looked at whether exposure to tiny airborne particles during pregnancy leads to more low-birth-weight babies. Although many studies have found links, others have failed to establish a connection.

“The thorn in the side of many studies of air-pollution exposure and impact on fetal growth has been the variability in study design and in exposure assessment,” says Leonardo Trasande, a children’s environmental-health researcher at New York University in New York city. “This one does a tremendous service by making them very comparable.”
Birth pool

The observational study pooled data from 3 million births at 14 research centres in 9 countries, including the United States, South Korea and Brazil. It focused on two classes of hazardous air pollutants: inhalable particulate matter (PM) with a diameter of less than 2.5 micrometres (PM2.5) and of less than 10 micrometres (PM10). These particles are produced from the combustion of fossil fuels by industry and transportation and from burning firewood, but can also include particles of dust or sea salt.

“Those centres that have higher levels of air pollution report higher risks of low birth weights compared with those centres that have lower levels of pollution,” says Payam Dadvand, an epidemiologist at the Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Barcelona, Spain, who is first author on the study.

By the authors’ calculations, each increase in PM10 by 10 micrograms per cubic metre (μg m–3) was associated with a 3% higher chance of an infant being underweight and with an overall average weight reduced by 3 grammes. That reduction in average weight tripled to 9 g when the authors adjusted for local variables such as maternal age or tobacco use. The calculations took socioeconomic status into account.

The median PM10 value varied across the 14 sites, from 12.5 μg m–3 in Vancouver to 66.5 μg m–3in Seoul. For a subset of centres that included information on PM2.5 exposure, the odds of lower birth weight increased by 10% for each increase in exposure.

As Trasande explains, the risks are small at the individual level, but “on a population basis, a shift can produce large increases in the percentage of low-birth-weight infants”, he says. Smoking, alcohol and drug use and poor maternal health are also linked to low birth weights.

In a study of more than 220,000 US births published last month, Trasande and his colleagues found that outdoor air pollution was associated with longer hospital stays and greater health-care costs2. In 2010, 8.2% of infants born in the United States were of low birth weight.

Other factors

The authors of the latest study made efforts to control for socioeconomic and lifestyle factors that might skew the results. However, some of those adjustments had limitations. Not all centres included information about whether the mother smoked during pregnancy; maternal education and address were used as proxy measurements to give an idea of socioeconomic status; and the mothers' exposure to air pollution during pregnancy was estimated rather than measured directly.

Despite such limitations to studying these effects, “we are getting more and more consistent signals that particles are related to these birth outcomes and they may affect prenatal development,” says Beate Ritz, an environmental epidemiologist at the University of California, Los Angeles. She has studied the connection between particulate matter and birth weight in California since the 1990s, but was not involved in the latest analysis.

Epidemiologists are concerned that some of the effects of a mother's exposure to air pollution may not be seen until several decades after her children are born. “If you think of what is happening in China, that doesn’t bode very well,” says Ritz, referring to recent reports of dangerous air-pollution levels in some Chinese cities. For example, in late January, the 24-hour average reading for PM2.5in Beijing reached more than 460 μg m–3 according to the US Embassy there; China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection reported a lower figure of around 350 μg m–3.

The World Health Organization recommends that countries establish rigorous air-pollution standards of an annual mean of 10 μg m–3 for PM2.5 and 20 μg m–3 for PM10. The US Environmental Protection Agency recently strengthened its annual PM2.5 standard by decreasing it from 15 μg m–3to 12 μg m–3. The agency estimates that meeting this standard will provide health benefits worth between US$4 billion and $9.1 billion annually by 2020.

“The impacts of air pollution on pregnancy have not been considered when setting up the regulations,” says Dadvand. “Now is the time to start thinking about it.”



Source: Nature

Beijing Air Pollution Makes International News

China Lets Media Report on Air Pollution Crisis - New York Times

Record Beijing air pollution forces warning from China officials to keep kids indoors - CBS News

This Unbelievable Photo Shows Beijing's Off-The-Charts Air Pollution - Mashable

Chinese media urges action on air pollution - Reuters

Chinese air pollution hits record levels – in pictures - Guardian

China hit by extreme air pollution - LA Times

Beijing's Air Quality Catastrophe - The Atlantic Cities

Beijing's 'Airpocalypse' Spurs Pollution Controls, Public Pressure - NPR

Chinese Pollution Leads to Rare Criticism in State Media - Hollywood Reporter

Biofuel Effect on Air Quality and Crops

Fighting climate change by producing more biofuels could actually worsen a little-known type of air pollution and cause almost 1,400 premature deaths a year in Europe by 2020, according to a new study.

The report said trees grown to produce biofuel - seen as a cleaner alternative to oil and coal - release a chemical into the air that, when mixed with other pollutants, could also reduce farmers' crop yields.

"Growing biofuels is thought to be a good thing because it reduces the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere," said Nick Hewitt, who worked on the study with colleagues from Lancaster University, UK. "What we're saying is 'yes, that's great, but biofuels could also have a detrimental effect on air quality'."

The report, in the journal Nature Climate Change, looked into the impact of a European Union scheme to slow climate change by producing more biofuels.

Hewitt told Reuters there would be a similar impact wherever biofuels were produced in large quantities in areas suffering air pollution, including the United States and China.

Poplar, willow or eucalyptus trees, all used as fast-growing sources of renewable wood fuel, emit high levels of the chemical isoprene as they grow, the study said. Isoprene forms toxic ozone when mixed with other air pollutants in sunlight.

"Large-scale production of biofuels in Europe would have small but significant effects on human mortality and crop yields," said Hewitt. "As far as we know, no one has looked at the air quality of growing biofuel crops before."

The report estimated that ozone from wood-based energy to meet the European Union's 2020 goal would cause nearly 1,400 premature deaths a year, costing society $7.1bn. The European plan would also would reduce the annual value of wheat and maize production by $1.5bn since ozone impairs crop growth, the study added.

Siting new biofuel plantations far away from polluted population centres would help limit ozone formation, the study suggested. Genetic engineering might be used to reduce isoprene emissions, it said.

Ozone can cause lung problems and is blamed for killing about 22,000 people a year in Europe. Overall air pollution, mainly from fossil fuels, causes about 500,000 premature deaths in Europe a year, according to the European Environment Agency.

The study did not compare the potential damage caused by biofuels to the impact on human health from producing coal, oil or natural gas as part of policies to slow global warming. "We're not in a position to make that comparison," Hewitt said.

He noted that the main reason to shift to biofuels was to cut emissions of carbon dioxide, mainly from fossil fuels, that UN studies project will become ever more damaging this century.

The United Nations' World Health Organisation estimates global warming has caused more than 140,000 deaths annually worldwide since the 1970s.

The biggest impact was recorded in developing nations where the floods, droughts and other disasters blamed on climate change left millions suffering from diarrhoea, malnutrition, malaria and dengue fever.

Burning biofuels is viewed as neutral for climate change because plants soak up carbon when they grow and release it when they burn or rot. Fossil fuels, on the other hand, add carbon to the atmosphere from underground stores millions of years old.

Biofuels are often blamed for causing food price spikes by competing for cropland. Responding to such criticisms, the European commission said in 2012 it aimed to limit crop-based biofuels - such as from maize or sugar - to 5% of transport fuels.

Source: Guardian

Air Pollution, Traffic, and Childhood Asthma

As part of an international collaborative study on the impact of Traffic-Related Air Pollution on Childhood Asthma (TRAPCA), the health effects associated with long-term exposure to particles with a 50% cut-off aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 µm (PM2.5), PM2.5 absorbance, and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) were analysed.

The German part of the TRAPCA study used data from subpopulations of two ongoing birth cohort studies (German Infant Nutrition Intervention Programme (GINI) and Influences of Lifestyle Related Factors on the Human Immune System and Development of Allergies in Children (LISA)) based in the city of Munich. Geographic information systems (GIS)-based exposure modelling was used to estimate traffic-related air pollutants at the birth addresses of 1,756 infants. Logistic regression was used to analyse possible health effects and potential confounding factors were adjusted for.

To read the entire study, please see This Link

Obama on Air Pollution

Obama tightens air pollution limits
Suzanne Goldenberg US environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Monday 17 December 2012 06.11 EST

EPA to cut release of soot from power plants and diesel engines, following link to higher rates of heart attacks and lung diseases

The Obama administration has set new limits on a deadly form of air pollution – and risked a backlash from industry early in a second term – by tightening restrictions on soot from smoke stacks and diesel engines.

The new rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will reduce the amount of soot released from power plants, diesel engines, refineries, and other industries.

The microscopic particles are linked to early death and higher rates of heart attacks, strokes and lung diseases, such as asthma.

The EPA administration in announcing the new standards on Friday promised sweeping public health benefits. "Families from around the country will benefit from the simple fact of being able to breathe cleaner air," said Jackson, adding that her two sons suffered from asthma.

The rules, finalised in response to a court-ordered deadline, were strenuously opposed by industry groups and by some members of Congress, setting up the stage for heightened confrontation during Obama's second term.

The administration is expected to roll out other pollution controls, which were put on hold in an election year.

The main oil lobby group, the American Petroleum Institute, said in a statement: "There is no compelling scientific evidence for the policy decision to develop more stringent standards. The existing standards are working and will continue improving air quality."

James Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican who is the Senate's biggest doubter of climate change, said the new rules were the first wave of "an onslaught of post-election rulemakings that will place considerable burdens on our struggling economy and eventually push us over the 'regulatory cliff'".

Clean air advocates praised the decision as long overdue. The air quality standards were raised only after environmental group Earth Justice sued the EPA to enforce standards recommended by its own scientific advisers.

The American Lung Association, which had supported the suit, said in a statement that the new standard would save lives.

"We know clearly that particle pollution is harmful at levels well below those previously deemed to be safe," the statement said. "By setting a more protective standard, the EPA is stating that we as a nation must protect the health of the public by cleaning up even more of this lethal pollutant."

The new standards will limit annual average soot emissions to 12 micrograms per cubic metre of air by the end of the decade. The level, significantly more stringent than the standard of 15 micrograms set in 1997, was in the middle of a range of 11 to 13 micrograms recommended by EPA scientists.

Microscopic particles lodge in lungs and in the bloodstream and are especially dangerous to children and older people. They have been linked to severe asthma attacks.

Jackson said the new standards would result in health savings of between $4bn and $9bn. They will cost up to $350m to implement.

About 66 counties in the country now exceed the current standards, but the EPA estimates that by 2020 only seven counties – all in California – will have trouble meeting the new air quality standards.

The agency will rely on air quality monitors across the country to check on soot levels – especially along busy roads in urban areas. People living on busy roads are at a higher risk of exposure to soot particles.

Source: Guardian

Dirty Minds

Outside In: Dirty Minds

Pollution harms not only lungs but also brains.

By Laura Wright Treadway, published on March 13, 2012 - last reviewed on April 30, 2012

Pollution is ubiquitous in cities, but few rival Mexico City, one of the most smog-filled places in the world. Air pollution is known to cause asthma and other respiratory ailments, even heart disease. But it was still a leap when neuropathologist and toxicologist Lilian Calderón-Garcidueñas suggested that it might affect cognitive function—namely memory and learning.

After all, the brain is walled off from potential harm by the blood-brain barrier—tightly bound cells that restrict the passage of particles from the bloodstream into the cerebrospinal fluid bathing the brain. But Calderón, who works both at the University of Montana and Mexico's National Institute of Pediatrics, has found that the blood-brain barrier is not as impenetrable as once thought.

She recruited healthy children from Mexico City and nearby Polotitlán, where the air is much cleaner. After two years, Calderón was shocked to find that the Mexico City children lagged significantly on tests of memory and learning. MRIs revealed that about half of them had brain lesions similar to those found in Alzheimer's patients."People living in mega-cities do not have an intact blood-brain barrier," she says. "These lesions, they are leaks."

Severe air pollution, Calderón finds, leads to neuroinflammation and damages the brain's white matter. There's evidence that particulate from industrial smokestacks, car and truck exhaust, tobacco smoke, and other sources may be small enough to access the brain directly through neurons in the nose.

Another recent study, at the University of Ohio, found that mice exposed to particulate matter show not only sensory, memory, and learning impairments but also signs of depression.

Although pollution appears to cause measurable harm to the brain, Calderón does not believe that Mexico City's kids are destined to develop a severe neurodegenerative disease. They may be at higher risk, but exercising the mind can mediate damage that is otherwise beyond control.

"There is a lot of plasticity in the brain," Calderón emphasizes. The child whose parents read to him will fare better than the child left to sit in front of the TV all day. "You make new connections, new synapses. But if you are not using your brain, you cannot compensate."

Source: Psychology Today, March 2012

Asthma-Allergy Connection

An estimated 20 million Americans have asthma, chronically inflamed airways that swell and make breathing difficult. And for at least 6 percent of them, inhaled allergens (such as pollen) can trigger the attacks, says New York City allergist Clifford Bassett, M.D. If you have asthma, getting your seasonal allergies under control should help you. If you don't, doing so could prevent you from developing asthma in the first place.

Soruce: Natural Health, May 2012

Breathe Healthy

Many of us ask ourselves: What can I do to be healthier? Of course, we can eat well, get sunshine and exercise, and allow time for balance between work and play. But you can also breathe healthier!

Our air purifying systems combine UV light with the industry's thickest tacky filters to remove more airborne particles than other systems. Decreasing the amount of airborne particles you breathe can help your health on a daily basis.

Some of the problems associated with breathing unhealthy include:

• Asthma
• Bronchitis
• Migraine
• Lung Disease
• Irritation of eyes, nose, throat
• Upper respiratory Infection
• Pneumonia
• Emphysema
• Headaches
• Nausea
• Allergies
• Chronic respiratory disease
• Lung Cancer
• Heart Disease
• Damage to the Brain, Nerves, Liver, or Kidneys

Source: Lawrence Berkeley National Lab

Cargo Ships and Air Pollution

A recent article in Scientific American shows that simply slowing the speed of cargo ships near ports can decrease the amount of air pollution in port towns like Miami.

Slowing cargo vessels near coastlines by 10 to 15 miles per hour could dramatically cut ships’ air pollution, according to a new study. But only a few U.S. ports have initiated such efforts.

A speed limit of 14 mph, down from the current cruising speeds of 25 to 29 mph, would cut nitrogen oxides – a main ingredient of smog – by 55 percent and soot by almost 70 percent, according to the University of California, Riverside study. It also would reduce carbon dioxide – a potent greenhouse gas and key contributor to climate change – by 60 percent.

With 100,000 ships carrying 90 percent of the world’s cargo, air pollution is a heavy burden for people living near ports, so slowing ships could improve their health, researchers say.
In the study, the ships traveled at speeds already used at the ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach and New York-New Jersey as part of voluntary programs.

“Vessel speed reduction does significantly reduce emissions, and that's why we have had a vessel speed reduction program in place at our port for several years,” said Arley Baker, a spokesperson for the Port of Los Angeles. “It’s both a feasible and practical way to reduce vessel emissions.”

But setting a speed limit on cargo ships has been an elusive goal for port cities because shipping traffic is regulated internationally.

All ocean-going vessels, when they are within 10 nautical miles of a U.S. port, must slow down, to typically 14 mph. The voluntary programs in Los Angeles/Long Beach and New York-New Jersey slow them farther out, up to 40 miles offshore.

A ship’s fuel consumption and emissions increase exponentially with speed, so burning low-grade oil at traditional cruising speeds emits more air pollution than slower ships, according to the study, led by environmental engineer David Cocker.

"Speed reductions, which are known to reduce emissions, would need to be maintained over a very long-term period in order to produce regional air quality benefits," said James Corbett, a professor of marine policy at the University of Delaware, who has studied the impact of the shipping industry on human health. Corbett was not involved with the new study.

The new study measured the emissions of two container vessels traveling between California's Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and the Port of Oakland. Emissions were measured near the ports and in international waters.

In international waters, ships burn heavy fuel oil. As it burns, large amounts of particulate matter, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides are released.

Studies worldwide have linked particulate matter – soot – to deaths from respiratory disease and heart attacks. Particulates specifically from ocean-going vessels have been linked to an increased number of premature deaths, according to a 2007 study by Corbett published in the journal Environmental Science and Technology.

In addition, the shipping industry is responsible for 3 percent of the world's carbon dioxide emissions, according to the International Maritime Organization, a United Nations agency responsible for marine safety and pollution. Shipping emissions are expected to grow 2 to 3 percent every year over the next three decades [PDF] as shipping traffic grows, according to the IMO.

The industry has dodged tax strategies and international treaties, such as the Kyoto Protocol. The International Maritime Organization has failed to set a cap on greenhouse gas emissions at international meetings in previous years. Under theWorld Port Climate Initiative, some of the world’s leading ports have committed to reducing their greenhouse gas emissions.

Some states and local pollution agencies are stepping in. California has banned ships from burning dirty kinds of fuel, and is rolling out other clean port initiatives.

Since 2001, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach – the nation’s two busiest shipping ports – have offered financial incentives to shippers that voluntarily reduce their speeds to 14 mph. Baker said it has led to 90 percent compliance.

Smog-causing nitrogen oxides from the Los Angeles port’s ships declined 30 percent between 2005 and 2011, while particulate matter decreased about 70 percent. Carbon dioxide was not reported.

"I think it has been quite effective," said Sam Atwood of the South Coast Regional Air Quality Management District, the local air pollution agency that monitors the side-by-side ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

In August, the Port of New York and New Jersey approved several initiatives to reduce emissions, including a voluntary speed reduction program similar to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Ocean-going vessels that reduce their speed to no more than 10 knots (11.5 mph) starting 20 nautical miles from the entrance to the New York-New Jersey harbor earn financial incentives and recognition.

Smaller ports, such as Port Miami, are considering setting new policies for cargo ship speeds to help clean the air.

Shippers might not want to slow down because “hours lost in transit can cost carriers and their shipping customers dearly," said Aaron Ellis of the American Association of Port Authorities.
An industry group, the U.S. Shippers Association, noted that there are other ways to clean up the industry.

“Speed limits are only one, and not necessarily the most effective, way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Vessel owners should be encouraged to implement as many options as possible to meet and exceed emission reduction standards,” said Beverly Altimore, executive director of the U.S. Shippers Association.

In Southern California, one other solution has been to supply shore-side power so that ships can plug into the electric grid while docked rather than idling their engines, Atwood said.
The authors of the new study warned that emissions reductions near ports could be negated if the ships travel faster than normal cruising speeds outside of the slow zones.

“It is important to note that vessels speeding up to make up for lost time at the slower speeds in the [vessel speed reduction] zone could have an overall increase in CO2 and other emissions,” the researchers wrote.

This article originally ran at Environmental Health News, a news source published by Environmental Health Sciences, a nonprofit media company.

NASA on Pollution

NASA Instrument On Commercial Sat To Track U.S. Air Pollution
By Frank Morring, Jr.

Source: Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
November 12, 2012

Reposted from: Aviation Week

A $90 million NASA instrument mounted on a commercial communications satellite in geostationary orbit will monitor air pollutants over North America beginning in 2017, the first step toward what researchers hope will be a global network of pollution monitors in space.

The U.S. space agency selected a proposal from the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory in Cambridge, Mass., from among 14 submitted for the first Earth Venture Instrument award. The Tropospheric Emissions: Monitoring of Pollution (Tempo) instrument will ride as a hosted payload on a commercial communications satellite in a geostationary Earth-orbit (GEO) slot that will give it a view of North America in its entirety.

From that vantage point the instrument will be designed to deliver hourly readouts of the atmosphere in ultraviolet and visible wavelengths during daylight hours. That data will allow principal investigator Kelly Chance and his colleagues to measure tropospheric concentrations of ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, formaldehyde and aerosols. Similar measurements from spacecraft in low Earth orbit typically are possible only once a day.

“We expect to see significant advances in air quality research with Tempo,” said John Grunsfeld, associate administrator of the agency’s Science Mission Directorate. “The vantage point of geostationary orbit offers the potential for many new opportunities in other areas of Earth system science.”

Tempo is NASA’s second planned hosted payload, following the Laser Communications Relay Demonstration that is also set for launch in 2017. Both payloads will ride piggyback on as-yet-unselected commercial satellites.

NASA will spend as much as $90 million for the Tempo instrument, plus the cost of integration into the host satellite and a share of the launch. The agency expects there will be “numerous” satellites launched in 2017 that will be suitable for the mission.

Space agencies in Europe and Asia also are considering similar observation efforts after Tempo is launched, which could lead to an international constellation of pollution-monitoring instruments in geostationary orbits, NASA states. The U.S. instrument will be the first funded under the broader Earth System Pathfinder program of small, targeted, scientific missions designed to complement larger-scale Earth-science efforts. The first stand-alone satellite in the program—the $152 million Cyclone Global Navigation Satellite System—was awarded earlier this year to the University of Michigan.

Other members of the Tempo team include Ball Aerospace and Technologies Corp. of Boulder, Colo.; NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va., and Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Several U.S. universities and research organizations also will participate.

Langley manages the Earth System Science Pathfinder program, which plans to issue two new requests for proposals next year, and to continue making regular awards for airborne, satellite and hosted-payload missions, the agency says.

Reposted from: Aviation Week

Air Quality and Socio-Economic Status

In an interesting study by New America Media, shows that air quality differs by socio-economic status and the ethnicities effected thereby. Full article is below:

Environmental Health News, News Report, Cheryl Katz, Posted: Nov 04, 2012 

Tiny particles of air pollution contain more hazardous ingredients in non-white and low-income communities than in affluent white ones, a new study shows.

The greater the concentration of Hispanics, Asians, African Americans or poor residents in an area, the more likely that potentially dangerous compounds such as vanadium, nitrates and zinc are in the mix of fine particles they breathe.

Latinos had the highest exposures to the largest number of these ingredients, while whites generally had the lowest.

The findings of the Yale University research add to evidence of a widening racial and economic gap when it comes to air pollution. Communities of color and those with low education and high poverty and unemployment face greater health risks even if their air quality meets federal health standards, according to the article published online in the scientific journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

Los Angeles, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, St. Louis and Fresno are among the metropolitan areas with unhealthful levels of fine particles and large concentrations of poor minorities. More than 50 counties could exceed a new tighter health standard for particulates proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Communities of color and those with low education and high poverty and unemployment may face greater health risks even if their air quality meets federal health standards.A pervasive air pollutant, the fine particulate matter known as PM2.5 is a mixture of emissions from diesel engines, power plants, refineries and other sources of combustion. Often called soot, the microscopic particles penetrate deep into the lungs.

The new study is the first to reveal major racial and economic differences in exposures to specific particle ingredients, some of which are linked to asthma, cardiovascular problems and cancer.

“Numerous studies indicate that some particles are more harmful than others,” said lead author Michelle Bell, a professor of environmental health at Yale’s School of Forestry and Environmental Studies.

The particles people breathe include a variety of metals and chemicals, depending on their source. For instance, people living near refineries are exposed to more nickel and vanadium, while those near coal-fired power plants breathe particles with higher sulfate content. Neighborhoods along busy roads have more nitrates from vehicle exhaust.

One such community is Boyle Heights, in East Los Angeles. It is more than 90 percent Hispanic and one of the poorest parts of the city.

Boyle Heights is “surrounded by freeways,” said Susan Nakamura, planning manager for the region’s South Coast Air Quality Management District, “and a lot of those freeways are used for shipping commercial goods.” Four major rail yards emit diesel exhaust nearby, and the area is home to “multiple auto body shops and chrome-platers in close proximity to neighborhoods,” she said. She is especially concerned about the particulate sources near schools.

 A nationwide look 

Bell and colleague Keita Ebisu examined exposures to 14 components of particulates in 215 Census tracts from 2000-2006. The components, including sulfate, a powerful respiratory irritant, and nickel, a possible carcinogen, were chosen because they had been associated with health impacts or accounted for a substantial amount of particulates overall.

Census tracts with a greater proportion of Hispanics had significantly higher levels of 11 substances. Included is more than 1.5 times the whites’ exposure to nickel, nitrate, silicon, vanadium – all linked in some studies to hospitalizations or deaths from cardiovascular and lung disease – and aluminum, which is associated with low birth weights.

 Communities with larger Asian populations had higher levels of seven components. Asians registered far greater exposures than whites to nickel, nitrate and vanadium.

And areas where more African Americans lived showed significant elevations in four compounds, including sulfate and zinc.

People with less than a high-school education, unemployed or living in poverty had more exposure to several components, including silicon and zinc. Also, children and teenagers were more likely than adults to breathe most of the substances.

The demographic differences raise important policy questions, said Rachel Morello-Frosch, an associate professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who studies the health risks of air pollution but was not involved in the Yale study.

Census tracts with a larger proportion of Hispanics had significantly higher levels of 11 substances, including more than 1.5 times the whites' exposures to nickel, nitrate, silicon, vanadium and aluminum.She said targeted monitoring may be needed in problem areas. “Then regulatory agencies may want to assess how they can encourage emissions reductions from sources that are having localized impacts,” Morello-Frosch said.

It’s a common scenario in cities nationwide: Due to high housing costs and historical discrimination, low-income and minority neighborhoods are clustered around industrial sites, truck routes, ports and other air pollution hotspots.

In the South Bronx, a largely Hispanic and African-American district of New York City, nearly four in 10 live in poverty. Heavy traffic and a jumble of small industries taint the air with a load of fine particles that frequently exceeds the federal health limit.

Asthma rates are as much as four times higher in the Bronx than the national rates, said Dr. Norman Edelman, chief medical officer for the American Lung Association. “They live near highways, they live near where trucks spew diesel,” Edelman said. “That’s the least desirable housing… much different than a nice, leafy suburb.”

And just south of Pittsburgh, a slice of the Monongahela River Valley known as Liberty-Clairton tops the EPA charts with the nation’s worst fine particle pollution outside of California.

Clairton, a mill town, is “home to the [U.S. Steel] Clairton Coke Works, which is the largest coke-making facility in the nation,” said Rachel Filippini, executive director of the environmental organization Group Against Smog and Pollution. “The process of making coke is a pretty dirty one with lots of particulates and air toxics.”

Tom Hoffman, Western Pennsylvania director of the environmental group Clean Water Action, said childhood asthma is rampant in Clairton, but a lot of families in the hardscrabble town don’t have medical coverage. In some homes, the whole family shares a single inhaler, he said.

Particulates are complicated

The health effects of fine particle pollution are well-documented: Studies worldwide have shown that on days when fine particle concentrations increase in a community, more people die from heart attacks and respiratory problems.

But far less is known about whether specific types of particles translate to greater rates of illness or death.

“Some of these particles are not only composed of different things, but there are different gases and other things that adhere to them on the outside. So they’re complicated in a whole range of ways,” said Janice Nolen, author of the American Lung Association’s annual State of the Air Report.

Studies on the components are limited and have given varying results. But some associations are clear.
Sulfate, for instance, can trigger asthma attacks, while vanadium irritates lungs, and nitrate causes inflammation that may lead to heart attacks or strokes. Within cities, some studies have found cardiovascular deaths rise with certain particles, including nitrate, zinc, nickel, carbon, selenium and silicon.

More human research and animal experiments are needed to understand which components are the most harmful and why, said Marie Lynn Miranda, dean of University of Michigan’s School of Natural Resources and Environment and director of the Children’s Environmental Health Initiative.

"They live near highways, they live near where trucks spew diesel. That's the least desirable housing ... much different than a nice, leafy suburb." -Dr. Norman Edelman, American Lung Association, speaking of Hispanics and African Americans in the South Bronx“The notion of trying to figure out what are the different components and are there specific things in the PM2.5 that cause more of a problem… would have implications for how you regulate health effects,” Miranda said.

The EPA earlier this year proposed a more stringent health standard for fine particulate exposures that will force new regulations in some cities. Its final decision is expected in December. But the agency says too little is known about the specific ingredients of the particles to set individual limits for them.
“While different chemical components of PM may have different effects on health, the available scientific evidence to date supports setting standards that provide protection against exposures to PM from all sources,” the EPA said in a statement to EHN.

More racial disparities

The Yale study is part of a growing body of research on racial and social disparities in air quality. 
African Americans are considerably more likely to live in areas with the worst levels of particulates and ozone, the main ingredient of smog, according to a nationwide study by Miranda and colleagues. Hispanics and low-income residents also are overrepresented in counties with high fine particle pollution.

Also, cancer risks from air toxics such as benzene and formaldehyde are greatest in the nation’s highly segregated metropolitan areas, according to research by UC Berkeley’s Morello-Frosch and Bill Jesdale. The risks increase with degree of segregation in all racial and ethnic groups, but are strongest for Hispanics, they found.

“Our question was: Are places that are more unequal disproportionately exposing communities of color more than other groups?” Morello-Frosch said. “The answer to that is ‘yes.’ Cities that are more segregated, you see higher pollution burdens for residents of color.”

As for why Hispanics seem to be facing some of the greatest air quality disparities, Morello-Frosch speculated that it may partly reflect the “L.A. Effect.”

“Because you have a lot of Latinos living in one of the largest and most polluted cities in the United States,” she said, “you might expect that contributing to the high population burdens of pollution.”

"Are places that are more unequal disproportionately exposing communities of color more than other groups? The answer to that is 'yes'."-Rachel Morello-Frosch, University of California, BerkeleyMany questions about the effects of unequal exposures remain. Stress from social and economic conditions seems to exacerbate the effects of pollution, according to some recent research. In other words, the same amount of pollution may harm poor people more than affluent people, or segregated minorities more than whites.

“So if I’m exposed to air pollution but I otherwise live in a pretty nice neighborhood, I don’t have a very stressful life… how does that differ from, I’m exposed to air pollution and I live in a cruddy house in a cruddy neighborhood and I have a very stressful life?” Miranda asked. “How do the social factors in my life affect my resiliency to environmental exposure?”

Importance of Air Filters

Service Experts reports: Sometimes I'm asked what is the most important thing that homeowner's can do to protect their air conditioning and heating system between their regular Maintenance Tune-ups. It's a simple question with a simple answer; remember to change the heating and air conditioning air filter. Changing furnace and return air filters is crucial to the proper performance of your HVAC system, not to mention your home's air quality. Did you know indoor air pollution is one of the top five environmental health risks?* I know it's the last thing on your mind, but this is really important stuff. Changing the air filters is not all that hard for most homeowners, but there are usually two obstacles to actually getting it done:

1. Knowing just how often to change your furnace or air conditioner filter.
2. Remembering to change air filters when needed.

1. When To Change Your Air FiltersSimple, when they're dirty. Ok, now here's how to... Wait, not enough info? Ok, well... you can read the rest of this section for the details, or just skip over it if you're good to go.

Ready to dive in? Good, I like that. How often to change your air filters can depend on several factors:

• the type of air filter you are using
• the overall air quality of your home
• pets, pets, pets..
• occupancy of the home, and
• the level of air pollution and construction around the home
• ...and did I mention pets? Oh yes, pets.

We recommend you change your filter every 30 days. 

2. How To Remember To Change The Darn Things

It's simple. We will post a reminder to Facebook at the beginning of every month!

Remember that Air Purifying Systems' filters are made with a tacky material that traps more particles than an average filter. Combined with our UV system, we allow for the freshest possible air in your home.

Clean Air Healthy Heart

Kai Zhang of ABC Environment reports:

A SUDDEN REDUCTION OF air pollution might improve adverse cardiovascular effects in healthy adults, according to a study that tracked pollutants and compared levels to blood markers before, during and after Beijing's 2008 Olympic games.

This is the first major study to examine the biological link between short-term air pollution reductions and cardiovascular diseases in young adults who have no health problems. The study suggests that even healthy people can benefit from a temporary decline in air pollution.

Beijing is a megacity well known for its extreme levels of air pollution. To improve air quality for the 2008 Olympic games, vehicle use was restricted and numerous industrial factories in the city and nearby provinces were closed.

The changes led to a 60 per cent drop in air pollution emissions. At the same time, the levels of two heart markers linked with cardiovascular disease improved in young, healthy adults, the study shows.

When factory work and traffic returned to normal after the games, air pollution emissions rose rapidly and the levels of the heart health markers returned to previous levels.

A few human studies have examined the impacts of reduced air pollution on cardiovascular diseases. This study went further by trying to identify underlying mechanisms. In addition, the researchers looked at young, healthy adults while most of the previous studies focused on either the elderly or children.

Air pollution is a mix of small particles - called particulate matter - and gases - such as ozone and nitrogen dioxide. Vehicles, power plants, industrial factories and natural sources release the pollutants into the air.

Billions of people around the world live in areas with very high levels of air pollution. The worst air quality plagues the large megacities where populations exceed 10 million people.

Breathing air pollution can increase the risk for cardiovascular diseases, such as heart attacks and high blood pressure. Exposure to fine particulate matter - particles less than 2.5 micrometer in diameter (PM2.5) - is especially dangerous.

However, the underlying connections between air pollution and heart diseases are not well understood. The Chinese government's tight controls on emissions from factories and vehicles for the Beijing Olympics offered a rare chance to look at how air pollution might affect predictive markers for heart disease.

For the five-month study from June to November, the researchers recruited 125 resident doctors with an average age of 24 from a centrally located hospital. Half were male, and all were healthy with no history of diabetes or cardiovascular disease.

Air pollution emissions were also measured at similar times. Levels of most air pollutants during the games decreased up to 60 per cent compared to their pre-game levels, depending on the type of pollutants. For example PM2.5 dropped 27 per cent, nitrogen dioxide 43 per cent and sulphur dioxide 60 per cent. After the games when pollution controls were removed, emissions rose to higher levels than were measured before the games started.

This study suggests that even young healthy people can benefit from short-term air pollution reduction and supports efforts to quantify and understand the benefits and costs of air pollution control measures.

Toxic Dioxin

Since its use by the US military to raze the Vietnamese forests and grasslands, Agent Orange has wreaked horrific damage to the Vietnamese people. Cancers, disabilities and birth defects all bear witness to its effects. Now a study looking 

into the effects of dioxins on gene expression has revealed that even three generations after exposure, diseases and problems caused by dioxin will be present in rats.

Today dioxins are found as industrial by-products, given off by waste incinerators and other processes. To investigate effects of its exposure, pregnant rats were administered TCDD, a dioxin component of Agent Orange. This dose was low for lab rats but higher than humans would experience in the environment, as well as for a different time period and method of dose delivery. The team found that subsequent generations, all the way to the original rats' "great grandchildren", had problems such as prostate cancer, ovarian diseases and kidney disease.

The way dioxins do this is by changing which genes are turned on and off. The DNA sequences are the same, but whether they are expressed or not changes (the study of inherited changes in gene expression is called epigenetics). While the findings are not directly applicable to humans, it demonstrates that the environment of our ancestors can be responsible for diseases and disorders today.

Photo credit: iStockphoto/Dmitry Oshchepkov

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120926213939.htm

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rats-harmed-by-great-grandmothers-exposure-to-dioxin

Carmageddon and Air Quality

Air quality near the closed 10-mile portion of the 405 Freeway reached levels 83% better than typical weekends, according to a team at UCLA's Institute of the Environment and Sustainability.

The 405 Freeway at Sunset Boulevard is shown. UCLA researchers say that last year’s Carmageddon closure of the 405 rid Los Angeles of both traffic and another notorious problem: pollution. (Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times / July 16, 2011)

The reprieve lasted for only one weekend, but UCLA researchers say that last year's Carmageddon closure of the 405 Freeway rid Los Angeles of both traffic and another notorious problem: pollution.

Air quality near the closed 10-mile portion of the freeway reached levels 83% better than typical weekends, according to research released Friday by a team at UCLA's Institute of the Environment and Sustainability.

More striking, the researchers say, air quality also improved 75% in parts of West Los Angeles and Santa Monica, suggesting that whole swaths of residents stayed off the road in those areas. Overall, air quality across the region was 25% better than normal.

"Seeing such a dramatic reduction [in pollutants] in West L.A. was really quite surprising," said Suzanne Paulson, one of the professors leading the research. "It gives a very dramatic view of how clean the air could be."

As soon as traffic returned the following week, the improvements vanished, Paulson said. But area residents have another chance to breathe some fresh air starting Saturday.

More than 14 months after the initial closure, workers will again shut down a portion of the 405 Freeway, this time to demolish the northern end of the Mulholland Drive bridge. The construction is part of a $1-billion project that will include adding a carpool lane.

Paulson and Sam Atwood, a spokesman for the South Coast Air Quality Management District, both said they hope the freeway will one day be filled with electric vehicles or other low-emission cars. Atwood said Los Angeles still has the "worst air quality in the country." Research has linked exposure to near-roadway pollutants to an increased risk ofasthma, heart attack, stroke, premature births and other health problems.

Atwood said the study's findings were not all that surprising but illustrate the "significant effect" cars, and especially trucks, have on air quality. He estimated that vehicular traffic is responsible for about half of all air pollution.

City leaders and transit officials have asked residents to stay out of their cars and "eat, shop and play locally" during this weekend's closure. But the average person probably won't be able to tell the difference in air quality even if cars stay home, Paulson said.

The professor and her colleague, Yifang Zhu, don't plan to conduct another study during this weekend's closure, and haven't yet published a paper on last year's findings.

So perhaps the only way for people to gauge the quality of the air they are breathing will be to look to the streets and count the cars.

Source: LA Times

Environmental Success Story

Air pollution success story

Los Angeles, wedged between the ocean to its west and mountains to its east, is built for air pollution. Contaminants from cars, utilities and factories pump out particles and gases that enshroud the city in smog.

California became the first state to regulate air pollution when then-Governor Ronald Reagan signed the Air Resources Act in 1967. The U.S. caught up with California three years later when another California Republican, President Richard Nixon, signed the Clean Air Act.

California maintains its role as an environmental law laboratory. This fall it will introduce a statewide cap-and-trade program to gradually reduce its climate pollution.

Read more energy & sustainability news.

Source: Bloomberg

Keeping Allergic Children Healthy

If your child has allergies, asthma or other sensitivities, there’s extra parenting responsibility. Erica Reid, mother to two preteens with food and environmental sensitivities and author of The Thriving Child , shares some of her tips for keeping children safe.

Be an advocate.
Own your children’s health problems, and guide your children to do so, too. “Teach them as early as possible to live with whatever they have,” Reid says. With strong food allergies, Reid’s son, 9, doesn’t eat at friends’ houses. Her son and daughter, 11, know what questions to ask when they order for themselves in restaurants.

'School' others.
Discuss your child’s health needs with teachers. “Inform teachers on the first day of school, and if your child has more than one teacher, don’t rely on that teacher to tell the other,” Reid says. And don’t be fazed by resistance. “Some teachers ... don’t understand when I tell them my son is allergic to cold air. They think I am overreacting.” It’s the responsibility of the parent and the person taking care of the child to ensure health is taken seriously.

Know the triggers.
Always carry your child’s medications and have him wear a medical bracelet that informs others of health problems in case he can’t speak for himself.

Source: USA Weekend