Environmental Protection Agency proposes stricter smog control to address health concerns
By Jennifer Carcamo
Jan. 13, 2010 10:14 p.m.
The Environmental Protection Agency proposed putting stricter limits on national smog emissions Jan. 7, the agency’s first attempt to address the health and environmental issues caused by smog.
The new proposal would restrict the concentration of ozone and particulates, the primary elements of smog, from originally 0.075 particles per billion in over eight hours to 0.060-0.070 particles per billion in over eight hours, a statement by the agency said.
California is a key factor in these proposed restrictions on smog-causing emissions, since smog affects three-fourths of all Californians, said Leo Kay, spokesmen for the California Environmental Protection Agency.
California has never managed to go below 0.080 particles per billion, according to the Los Angeles Times.
UCLA researchers and specialists have viewed the proposal with a positive light, claiming that any measure to reduce the effects of harmful particles in the air is an improvement.
Suzanne Paulson, UCLA professor of atmospheric chemistry who studies the particulates’ effects on human health and climate, is working with a small group of other UCLA professors and specialists to address issues through independent or collaborative research. It is these types of research studies on public health that led the EPA to propose new restrictions on emissions, Paulson said.
One of Paulson’s most recent accomplishments involves studying air pollution at the Santa Monica Airport along with Arthur Winer, a UCLA distinguished professor of environmental health sciences. The study found that people living near the airport are exposed to higher levels of air pollution, Paulson said.
California specifically is expected to face these new restrictions with some trouble. The state, which has never been able to meet emission restrictions, has long been affected by a love affair with automobiles, Kay said. He also said that California’s geography on the coast area, which traps smog, and Los Angeles’ dense population produce more emissions than other parts of the country.
UCLA researchers are wary of what this act actually means and what it will achieve, Paulson said.
Paulson said this new EPA standard is definitely an improvement aimed at tackling long-debated claims of increasing health problems in the community, such as the one she found in her study with Winer.
Problems such as respiratory issues, higher mortality rates caused by ozone and cardiovascular issues like heart attacks and strokes are caused by particles, Paulson said.
“We are all citizens breathing the same air, so it definitely affects all of us,” said James C. McWilliams, chair of the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences.
McWilliams said there needs to be tighter controls on what is being released into the air because it seems that although things are getting better, the situation is not improving as much as it should.
One of California’s most recognized improvements is its reformulated gasoline, which replaced diesel with regenerated, cleaner fuel that reduced the amount of dangerous chemicals being emitted by vehicles, Paulson said.
However, this was not enough to bring California to the national average of 0.075 particles per billion, which is why the state is taking greater measures by cleaning up passenger vehicles as well as fixing still-existing diesel engines, Kay said.
“We might eventually meet the standard,” Paulson said. “California has optimal conditions for it.”
McWilliams said this issue also addresses the larger issue of greenhouse gases being transmitted globally into the air, which was the main focus of discussion at the United Nations Climate Change Conference at Copenhagen, Denmark, in December. Kay said that although the discussion and solutions proposed at Copenhagen had nothing to do directly with the EPA’s decision, it was most likely in the back of the EPA’s mind when the proposal was passed.
“It’s going to be a challenge,” Kay said. “There needs to be lots of progress, but we need to realize that we all have to work collectively and roll up our sleeves together.”
