|
Sacramento Transportation Management AssociationSummer Smog Season. From May to October, the Sacramento region is subject to regular and frequent days marked by ground level ozone... the primary ingredient in smog. During this time of year, area air districts issue "Spare the Air" advisories when such days are forecast. Sacramento summers typically see about 25 Spare the Air advisories issued.
On Spare the Air days, residents are asked to be particularly aware of airborne pollutants they may be contributing to the environment and are asked to make a personal effort to reduce such pollutants. Suggestions for significantly reducing individual contributions include:
- Carpooling
- Using Roseville Transit, North Natomas Transit, or davisYolobus for free *
- Postponing/combining errands *
- Avoiding the use of gas powered tools & equipment *
- Avoiding the use of charcoal lighter fluid and outdoor cooking
- Visit www.SpareTheAir.com for additional information or to sign up for text/phone/email alerts of Spare the Air days.
The Sacramento region is nowhere near meeting federal clean air standards. If the region fails to meet federal air quality standards, the feds will withhold transportation funds - including, ironically, millions of dollars for projects that would help stem pollution by decreasing our reliance on cars!
One way to do this is by encouraging more new housing to be built near jobs, such as in downtown Sacramento and Rancho Cordova. Dense, urban development reduces the need for people to drive cars long distances to get to work, to stores or to entertainment venues. Density is the missing link, he said, that could turn mass transit, such as light-rail or streetcar systems, into a truly useful option for commuters.
Use AirAlert to:
- Decide if your children should attend afternoon sporting practices.
- Determine if members of your family who suffer from asthma or other respiratory diseases should stay indoors until unhealthy air passes.
- Make air quality-related decisions. If air quality is forecast to be unhealthy, you may decide to carpool or take transit in an effort to Spare the Air.
As an AirAlert subscriber, you will begin receiving AirAlert notifications based on the criteria you've selected.
- Daily air quality forecasts for the Sacramento region by 11:00 a.m.
- Spare the Air day and Health Advisory notices as soon as they are issued
- Real-time Air Quality Index (AQI) notifications within minutes of when unhealthy ozone levels are measured anywhere in the region
- Full-length alerts at your e-mail address and shortened alerts on a text pager and/or digital cell phone
- Notifications at as many e-mail addresses as you would like to sign up Register for AirAlert
In addition to AirAlert, you can go to the Spare the Air web site for more information about air pollution in the Sacramento region, for health information, and to view ozone movies and historical data.
If you are not signed up to receive air quality alert notices, call Jamie Brown Arno at the Air Quality Management District, 874-4812.
Summer smog programs ready Summer smog abatement programs will be easy to offer this year, with coordinated programs, marketing material and a consistent theme of the cumulative effects of ozone. Because we cannot see or smell ozone, we have a hard time believing that it is bad. The reality is that everyone breathes too much ozone on our still, hot, smoggy days, and everyone is being hurt by the cumulative, harmful effects of ozone.
Program support information is available from the website: www.sparetheair.com. On the Employer page of the website, it says FREE Materials Here you will find many publications that can be ordered, free of charge, for distribution at your work site. In addition, if you would like please contact Jamie Arno at (916) 874-4812.
If you would like brochures about the summer Spare the Air air quality program or ready-to-use newsletter articles for employee publications, contact Jamie Arno at (916) 874-4812 or visit the Publications page at www.SpareTheAir.com.
Please encourage your employees to sign up for their own personal Air Alert. This way they will receive Spare The Air advisories directly from the Air District. To do this, go to "Air Alert sign up" at www.SpareTheAir.com. Employees can be eligible to win movie tickets if they sign up with a promotional code that identifies them with their employer.
The TMA is often asked if we advocate
motor scooters (which can get up to 115 mpg) as a
feasible alternative mode of transportation in the
Motorcycles and emissions: The surprising facts, summarized from an article by Susan Carpenter, THROTTLE JOCKEY June 2008 in the Los Angeles Times
Long story short: Motorcycles, even small ones, are more polluting than Hummers. . In fact, the average motorbike is about 10 times more polluting per mile than a passenger car, light truck or SUV, according to a California Air Resources Board comparison of emissions-compliant vehicles. If you want to make a difference, consider an electric two-wheeler for your next bike or a gas-powered model with fuel injection and a 3-way catalytic converter.
A surprising level of emissions spew from on-road motorcycles and scooters. In California, such bikes make up 3.6% of registered vehicles and 1% of vehicle miles traveled, yet they account for 10% of passenger vehicles' smog-forming emissions in the state
Here's a simplified explanation of the pollutants a gas-powered motorbike emits and why.
Motorcycles and scooters are, on average, about twice as fuel efficient as cars. Compact and lightweight, their internal-combustion engines do a better job of converting fuel into energy that makes the vehicle move. But extracting more energy from the fuel has a downside. It produces greater amounts of a smog-forming emission called oxides of nitrogen.
Oxides of nitrogen are one of three pollutants the Environmental Protection Agency and the Air Resources Board measure to see whether vehicles meet acceptable emissions levels and can be sold legally. Smog-forming hydrocarbons -- unburned compounds in fuel that escape through the tailpipe, fuel lines and gas tank -- are also measured, as is carbon monoxide. Carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, isn't measured by either agency, but motorcycles are generally better than other vehicles in this regard since they use less fuel per mile.
As with other passenger vehicles, there are technologies to offset motorcycle emissions, such as catalytic converters, but those technologies tend to be too big, too heavy or too hot to fit on a motorcycle and work as effectively as similar systems on larger, enclosed vehicles that have more space to accommodate them. That's why the EPA and the air board are more lenient on bikes than they are on other passenger vehicles.
Emissions standards for motorcycles are already more forgiving than they are for cars, light trucks and SUVs. Not only are motorcycles allowed to emit more than cars, they are also tested at lower speeds, which pollutes less. And motorcycle manufacturers only have to ensure that their vehicles of 179 cc and above meet governmental emissions criteria for the first 18,600 miles of a bike's life, compared with 150,000 miles for cars.
Five years ago, the EPA tightened its emissions standards for on-road motorcycles with a two-tier system, the first of which tightened requirements for the 2006 model year. The second, even stricter phase kicks in for 2010.
California is the only state in the country with its own emissions standards, which are the same as the EPA standards except they've been fast-tracked to kick in two years earlier. In effect, the stricter standard has already been met for many of the on-highway motorcycles on the market because any 2008 model year bike that is sold in California already meets the EPA standard for 2010.
Right now, there are no plans for the air board or the EPA to further tighten motorcycle emissions requirements because:
* Motorcycles account for such a small portion of vehicle miles traveled.
* There haven't been enough advances in motorcycle emissions technologies to enable further pollution reduction to any significant degree.
* There are other, even bigger polluters to deal with, such as diesel trucks, construction equipment and non-emissions-compliant products from China.
Noncompliant Chinese vehicles have become such a pollution issue in California, in fact, that the Air Resources Board has just added a new motorcycle emissions facility at its Haagen-Smit Lab in El Monte to test them. The board estimates as many as 20,000 all-terrain vehicles, dirt bikes and scooters are shipped into California from China each month, many of them with emissions that are at least 10 times higher than the state's requirements.
Rainy days linked to traffic and air pollution. Summer rainfall in the southeastern region of the country appears to mimic the highs and lows of air pollution from weekday commuters, says Thomas Bell of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.
At the May meeting of the American Geophysical Union in Baltimore, Maryland, Bell reported that afternoon thundershowers are more frequent and more intense on weekdays than on weekends. Bell limited his study to summer thunderstorms, which, in theory, are most likely affected by changes in air pollution.
Meteorologists believe smog contains tiny particles that spur the formation of water droplets, which eventually become raindrops. More smog, therefore, not only means more droplets, but also tinier ones—at least in the initial stages of storm formation. These smaller droplets are carried higher into the air before falling as rain, which ultimately increases storm intensity.
Scientists have long speculated that pollution from weekday commuters might affect the storm cycle. But previous studies failed to detect a link. Bell says that past studies tended to focus on individual cities, particularly those in coastal areas where other factors may also influence storms.
Seeking to examine the issue more broadly, Bell analyzed rainfall patterns from nine years of satellite data from the Southeast quadrant of the U.S. The region extends as far north as central Illinois and as far west as mid-Texas (map of the United States).
The scientist found that during June, July, and August afternoon thunderstorms were most common on Wednesdays and least common on weekends. The showers exactly mirrored pollution intensity from vehicle traffic.
According to the satellite data, midweek afternoon rainfall was nearly double weekend precipitation. Weekday storms were also more likely to be intense downpours. Local weather station rainfall measurements backed the team's findings.
Driving Patterns
Bell and his colleagues say that atmospheric wind-speed data also indicate that stronger and more frequent storms occur on weekdays. Bell believes weekday commuter car traffic is unlikely to be the sole cause of the summer weather pattern. While people change their driving pattern on weekends, they still drive, he says.
Monitoring by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has found that air pollution levels follow weekly cycles marked by mid-week peaks, but there appears to be only a 10 to 15 percent dip in pollution on weekends.
Bell doesn't believe commuter car traffic alone is enough to explain the rain effect found by his study.
"Truck traffic drops off a lot on weekends," the researcher said. "So it might be something related to pollution from truck traffic. But that's a pure guess."
J. Marshall Shepherd is a geography professor at the University of Georgia in Athens who has also studied the effects of air pollution on rainfall patterns. Shepherd applaudes Bell's research, saying, "It's a very nice study,"
Study finds higher levels of exhaust increase deaths. Scientists have found what appears to be a significant association between the daily health-related death rate in Sacramento and other populous counties in California and the amount of haze in the air that day, state environmental officials said in what they described as the largest study of its kind. The results were released Friday.
The statistical analysis comparing daily mortality with levels of tailpipe exhaust particles showed a strong enough correlation to implicate the particles in the deaths, which would be limited mainly to people with heart or lung disease, the researchers said.
Health-related deaths in Sacramento County averaged 22 a day during the 1999-2002 study period.
"These people are dying earlier than what their life expectancy normally would be," said Bart Ostro, the state's top air pollution epidemiologist who conducted the study along with scientists at the University of California, Davis, and UC San Francisco.
The link is particularly evident among women, diabetics and people over 65, according to the peer-reviewed study, published in the scientific journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
Researchers could only speculate as to why the increase in the death rate from lung diseases in Sacramento County was more than double that of any other area studied, except Orange County. The chemical composition of particles might vary by area, researchers suggested.
Ostro has launched a follow-up study to learn which factors - such as obesity, age, location of residence - might explain why the pollution affects some regions and some groups of people more than others. Without identifying such risk factors, Ostro said, this would be "just another scare story."
The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Cal-EPA's scientific arm, initiated the study to help regulators identify better ways to cut people's exposure to pollution, such as tougher auto emission controls, better land-use planning and encouraging healthier lifestyles.
"It's important to know the factors that affect our health, and fortunately this is something we can do something about," Ostro said.
In the past decade, many studies from around the world have tied the inhalation of microscopic specks, or soot, to heart attacks and lung-related deaths. The correlations found in the California study are considered especially robust because it looked at a much larger population, about 23 million. The study is one of the first to examine such associations with tinier pollutants, known as "fine particles," which studies show are more toxic.
"Overall, this large, multicounty analysis provides evidence of significant associations of fine particles with daily mortality among nearly two-thirds of California's population," scientists concluded in the paper.
The fine, wind-blown particles penetrate more deeply into lungs than ordinary dust, aggravating existing heart and lung conditions, such as asthma, and even triggering death, many studies show. Even brief episodes of severe particle pollution - a day or two - can be enough to kill people with asthma or heart disease sooner than expected. The California study focused on these day-to-day exposures, taking four years of data from air pollution monitors in downtown Sacramento and in other cities in Contra Costa, Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Diego and Santa Clara counties. Death data during the same period were obtained from the state Department of Health Services.
The California findings come as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is revising national standards for fine particles, which measure 2.5 microns or less in diameter and are mainly products of fossil fuel combustion in automobiles, power plants and other sources.
The findings support California's initiative in setting the nation's strictest enforceable limits on fine-particle pollutants, adopted in 2002 by the state Air Resources Board, said Dr. Joan Denton, director of Cal-EPA's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. She supports tightening standards nationwide.
"We should not overlook the potential health impacts of the smallest of these particles," Denton said.
California has some of the worst particle pollution in the nation. Hardest hit are the inland, poorly ventilated counties in the southern San Joaquin Valley and in Riverside and San Bernardino counties.
The Sacramento area generally meets national standards for particle pollutants, except during the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays when smoke from wood-burning fireplaces is heavy.
Transportation and Air Quality Plans. The Sacramento region has reduced ozone levels significantly in the last decade, thanks to more
sophisticated strategies to reduce emissions.
The Sacramento Area Council of Governments creates the Metropolitan Transportation Plan that lays out proposals for dozens of new roads, public transit projects and bicycle paths.
The region's transportation plan must be consistent with air
quality plans to avoid losing federal money for projects like wider roads, new bridges and possibly even mass transit. If
the plans do not conform, many transportation dollars
may be put on hold, and some projects could lose funding
altogether.
The air district hopes to meet the federal ozone standard through
incremental changes in the new air quality plan. Businesses and agencies that emit 25 tons per year or more of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) or volatile organic compounds would pay penalties.
SMUD pays about $75,000 to $90,000 per year to local air
districts and the state Air Resources Board to renew permits for three small
gas-fired power plants it operates in the region
2005
When it became clear that Greater Sacramento would not make the federal ozone standard by 2005, the region's air districts asked the U.S. EPA for a five-year extension in exchange for downgrading the region's air quality designation from "severe" to "extreme" non-attainment for ozone. For Sacramento County, this means the owners of seven factories and power plants emitting more than 25 tons per year of ozone-forming chemicals have to pay new fees. The Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Procter & Gamble, Silgan Can Co. and UC Davis Medical Center face penalties ranging from $25,000 to $236,000 per year for each building, depending on how much they pollute.
And this means reclassifying 450 businesses, which have permits to emit 10 tons per year of NOx or volatile organic compounds as major polluters, requiring them to pay a total of $500,000 overall to obtain operating permits, even though their ozone-forming emissions stay at current levels, plus additional annual penalties of at least $15,000. These include businesses as diverse as the Sara Lee Bakery Group factory that makes EarthGrains bread in South Sacramento, and the commercial printing company Graphic Center on Howe Avenue,
Blue
Skies by 20??
Metropolitan Sacramento is one of the most rapidly growing, automobile-dependent, sun-baked and poorly ventilated regions in the country, where corrosive ozone gas irritates eyes, shortens breath
and aggravates asthma every summer. Most of the region's ozone comes from sun-cooked vehicle exhaust.
In the Sacramento area, cars and trucks produce at least 70 percent of the smog-forming emissions, with the balance coming from businesses and consumer products.
Triple-digit temperatures can kick up smog levels dramatically on windless days.
The region's smog episodes typically last one to three days, as smog sensors register "unhealthy" and "very unhealthy"
levels of ozone in parts of Sacramento, El Dorado and Placer counties. Even healthy people
are advised not to exert themselves outdoors.
Clean-air advocates and regulators insist that the fate of the region's air quality is not determined solely by the force of government, the will of industry or the whims of weather.
Individual actions count, they say. On days smog is expected to reach unhealthy levels, air districts in each of the region's six counties broadcast "spare-the-air" alerts urging people to postpone barbecuing, mowing the lawn and nonessential driving.
In the greater Sacramento area, there has been a significant amount of progress
despite population growth. Tougher exhaust controls, increased engine
efficiency and cleaner-burning, less toxic gasoline have done the most to cut
smog. Local Air Quality Management District officials say they have squeezed
nearly all the emission reductions politically possible from bakeries, dry
cleaners and about everything else with an exhaust vent.
Government data for the Sacramento Valley show the average number of days when smog exceeded the over an eight-hour period) was 51 from 1981 through 1983. That compares with 46 from 1998 through 2000.
The progress does not seem like much without placing the figures against a backdrop of surging growth. The Valley's population increased 50 percent during the 20-year period, and the average number of miles driven in the region doubled.
To offer encouragement, federal and state officials actually point to the Los Angeles area -- the nation's dirtiest metropolis.
Days of unhealthful ozone levels have declined 75 percent, and peak concentrations have fallen by two-thirds in the past 15 years, according to district figures.
Data for 2001 show, for the third year in a row, no first-stage alerts reported anywhere in Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino or Riverside counties. In the 1970s and early '80s, such days of extremely unhealthful smog occurred frequently.
Some inland and mountain communities of Southern California continue to experience the worst smog in the country. But the region is winning its war against smog, having advanced further than any other urban area.
Today, the majority of Los Angeles-area residents breathe air that on most days meets all health-based standards in force under the federal Clean Air Act.
California regulates "greenhouse gas"
Though greenhouse gases are not believed to be hazardous to breathe, their buildup in the atmosphere can raise the Earth's temperature and affect sea
levels, water supplies, crop production, disease and wildfires, according to
scientific research.
On July 22, 2002, California Governor Gray Davis signed Assembly Bill (AB) 1493
into law, requiring the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to develop and
adopt the nation's first greenhouse gas emission standards for automobiles. The
legislature declared in AB 1493 that global warming was a matter of increasing
concern for public health and environment in the state.
It cited several risks that California faces from climate change, including reduction in the state's water supply, increased air pollution created by higher temperatures, harm to agriculture, an increase in wildfires, damage to the coastline, and economic losses caused by higher food, water, energy, and insurance prices. Further, the legislature stated that technological solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would stimulate the California economy and provide jobs.
Under the legislation, the ARB must adopt standards that will achieve "the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles," taking into account environmental, social, technological, and economic factors. "Cost-effective" is defined by the legislation to mean greenhouse gas reductions that are economical to the owner of the vehicle, taking into account the full life-cycle costs of the vehicle. The ARB is also required to provide flexibility for compliance with the regulations, allowing the use of alternative methods to comply with the regulations, as long as the alternative methods achieve equivalent or greater reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
In setting the emission standards, the ARB is not permitted to impose mandatory trip reduction measures or land-use restrictions. It may not undertake the following measures in setting the standards: 1) imposing additional fees or taxes on vehicles, motor fuel, or travel, 2) banning the sale of any vehicle category, 3) requiring a reduction in vehicle weight, 4) limiting the speed limit, or 5) limiting vehicle miles traveled. The legislation provides for credits for emission reductions achieved before the regulations take effect, using 2000 as the baseline year. The credits are to be granted using procedures and protocols adopted by the California Climate Action Registry. On June 14, 2004, the California Air Resources Board (ARB) released a draft of its staff proposal in response to Assembly Bill 1493. The bill, passed in 2002, directed the ARB to adopt regulations that would achieve the "maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles." The staff report requires a 1 to 2 percent reduction in emissions in 2009, depending on vehicle type, rising incrementally to reach approximately 30 percent below projected 2009 levels in 2016. The cost-effective reduction measures identified by the staff include discrete variable valve lift, dual cam phasing, turbocharging with engine downsizing, automated manual transmissions, and camless valve actuation. The ARB expects that the regulations will add around $1000 to the cost of a new car in 2014 but that the increased up-front cost will be more than offset by decreased operating costs over the life of the vehicle. The regulations will apply to model years 2009 and after.
The ARB adopted the regulations on September 24, 2004. The regulations are not to take effect before January 1, 2006, in order to provide the legislature with sufficient time to review the regulations and to amend them, if necessary. The legislature is also required to hold at least one public hearing on the regulations.
In December 2004, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) announced a lawsuit against the California Air Resources Board over AB 1493. The Association of International Automobile Manufacturers has joined the AAM in the lawsuit. The suit argues that forcing manufacturers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is akin to setting fuel economy standards, which can only be set by the federal government. The Schwarzenegger administration has responded to the lawsuit by arguing that carbon dioxide is a pollutant that that the ARB can regulate, and that there are other methods of reducing GHG emissions from vehicles besides increasing fuel economy.
Development AB 1493’s predecessor was AB 1058, introduced by Assemblymember Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills). Many automobile manufacturers, new car dealers, oil companies, and labor unions, were strongly opposed to AB 1058, claiming that the bill would lead to higher taxes, more expensive and less safe vehicles, and an SUV ban. The opposition mounted a $5 million campaign against the bill, and the bill was stalled in the Assembly for months.
AB 1493, substantially similar to AB 1058, was introduced as an attempt to address criticism of the first bill. It included a specific prohibition against raising taxes or outlawing any class of vehicle. The state Senate voted 23-16 in favor of the new bill; it passed the Assembly two days later with a party-line vote of 41-30. Though organized opposition to the bill was strong, a statewide poll conducted in June 2002 by the Public Policy Institute of California found that 81 percent of adults in California, including 77 percent of SUV owners, favored the concept of the bill.
Lesson Learned Many technologies are available that may reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and these different technologies can be used with varying effect in different types of vehicles. It is a challenge to determine the cumulative effect of combining technologies, since the reduction achieved by a set of technologies is not equal to the sum of the reductions that could be achieved separately by each technology. In addition, the structure of the standard will have different impacts on individual manufacturers and on total fleetwide emissions. Great care must be taken to analyze these effects.
An ARB official said that because of the controversy surrounding the issue, it is essential to have a sound staff analysis of the broad range of issues involving the future standard. Although AB 1493 is state legislation, it relates to debates that are underway at the federal level and therefore focuses more attention on the ARB from the national level than it would typically see for its other rulemakings.
Benefits California is the fifth largest economy in the world, and the transportation sector in 1999 accounted for almost 60 percent of its greenhouse gas emissions. Californians drove 730 million miles per day in light-duty vehicles in 2000, emitting more than 350,000 tons per day of greenhouse gases. Thus, a standard affecting greenhouse gas emissions from new light-duty vehicles has the potential over time to achieve significant emission reductions. If the current proposal is adopted, the staff estimates that the regulation will reduce climate change emissions by an estimated 85,900 CO2 equivalent tons per day statewide in 2020 and by 143,300 CO2 equivalent tons per day in 2030. This translates into a 17 percent overall reduction from projected levels in climate changes emissions from the light duty fleet in 2020 and a 25 percent overall reduction in 2030.
The influence of California's GHG standard for automobiles may extend beyond its own borders. Because the California Air Resources Board was in operation before the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Air Act of 1970, California has the authority to pass stronger air pollution standards than those set by the federal government. Other states may elect to adopt California's standards, but no other state may independently surpass the standards set by the federal government. Seven states have chosen California’s standards over those of the federal government. Thus, the California law opens the possibility of these states adopting a light-duty vehicle GHG emissions standard.
Passenger cars and light trucks are responsible for about 40 percent of greenhouse gas pollution in California, according to findings cited in AB 1493.
