- NEWS
- SPORTS
- Final: Lakers 88, Celtics 87 (OT) 27 minutes ago
- Fryer: Welch in jeopardy but should keep job 3 hours & 47 minutes ago
- Ducks in must-win mode 48 minutes ago
- Tiger off to solid start at Pebble Beach 1 hour & 43 minutes ago
- BUSINESS
- ENTERTAINMENT
- Grammy predictions: Adele will have it all 2 hours & 34 minutes ago
- ‘The Voice’ challenges ‘American Idol’ for TV supremacy 1 hour & 2 minutes ago
- Rap mogul arrested on drug, traffic charges 1 hour & 43 minutes ago
- Slideshow: Van Halen finish tour prep at Forum rehearsal 3 hours & 52 minutes ago
- LIFE
- TRAVEL
- Marriott Residence Inn opens as San Juan's second hotel 5 minutes ago
- A ‘Flying Fortress' flies in O.C. 3 hours & 25 minutes ago
- Beer, betting and bikinis in Vegas
- Mexico fights for its image
- OPINION
Air pollution kills more people than car accidents in Southern California, OC researchers say
November 12th, 2008, 4:42 pm · 17 Comments · posted by Pat Brennan, science, environment editor
If you’ve ever wondered about the health costs of air pollution, a Cal State Fullerton economist has an answer: $22 billion for the South Coast air basin, which includes Orange County.
Jane V. Hall, a professor who specializes in environmental economics, looked at a variety of data to add up costs to the South Coast and San Joaquin air basins — both consistently among the dirtiest in the nation.
She and co-authors Victor Brajer and Fred Lurmann found that the South Coast basin, including parts of Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside counties, and all of Orange County, would save $22 billion in health costs if state and federal health standards were met for ozone and fine particle pollution.
South Coast and San Joaquin combined would save $28 billion; in the two regions, air pollution is believed to contribute to 3,800 premature deaths a year. Cleaning up the air, the researchers said, would save more lives than reducing traffic deaths to zero in most of the counties studied.
They said pollution-related deaths are more than double those from car accidents in Los Angeles County.
“There’s a clear consensus among experts: lives in fact are shortened and people are made sick by pollution,” Hall said Wednesday. “Kids miss school, there are more non-fatal heart attacks, work days lost and so on.”
The $90,000 study, paid for by the Hewlett Foundation, captures the cost to families of missed days of work because of illness related to air pollution, sick leave paid by employers, costs to HMOs and insurance companies from hospital treatments, and premature deaths, among other costs.
For people who live in the South Coast air basin, it boils down to $1,250 per person per year.
The report focused on two high priority pollutants, ozone and fine particles. A breakdown for Orange County shows a cost savings of $56 million if the standards for ozone are achieved, and $2.8 billion for attaining fine particle standards.
The federal target date for the South Coast basin to reduce fine particle pollution — particles 2.5 microns in size or less — is 2015; to hit the ozone standard, 2024.
Although the South Coast Air Quality Management District uses different methods for assessing the health costs for air pollution, Hall’s findings appear to be consistent with the air district’s analysis, spokesman Sam Atwood said.
Related links:
Get $125 to convert your wood-burning fireplace to gas
The next pollution frontier: your fireplace
Air improves in region, but not enough
Reader Comments
Comments are encouraged, but you must follow our User Agreement.- Keep it civil and stay on topic.
- No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks.
- People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
17 Comments
-
ADVERTISEMENT
-
-
-
-
16th annual People’s Choice
From your favorite restaurants and shops to the best day spa in town, here are your choices for the number one places to eat, shop and play in O.C.
Browse the 2009 Best of Orange County winners-
ADVERTISEMENT
How about them windy Santa Ana days when all the smog blows offshore? There have been a lot of those days lately. Then the ocean breeze blows it right back through from the other direction, its a cycle. It seems like the OC is not only a producer of the pollution, but a middle man for the inland counties. I just came back from a cruise to Mexico. On our return towards Long Beach Harbor, even though we were too far offshore to see shore, it was easy to tell we were getting close to port from the brown cloud on the horizon. And the rent and taxes are incredibly high, why?
Glad I don’t have to live in that muck anymore.
Mr Aksteve,
Everyone in the city is glad you do not live here too.
Sorry, I don’t believe these numbers at all. Glad they got 90,000 for yet again another wasted study.
On the positive side, it true, still costs us less then the illegal alien problems we have in state.
Illegals caused by NAFTA dislocations and Feds turning the other way with employers who hire them while contributing to the Republican party.
Mr Cecil, did I say something offensive to you? Everyone is glad I don’t live there because I don’t want to live in smog? Flame war, OMG, LOL.
You ought to go after the person that wrote this article then.
And yes gousoc, it is amazing how much funding UCI is getting lately for obscure research topics. And, yes, a study on how much illegal aliens cost the State may be a more usable one. Especially with the huge California budget deficit.
nothing going to change even if you have all the facts. politicians play game every time. i am sick and tired of listen to this old news. to increase my health lifestyle, i don”t lived next to the freeway,industrial areas,a house where the wind blow at all the time, closed all window and doors at home and cars, wash down your exterior house and walkway once a week to get rid of dust,chemical,dirts,etc. , exercise 6 times a week, eat healthy food everyday, stay away from smokers or enviroment such as casino. all this and i have not get sick for 21 years and never visit a doctor
How much? The federal target date to reduce pollution. Costs to the company’s ,which in turn pass it along. Our extra gas refinement for all these years that we have been paying at the pump. How many billions? Sick days accredited toward pollution? Many people just use them, not because their pollution poisoned. Yes. A wasted 90,000$
They are paid for this study because the government wants the outcome it got. The more pollution costs, the more they can make new taxes “to combat the crisis”.
I really would like there to be no, or very little, air pollution. I just think the green movement is more about raising costs, taxes, regulations and forcing new industries onto consumers than it is about practical and responsible products and policies that benefit all, most importantly consumers and tax payers.
Clearly there are greedy industrialists that are willing to piss in their neighbors baths if it would make them a buck. Likewise many green activists are willing to take things away from you for their own agenda. Two extremes that, ironically, benefit each other….at our costs.
mr.steve better yet get the hell out of the usa.
Something strikes me as wrong with this data. Or at least a little misleading. Let’s start with…
South Coast and San Joaquin combined would save $28 billion; in the two regions, air pollution is believed to contribute to 3,800 premature deaths a year.
Am I to assume that 3,800 premature deaths cost $7,368,421.05 each?
I know we are wealthy here, but I think that might be a little excessive.
Now we get into the hard facts…
“There’s a clear consensus among experts: lives in fact are shortened and people are made sick by pollution,” Hall said Wednesday. “Kids miss school, there are more non-fatal heart attacks, work days lost and so on.”
What a relief. We have a clear consensus. Only thing is I wonder if simply getting proper diet and exercise might also be a factor. In fact, I am willing to bet they play a much greater role in sickness and heart attacks, lost work days, etc…
Next we hear…
For people who live in the South Coast air basin, it boils down to $1,250 per person per year.
I thought this was pretty extreme so I went to…
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06059.html
Here I learned that 3,002,048 people live in the great OC.
So simple math tells me that the roughly $3M multiplied by $1,250 gets me to about $3,752,560,000 or roughly $4Billion.
Trouble here is that there is still $24Billion left on the table.
and there is a second problem. That is that almost half the 3 million people are either under 18, or over 65 and therefore would not necessarily lose any money if they did not go to school or work.
So the 166,136 people would lead to about $207,670,000 which in all actuality puts us at about 27.8 Billion left to go. There seems to be a significant deviation between the facts, and this report.
The report focused on two high priority pollutants, ozone and fine particles. A breakdown for Orange County shows a cost savings of $56 million if the standards for ozone are achieved, and $2.8 billion for attaining fine particle standards.
Bear in mind by the chart alone, Orange County is the least of all air polluting areas monitored in this report.
So why is all this data so misleading? What could be behind such blatant trickery. I mean seriously, $28 Billion dollars is 13.6% of the entirety of monies made in Orange County. Seriously, if our economy lost 13.6% ever we would take some serious note.
Here may be the answer. It boils down to who funded the survey, and what their goals are.
Turns out the Hewlett Foundation (link below) is a major sponsor of environmental activist groups.
http://www.activistcash.com/foundation.cfm?did=34
You will see the list if you follow the link.
So why the erroneous (At best) data?
Because they wanted to buy Professors who would make a claim that we need to reduce emissions. They gave $90K to them in order to get them to say what they wanted. This is the sort of thing that infuriates me. The news is no longer the news but a resonating chamber for socialist, and activist groups. I am getting to the point where I am fed up. Are we all so naive to think that this sort of stuff is actually true? Or is it that they depend on us to be too lazy to actually research the truth for ourselves. Why is it that a news publication reports something like this at all? Gee, hidden agenda?
I think we could do with less pollutants, but frankly trying to con me into it is bull.
I was driving on Harbor and this beat up van cramed full of poeple was belching out lots of smoke
It was so bad I had to pull over until the cloud cleared
And to top it off a cop was right behind them and never pulled them over to cite them!
This whole smog scam is such a crock!
If you want to really make a dent in urban pollution, ban leaf blowers from the gardener’s arsenal of machines. If you look at the sales numbers of leaf blowers over the last decade, and compare that with child asthma increase numbers, we might be missing an important cause/effect. I still think brooms cause less pollution!
I agree re: leafblowers. those those are extremely annoying and cause pollution. Grabbing a huge broom really isn’t that difficult…
Our air quality here is not good and not enough is being done to fix it. My kids all suffer from severe respiratory problems as do many other people here. Most of the time I find that people who don’t believe pollution is a problem are really just afraid of the truth. It is much easier to “laugh off science” and believe everything is ok and go happily about your day than to face the reality that people are getting sick and dying and you could be next. Clean energy, zero emission vehicles, mass transit and stopping over-development of our state is the only way to stop this madness here as far as air pollution goes. Be a part of the solution, support the efforts to clean up our environment–do it for your grandchildren. Anyone here originally from California? If you are then you know how much it has changed (pollution) in the last 40 or 50 years. If it keeps going like this then think of how it will be in another 40 or 50 years. And it just isn’t air pollution that is a problem–our water, the ocean, open space or wilderness areas, preventing global warming, climate change–it is all important to protect both our present and future generations, it all fits together somehow. Please, think. And then write your government reps, sign pro-environmental petitions, join an pro-environment organization and make a difference. Thanks!
The most important thing is to get the government to encourage people to leave L.A. The only way we’re going to get relief is if some percentage of people are forced to leave the area. Maybe expunge 30% and then go from there.
Dear Folks,
Instead of running the numbers to see if they are wrong, or sayig “someone should do something” about air pollution, why not try:
Car pooling to work and school
Doing your weekend shopping with a neighbor, using only one car
Buying a low emission vehicle or a hybrid
Moving closer to work for a shorter commute
Cars cause about 60% of air pollution according to the Pasdadena Weekly. Why wait for the government or “someone else” to fix the problem? It’s sitting right in your driveway.
There are areas where pollution impacts are greater as in Riverside and San Bernadino and the eastern suburbs of LA. The pollution is not necessarily all created in these areas but due to winds, weather and topography these areas are impacted the most. I can’t validate or invalidate the numbers they present but just because you can’t actually see all the pollution or the health impacts doesn’t mean it isn’t there. Also, moving toward a “green”er industrial base and making sure that we all realize the true cost of our daily activities and lifestyles is the only way we are going to survive in the coming years. Just visit cities in Europe and Japan and look at the way residents and businesses there are so conscious about electricity and fuels usage, most of what they do is not that difficult. If we don’t do something now our costs will be astronomical in the future. Better to invest now and cushion ourselves from the blows due to finite resources that we continue to pillage and squander.