Today
Sections
More
Features
Displaying 1 - 10 of 52 |
Next »air pollution
Study links air pollution and diabetes
A groundbreaking new epidemiologic study has found a strong link between adult diabetes and particulate air pollution, even after controlling for other risk factors including obesity, exercise and ethnicity. Frighteningly, the correlation exists even in those exposed to pollution at levels the EPA calls safe.
The study, conducted by researchers from Children's Hospital Boston and published in Diabetes Care, examined 2004-2005 data from every county in the contiguous United States. It builds on prior studies that have found that exposure to particulates results in increased resistance to insulin among mice.
For the scientist: For every 10 microgram/m3 increase in PM2.5 exposure, there was a 1 percent increase in diabetes prevalence.
For the layman: Seriously disturbing stuff.
Particulate pollution has also been linked to asthma and heart disease.
| October 01 2010 at 06:21 AM
L.A. and Bay Area drop dramatically in new traffic ratings
As much as we like to celebrate California's role as a green leader, it's also historically been the leader in air pollution and traffic. Los Angeles has had the dubious honor of having the worst traffic in the nation since 1985.
But, according to a new study, Los Angeles doesn't even rank in the top 10, dropping instead to 17th. The Bay Area drops from 5th to 34th.
So who's got the worst traffic now? Nashville and Oklahoma City, cities that have ostensibly subscribed to the increasingly discredited theory that building more roads alleviates traffic.
The major changes result from a shift in methodology. Previous studies, which were conducted by the Texas Transportation Institute, measured traffic delays only. The new methodology, developed by CEOs for Cities and the Rockefeller Foundation, measures total peak period time spent behind the wheel.
What do you think? Is the new methodology a fair way to measure which cities are the worst in which to drive to work?
| September 30 2010 at 10:57 AM
Another BP spill
You may already have heard about an oil rig explosion that occurred this morning near the site of the fateful Deepwater Horizon explosion in April. But you probably haven't heard that even BP's rig spilled millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf this summer, a BP refinery in Texas City, Texas, was pouring 538,000 pounds of toxic chemicals, including the carcinogen benzene, into the air.
BP neglected to inform residents or local officials. It also failed to shut down the malfunctioning plant, attempting instead to burn off the leaking chemicals. But more than half a million pounds escaped anyway, according to BP's own estimate, making it one of the largest spills in the history of the oil-loving state.
Residents have filed a $10-billion class-action lawsuit after many fell ill without knowing why. Local officials finally learned of the spill after it had ended.
The conservative state Attorney General is also suing BP for $600,000 in fines. Although state officials were told of the spill as the law requires, they allege that the problem stemmed — wait for it — from negligent maintenance. The plant has a history of violations.
| September 02 2010 at 10:31 AM
Coming soon: Cars that run on fumes, literally
Scientists at the University of California, Irvine have isolated an enzyme that can convert the carbon monoxide in car exhaust into propane fuel. The development could lead to cars that run twice on the same fuel or travel along converting the air pollution around them into natural gas, which is environmentally gentler than gasoline. Researchers say the enzyme might also eventually be able to produce gasoline, a development that could double-down on our addiction to the stuff.
iStockphoto
The enzyme is found near the root systems of nitrogen-fixing plants like soybeans. Under normal conditions, it converts nitrogen into ammonia, but when fed carbon monoxide in the lab, it produced carbon chains.
The catch? "It's very, very difficult" to extract the enzyme, called Vanadium Nitrogenase [corrected], according to researcher Markus Ribbe.
Via PopSci and Discovery News
| August 09 2010 at 12:21 PM
Climate change is bad for your health
While we've been "enjoying" a foggy summer here in San Francisco, the East Coast has been sweltering under some record breaking heat waves. And climate change models show such heat waves will occur more often and last longer, according David Easterling, a climatologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center.
Heat waves are just one of the ways climate change impairs public health. Michael McGeehin, director of the Division of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects at the CDC, calls them "a public health disaster." Heat waves, he says, "kill the most vulnerable members of our society. The fact that climate change is going to increase the number and intensity of heat waves is something we need to prepare for."
On the other hand, taking steps to check climate change would improve public health. Research from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, found that simply reducing the number of miles driven by about 20 percent would save hundreds of lives, avoid hundreds of thousands of hospital admissions, and save billions of dollars in health care costs in the Midwest alone.
And if we do nothing about climate change, the question won't be simply of well being, but of survival. Climate change could even make regions of the Earth uninhabitable, according to Matthew Huber, professor of earth and atmospheric sciences at Purdue University, who recently calculated the highest temperature-humidity combination that humans can withstand. According to his findings, if emissions from burning fossil fuels continue unabated, temperatures could rise by as much as 15 degrees Fahrenheit. Australia, many Mediterranean countries, and parts of Africa, Brazil, China, India and the United States would be so hot and humid that people could only survive outdoors for a few hours during hot weather.
So did that get your attention?
Research has also found that framing climate change as a public health problem makes it more important and understandable to members of the public, even some who don't generally believe climate change is happening.
| July 19 2010 at 10:17 AM
Challenge to climate law will be on Nov. ballot
The proposal to indefinitely suspend California's pioneering climate law, AB32, officially qualified for the November ballot yesterday.
Courtesy NRDC
As Grist put it last month, the best case scenario now is an expensive distraction for environmental advocates and state regulators.
The worst case scenario is — well, global catastrophe. Not only is California the seventh biggest economy in the world, it's also a foothold for environmental responsibility in the United States. Defeat of climate regulation here would bode really, really badly for the rest of the nation. Not to mention that the carbon emissions in question also come with particulate pollution that jeopardizes public health, and that green jobs are one of the strongest industries in the state in these difficult times.
The biggest funders of the movement to suspend are out-of-state gas companies Valero and Tesoro.
Gov. Schwarzenegger issued a statement yesterday strongly supporting the embattled law, and Mayor Gavin Newsom will hold a press conference with environmental leaders today at 12:15 at Pier 7.
To oppose the proposition — which supporters disingenuously call the California Jobs Initiative and opponents call the Dirty Energy Proposition — check out this website.
| June 23 2010 at 11:19 AM
The hidden costs of driving
If you don't drive, you're heavily subsidizing those who do. And if you do drive, you're paying more for it than you even know.
A recent report from the American Public Health Association identifies hidden costs of car-centric transportation developments. Nationally, vehicles run up an $80-billion tab for health care costs and deaths due to air pollution. Traffic accidents cost the nation $180 billion a year in health care costs, lost wages, travel delay, property damage and legal costs.
The report includes obesity among the health problems caused by road development — which seems reasonable, except there's no way to assess what percent of obesity is caused by the prevalence of driving instead of walking, biking or transit. But if driving accounts for just 10 percent of obesity, the dollar figure would be $14 billion.
In one detailed example, the study identifies five road development projects in San Francisco. Additional accidents from the added traffic, it concludes, would cost $3.4 million.
What's incredible is that, despite these costs and the huge share of the national budget transportation already gets (as you can see in this pie chart), requests for federal funding for road transportation projects get routinely rubber stamped with no requirements to prove cost-effectiveness or comparative advantage over, say, bike and transit projects.
| June 01 2010 at 10:49 AM
Air pollution boosts risk of heart disease
The American Heart Association has concluded that the evidence linking air pollution to heart disease is conclusive after reviewing peer-reviewed studies on the issue.
This is not good news for someone — a blogger, say — in his sixth year in a rent-controlled apartment near a highway. Researcher Dr. Robert Brook told NPR that "some studies found that those who lived within 100 yards of a major roadway were 50 percent more likely to have heart disease then those living farther away."
Brook says the studies also indicate that there is no safe level of exposure to particulate pollution, which is caused mainly by traffic and industry. Yet, 60 percent of the U.S. population lives in places with an unhealthy level of air pollution.
Although the Bay Area's air quality is relatively good, we have significant pollution from the Mirant power plant, Chevron's San Francisco terminal and Bae Systems Ship Repair.
Still, we have less than a tenth of the pollution that San Diego has, and less than one one-hundredth the pollution Los Angeles has.
| May 12 2010 at 06:13 AM
Icelandic scientists say climate change will bring more eruptions
Iceland has long been a hotbed of volcanology, or the study of volcanic activity. That's because, as you may recently have learned, the country has a lot of active volcanoes.
While no one can say with certainty whether or not the eruption of Eyjafjallajokull stems from climate change, Icelandic scientists point to an increase in the likelihood of eruptions as glaciers melt due to climate change. It works like this: As ice recedes, the land underneath moves up, freed from the massive weight. As the ground rises, it creates tectonic instablity, increasing the likelihood of volcanic eruptions in formerly glacier-clad regions.
Some studies also suggest that changing air and ocean temperatures could create geological stresses, causing eruptions, earthquakes and tsunamis the world over.
Indeed, the current eruption, which has caused billions of dollars in economic losses from air travel, tourism, and other international activities, is a useful preview of what kinds of damage climate change could cause. It's precisely this kind of economic blowout that leads most economists to argue that, whatever the price tag on carbon regulations, acting now will be far cheaper than doing nothing.
That's the bad news, but there's a little bit of good news, too. Volcanic ash, like man-made particulate pollution, has a cooling effect on the climate because it reflects solar heat. At this point, scientists are saying that Eyjafjallajokull won't have a significant effect on the climate, but an increase in volcanic activity could have a cumulative cooling effect.
It's just incredible how powerful nature is, and yet how exquisitely balanced its systems are.
For more pictures of the eruption, see here.
| April 21 2010 at 07:03 AM
Traffic near schools increases risk of asthma
Kids are returning home from school now, on San Francisco's second annual bike-to-school day. The effort drew 30 school participants, and it's none too soon: A new study found that cars idling to drop kids off and pick them up at school increase our little scholars' chances of getting asthma.
Drawing data from a longitudinal study, USC researchers found that children who attend schools in high-traffic areas had a 45 percent greater chance of developing the breathing disorder. Living near a highway has previously been shown to be a significant risk factor — something that affects many San Francisco households (including this writer's).
Admittedly, the bulk of the air pollution children are exposed to at school comes from non-school related traffic, but poor traffic management at many schools contributes, too, and is easier to resolve than other traffic patterns.
Parents, do your kids go to school near a high-traffic street? Does the school manage drop-off and pick-up traffic effectively?
| April 15 2010 at 03:27 PM
more