Beyond State Lines: How Regional Partnerships Are Tackling Air Quality

Most Americans would agree that clean air is important. However, finding ways to realize this goal can be challenging. Federal and state agencies must balance the health and economic impact of poor air quality against the costs of programs to decrease pollution from cars, power plants, and businesses.

The Clean Air Act of 1970 established the framework for National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). These standards have since been applied to what are known as “criteria air pollutants,” which include ozone (“smog”) and other gases, lead, and particulate matter. (Particulate matter is basically anything suspended in the air, such as soot from diesel exhaust, dust from a construction site, etc.) The 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act, signed by President George H.W. Bush, improved and expanded the Act to further protect public health and welfare under the NAAQS provisions.

While the NAAQS are established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, it is left to the states to determine how best to attain the federal standards. This effort requires the development of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that details the control measures needed for the state to achieve attainment. Past SIPs have targeted emissions from large sources such as power plants, refineries, and industrial boilers.

As for the exhaust from cars and trucks, California began setting its own tailpipe emission standards in 1966, before EPA was created, and the state has successfully preserved its authority to maintain and improve those standards. Other states are free to either adhere to the national standards set by EPA or to adopt California’s historically more-stringent vehicle standards.

Figure 1. A comparison of changes in air quality and in various other measures of U.S. health and economy for the period 1980 through 2016. Image credit: EPA.

A nationwide network of more than 4000 surface monitoring sites called the Air Quality System provides continuous observations of air quality to track whether states achieve the NAAQS. Overall, U.S. air quality has improved significantly even as the U.S. economy has grown (Figure 1). However, there is still more work to be done. Repeated exposure to pollutants increases the likelihood of long-term effects. Children are particularly at risk to develop lung problems that will reduce their quality of life as they get older. In the near term, exposure to ozone and particulate matter is directly related to an increased risk of death due to respiratory and cardiovascular complications. People in and downwind of cities are especially susceptible, due to higher exposure levels more frequently seen in urban areas. Simply living within a few blocks of a major highway can significantly increase one’s risk of health impacts from air pollution.

The health effects of poor air quality can also have a significant impact on the economy due to increased medical costs, increased burden on health resources (i.e., increased emergency room visits) and decreased labor productivity (from missed work for illness or from taking care of ailing family members).

A common argument is that each state should be solely responsible for fixing its own air quality issues. However, as long as the wind blows, pollution will travel from one state to another, just as your house may get smoked out if your neighbors are burning garbage in their backyard. It often takes multi-state cooperation, as required under a “good neighbor” provision of the Clean Air Act, to make progress in achieving the NAAQS. This requires considerable effort for states to show that their local air quality is being influenced by out-of-state upwind sources in other states. Unsurprisingly, this can be very contentious, and it almost always requires the involvement of the EPA and the attorneys general from the affected states to resolve the matters.

State and regional initiatives in air quality research

As long as poor air quality is a threat to human health and a burden on the economy, there will be a need for research to help guide government policies that address interstate pollution. Proposed budget cuts to federal agencies and the reduction or removal of scientific oversight has left many wondering how improvements to air quality, as well as progress on other issues, will continue. Lack of federal involvement will not clean the air, so state and regional agencies, in collaboration with some federal agencies and universities, are coordinating resources to fill the gap in research programs that had been supported at the federal level.

In May and June 2017, a field project called the Lake Michigan Ozone Study examined the chemistry and meteorology along Lake Michigan to help explain why surface ozone tends to be most prevalent along the lakeshore. The project involved coordination among state agencies in the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO), along with resources from NASA, NOAA, EPA, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), and the Universities of Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Northern Iowa, and Maryland (Baltimore County). Data acquired from research flights and ground based systems during May and June will be used to better understand ozone formation and transport and, more specifically, why ozone is so high near the lakeshore.

Figure 2. Ozone design values (DVs) for 2014-2016 (left, in parts per billion) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from the National Environment Inventory (right, in grams per square meter). DVs portray air quality status in terms related to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). DVs greater than or equal to 71 ppb by volume (red), which exceed the 2015 NAAQS for ozone, are evident around the shore of Lake Michigan. Image credit: NASA/LMOS.

A similar issue exists in the Mid-Atlantic region. Although data from 2011 showed elevated ozone concentrations along many parts of the I-95 corridor, the highest levels of surface ozone (90 parts per billion) were in Edgewood, Maryland, a small community on the Chesapeake Bay northeast of Baltimore. Simulations of future air quality in 2020 and 2023, using the Community Multi-scale Air Quality Model (CMAQ) and projections of expected population growth and pollution controls, indicate that the Chesapeake Bay and Long Island Sound regions will still have difficulty attaining the current federal standards (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Observed surface ozone in 2011 and simulations of future air quality in 2020 and 2023. Values above 70 ppb, averaged across an 8-hour period, are in violation of the current maximum allowed by the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Image credit: Tim Canty.

The Long Island Sound area has persistently been in violation of the older 75-ppb and now the newer 70-ppb ozone standards. This is not only a problem for the roughly 20 million people living in the New York metro region, but also for the downwind populations in Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and even at times New Hampshire and Maine. To better understand air quality in the region, the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) has marshalled resources from CT, RI, NJ, NY, and ME to leverage a long-term aircraft research campaign funded by the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) and led by Professor Russ Dickerson (University of Maryland, College Park). Research flights based out of a regional airport in Connecticut are providing measurements to improve our understanding of local emissions of ozone precursors, pollution transport from upwind sources, and the local effect of meteorology.

In addition, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority helped convene a workshop with NESCAUM in May 2017 at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. The goal was to bring together state and federal air quality planners with members of the research community to discuss ideas for future work in this area.

States can’t do it all: The need for a continued federal role

Over the years, federal agencies have developed a high level of scientific expertise that states have come to rely upon, and the agencies typically act as arbitrators of interstate disputes. Even with the cooperation between states, universities, and regional agencies to maximize the use of available research resources—as shown above—there are still limits as to what can be accomplished. States that do not have the financial resources to support research programs can be at a distinct disadvantage when dealing with those states that can or may be unduly influenced by special interests that offer to fund research programs, or those that simply choose not to participate in any investigation of multistate air pollution problems.

Our elected leaders must weigh the negative costs of the health and economic burden of poor air quality, which often has a greater impact on the members of our communities that have the least available resources, against the costs of cleaning the air. This may become increasingly difficult as energy demand rises. Finding the best way forward requires a combination of observations, air quality modeling studies, and analysis to chart this course. With the increasing pressures on federal funding and expertise, it’s not completely clear how effective future solutions to our continuing air quality issues will be, but it seems evident that the role of states and multi-state cooperation could become more important.

Editor’s note: You can contribute to air quality monitoring from your own backyard by installing an air quality sensor and adding it to WU’s growing network. Find out more