Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutA011 - DNR Response to article in Cedar Rapids Gazette IDNR RESPONSE TO LEAF BURNING Page 1 of 4 THE FOLLOWING LETTER IS THE IOWA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES-AIR QUALITY BUREAUS RESPONSE TO A GUEST COLUMN WHICH APPEARED ON DECEMBER 71 19969 IN THE CEDAR RAPIDS GAZETTE CALLING FOR A REINSTATEMENT OF LEAF BURNING IN CEDAR RAPIDS To Whom it May Concern: This letter is in response to the Guest Column printed in the Cedar Rapids Gazette on December 7, 1996 regarding leaf burning. While levels of airborne particulates have dropped in Cedar Rapids since 1968, leaf burning is still a threat to health and a nuisance. There are only two monitoring locations for particulates in Linn County. Generally, monitor locations are set to monitor predicted areas of highest pollution from industrial sources or as background monitors. Outside of special study, they are generally not placed in areas predicted to have the highest residential based emissions from leaf smoke. Therefore, the impact of leaf burning on existing monitors may not be an accurate reflection of actual air quality, as areas experiencing high concentrations of leaf smoke would likely be un-monitored, and not reflect the true impact of leaf smoke on Cedar Rapids residents. Iowa's monitoring network is being updated and expanded to provide a more complete and accurate picture of Iowa's air quality. Unfortunately, relocating monitors has identified new problem areas in the state, including high air pollution levels of sulfur dioxide in Cedar Rapids that violates National Ambient Air Quality Standards. During peak periods of leaf burning, a community the size of metro Cedar Rapids is almost certain to push or violate the 24-hour clean air standards set to protect the health of residents. Leaf burning can create pollution levels several times higher than http://air.linn.ia.us/hottopics/idnrleafbum.htm 1/19/98 IDNR RESPONSE TO LEAF BURNING Page 2 of 4 all sources of industry and vehicles combined at the neighborhood level, even in small towns. Fortunately, more is known today about the health effects of particulates than in the 1970s. Due to a tremendous body of accumulated information from various national and international medical sources, EPA proposed newer, tougher standards for particulates this November. Overwhelming clinical and field evidence indicates that particulates contribute to premature mortality, hospital admissions and other respiratory illness at concentrations below the current standards. Therefore EPA proposed tougher standards, as the current standards fail to adequately protect health. There is little debate among the experts about the health effects of particulates. Your conclusion about expert scientific debate or disagreement on one issue, like complex global warming, does not mean that experts always disagree or significantly disagree on all issues. The proposed standards include keeping the current PM10 standard and a new standard for very fine particles [those with an aerometric diameter of 2.5 microns (PM2 5)]. Such fine particulates are produced during combustion, including leaf burning. Particulate levels are not the only concern. Leaf burning emits other regulated pollutants of interest in urban areas, including carbon monoxide and various toxins. Des Moines experienced numerous carbon monoxide violations during days of leaf burning before a leaf burning ban was enacted. Carbon monoxide is of special concern to residents with heart ailments. A significant number of Iowans are particularly susceptible to air pollution caused by open burning, according to a 1982 report from a DNR forerunner, the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The report stated that approximately one in every six Iowans is particularly susceptible to leaf smoke. The evidence is not just limited to studies. Before the ban was enacted in Des Moines, increased hospital admissions for http://air.linn.ia.us/hottopics/idnrleafbum.htm 1/19/98 IDNR RESPONSE TO LEAF BURNING Page 3 of 4 respiratory conditions were correlated with periods of leaf burning. A trial burn in Cedar Rapids is not a wise policy given these known effects. Iowa's large population of seniors makes leaf burning a great concern, as the elderly are more impacted by leaf smoke and particulate pollution. Iowa has the highest population of residents over the age of 80 and ranks fourth per capita for residents of 65, according to the Iowa Department of Elder Affairs. Even healthy children can become subject to respiratory complications after prolonged exposure, as can healthy young adults who exercise out-of-doors and inhale large volumes of air. Another at-risk group are those with respiratory conditions. According to the Iowa Chapter of the American Lung Association, there are over 9,500 of your neighboring Linn County residents with chronic bronchitis and over 8,000 with acute bronchitis. Nearly 1,500 suffer from chronic emphysema and over 5,700 adults suffer from asthma. Over 3,000 children have asthma. Over 3,300 suffer from acute pneumonia and 128 from lung cancer. Leaf burning often creates smoky conditions with air pollution levels much higher than emissions from cars and industry combined, especially when autumn thermal inversions keep the smoke close to the ground. This can expose even the smallest Iowa communities to high air pollution concentrations for extended periods. Burning most often occurs during weekends or nice weather, exposing many Iowans who are out-of-doors recreating, exercising or working. The smoke is not only a health hazard, but an unpleasant nuisance, both in odor and haze. In addition, dense ground level smoke can also create low visibility and traffic/pedestrian hazards when combined with autumn sunsets occurring during evening rush hours. While you make your proposals, I think it important to note that citizens in Ankeny, Ames, Mallard and other smaller Iowa communities are looking to implement leaf burning bans to protect children and seniors with severe asthma and other http://air.linn.1a.us/hottopics/idnrleathum.litm 1/19/98 'TDNR RESPONSE TO LEAF BURNING Page 4 of 4 ailments. It would be convenient to burn leaves. But it is also more convenient to not recycle, dump used motor oil, burn used tires, pour chemicals down the drain, avoid conservation tillage and fish and hunt without regard to regulation. However, the consequences are well known. Health standards exist to protect those needing protection the most. Please consider this in your decision making. If you need any additional information please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Brian Button Environmental Specialist IDNR-Air Quality Bureau 515-281-7832 Home ©Copyright 1996-1997 by Linn County Health Department--Air Quality Division. All Rights Reserved. http://air.linn.ia.us/hottopics/idnrleafbum.htm 1/19/98