Bad Idea: Build a New Elementary School in the Smoke

[UPDATE 1/30/2013: FDNM article Residents concerned with air quality, plot size of Badger Road subdivision plan. What’s essential in choosing a site for a school? Health and safety. On Nov 18, 2012, Superintendent Pete Lewis wrote that Elbasan Acres should “…work well for a new elementary school….and could conceivably serve as a secondary school site….” Then gives his own ‘Heck of a job, Brownie’, “We appreciate the planning consideration and effort that went into this site development and commend you and the borough staff for the good work.” p 48 Assembly Full agenda packet]

How can the Borough fail to consider air pollution in selecting a school site?

The Borough has proposed an elementary school in the SE corner of the Elbasan Acres parcel. A pollution pit, see map below.

Blue Square Marks Elbasan Acres using 1-20-2011 FNSB Map for North Pole

The FNSB Platting Board will meet Wed, Jan 30 @ 6 pm Assembly Chambers to subdivide 634 acres of Borough land in North Pole for development. “Elbasan Acres,” a new housing development of 115 homes, would go into a low-lying area near Brock Rd/Repp Rd/Hollowell Rd. The new elementary school would be built on 56 acres of adjacent land at the NW corner of the Repp Rd/Hollowell Rd intersection.

Compare North Pole with Fairbanks on the same day, Feb 16, 2011.

Blue Square Marks Elbasan Acres using 2-16-2011 FNSB Map for North Pole

PM 2.5 Concentrations in the Fairbanks Bowl, Feb 16, 2011 from 10:17 AM, Fairbanks, Alaska

Borough maps confirm what residents of the area know: the air is thick with smoke. Adding new emission sources to a pollution pit is irresponsible. Choosing to locate a new elementary school in a pollution pit is even worse. It is inhumane to endanger the health and safety of future school employees and elementary students. Knowing the harm but going ahead anyway makes the Borough and School Board legally negligent and culpable. Future injured employees and elementary school parents on behalf of their injured children will be in a position to drain the Borough’s assets to recover costs and damages.

Before going further with plans for a major new subdivision and elementary school, the Borough should add the area to its sniffer vehicle routes. The current North Pole sniffer run goes by existing schools but not the proposed site for the new elementary school.

Smoke exposure can cause asthma, COPD, chemical sensitivity, heart disease, diabetes, strokes, blood clots, and many other problems. It is implicated as a factor in Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, ear infections, respiratory infections, pneumonia, chronic bronchitis, and influenza. It has been documented to lower IQ and to increase workplace absences, school sick days, hospitalizations, and deaths. Most of the studies have been on populations exposed to far lower levels than are common in neighborhoods here and have found a linear relationship between exposure and harm.

Blue Square Marks Proposed North Pole School Site

The proposed development falls just outside the PM 2.5 nonattainment boundary [link to nonattainment map]. Emissions from the development can be expected to flow into the nonattainment area, making meeting attainment more difficult. The closest monitor is the North Pole Fire Station.

Link 48 Days of Smoke in Rectangle of Death AK 99705 [Graph]

The Borough’s main interest is to develop the housing to offset costs of building the school. As a short-term budget scheme, it sounds like a winner. But adding new homes on top of the very stagnant real estate market in North Pole, with over a year inventory of unsold homes, will depress property values and sales yet further. Then toss in the concern that by the time the school is built, the need may no longer exist. Is a school still needed given the families relocating out of the area? This bad idea does not protect taxpayers, home sellers and buyers, teachers, or children.

Someone will say trust Alaska DEC to control the air pollution. Based on what evidence? DEC has filed a single case against a violator, the Woodriver landlords, not several as some believe. That case, 4FA-13-01205CI, may be followed on CourtView. DEC isn’t keeping the PM 2.5 nonattainment schedule; they failed to send EPA their plan to meet attainment that was due Dec 14, 2012. The state has no plan for reducing smoke pollution. Hope is not a strategy.

Borough planners may not have talked with the air quality division or seen the maps. Right hand, meet left hand. Well, they should. In 2009, EPA accepted a smaller nonattainment area than what they’d initially proposed, and now, utterly oblivious to health and safety, the Borough proposes development on the edge of the nonattainment boundary that will make meeting attainment and protecting public health more challenging than ever. If the development goes through, there will be a need to either control pollution outside the PM 2.5 nonattainment boundary or to enlarge the area, just as is needed in Moose Creek, Alaska.

The Jan 30 meeting was rescheduled from the regular Jan 16 meeting. The Platting Board is required to consider health and safety issues. Testimony is limited to three minutes per person except for the applicant.

Link: Platting Board agenda

Link: Full agenda packet pp 37-57

Link: Platting Board membership list

For more information, please contact Jeanne Olson <corvi@mosquitonet.com> 488-8800/488-2906.

Time for the Borough to take the long view instead of trying to squeeze revenue from their land when the North Pole housing market is saturated. Time to consider how this scheme risks the assets and holdings of the Borough as well as the health of elementary age children and their teachers.

Time to stop ignoring air quality, hoping a gust of wind will carry it away.

Read Full Post »

Health Impacts from PM 2.5 Particle Pollution

Unless you have an effective home air filter, the ambient (outside) level of pollution comes inside your house, office, church, store, daycare, or school. A growing body of scientific evidence shows that exposure to increased small particle pollution (PM 2.5) causes increased health consequences, short-term and long-term.

Following is a selection of health studies and reports on the consequences of fine particle pollution, called PM 2.5, in wood and coal smoke.

The American Lung Association has noted that “short-term exposure to particle pollution can kill.” This sobering statement puts our high PM 2.5 levels in context. From their 2010 State of the Air report:

Deaths can occur on the very day that particle levels are high, or within one to two months afterward. Particle pollution does not just make people die a few days earlier than they might otherwise—these are deaths that would not have occurred if the air were cleaner.

Particle pollution also diminishes lung function, causes greater use of asthma medications and increased rates of school absenteeism, emergency room visits and hospital admissions. Other adverse effects can be coughing, wheezing, cardiac arrhythmias and heart attacks. According to the findings from some of the latest studies, short-term increases in particle pollution have been linked to:

• death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes;
• mortality in infants and young children;
• increased numbers of heart attacks, especially among the elderly and in people with heart conditions;
• inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults;
• increased hospitalization for cardiovascular disease, including strokes and congestive heart failure;
• increased emergency room visits for patients suffering from acute respiratory ailments;
• increased hospitalization for asthma among children; and
• increased severity of asthma attacks in children.

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency “Health Effects of Wood Smoke” covers this topic clearly and with an excellent graphic. Fine particles, called PM 2.5, travel deep into the lungs and beyond into the body, carrying toxic contaminants on a deadly journey inside us.

Some of the smallest fine particles can go deep into the lungs and can even pass through the lungs into the bloodstream. They can trigger respiratory problems such as asthma attacks and even heart problems. Fine particles are considered especially dangerous for young children with developing lungs, and people of all ages who have asthma, bronchitis, other respiratory problems, and or cardiovascular disease.

“Woodsmoke health effects: a review” Naeher, et al (2007), recommends woodsmoke be regulated along with other ambient fine particle pollutants:

The sentiment that woodsmoke, being a natural substance, must be benign to humans is still sometimes heard. It is now well established, however, that wood-burning stoves and fireplaces as well as wildland and agricultural fires emit significant quantities of known health-damaging pollutants, including several carcinogenic compounds.

Critical Review of the Health Effects of Woodsmoke by Naeher PhD et al, 3/2005 provides a comprehensive coverage of its many health effects.

Wood Smoke Risk Assessment: Defining the Questions, Morandi, et al (2009), page 2:

(T)here is a growing body of evidence from animal and human studies that exposure to wood smoke poses a risk to human health at environmentally relevant concentrations. These adverse health effects range from irritancy to serious respiratory diseases, including chronic obstructive airway disease and lung cancer.

Globally, the 1.4 million premature deaths from biomass fuels (indoor smoke from solid fuels) annually rivals those from malaria. Source: “Wood: The Fuel that Warms You Thrice” Kirk R. Smith, MPH, PhD (2008), Figure 5.1. Smith has a new take on the old New England expression, “Wood is the fuel that warms you twice. Once when chopping, and once when burning.” Smith writes that:

Wood seems to have the potential to generate heat a third time because the smoke from its burning is a major risk factor for respiratory infections and the fever that often accompanies them.

Other woodsmoke and PM 2.5 particulate studies are available on the National Institutes of Health PubMed publication search site.

The State of Alaska Epidemiology bulletin identified an association between PM 2.5 and Fairbanks hospital admissions 8/30/2010. See also the State of Alaska Department of Health and Human Services fact sheeton the 8/2010 bulletin. Also, see the FDNM article on the 8/2010 on the State of Alaska Epidemiology study.

Examine this list of scientific studies from 1984 to 2004 on the health effects of woodsmoke and particulate matter air pollution.

Woodsmoke triggers asthma attacks. Read more on the Center for Disease Control, Asthma pages, and asthma trigger page. See also the NIH National Library of Medicine “Breath of Life” asthma publication to better understand this complex disease.

A Johns Hopkins study from 1998-2003 found a direct correlation in increased PM 2.5 levels in indoor air and asthma symptoms and medication use. According to the study, a rise in indoor PM 2.5 by 10 μg/m³ increases the number of days children were wheezing severely enough to limit their speech by 7% and the number of days children used rescue medication by 4%. 

Jane Q. Koenig, PhD, MS Professor Emeritus of the University of Washington and Koenig’s faculty profile, has a number of relevant publications including: “Indoor- and Outdoor-Generated Particles” Koenig et al 2005 and “Effect of Particulate Air Pollution on Lung Function in Adult and Pediatric Subjects in a Seattle Panel Study” Carol A. Trenga, PhD, Koenig, et al 2005.

PM 2.5 air pollution has harmful cardiovascular effects according to a growing body of evidence, according to “Growing evidence linking air pollution with cardiovascular disease: AHA” by Michael O’Riordan on RD Brook, 2010:

PM2.5 generally has been associated with increased risks of myocardial infarction, stroke, arrhythmia, and heart-failure exacerbation within hours to days of exposure in susceptible individuals. Several new studies have also demonstrated that residing in locations with higher long-term average PM levels elevates the risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Sunday newspaper insert Parade published an article “The Surprising Link Between Air Pollution & Diabetes” 11/7/2010. The article refers to a study published in Diabetes Care which found “a strong association between PM2.5 exposure and diabetes prevalence, suggesting that ambient air pollution may contribute to the increased prevalence of diabetes in the adult U.S. population.” This conclusion was published in “Association Between Fine Particulate Matter and Diabetes Prevalence in the U.S.” by John F. Pearson, BS, et al in Diabetes Care, 10/2010.

Given a hypothetical population of 1,000,000 people, our model suggests that for every 10 μg/cubic meter increase of PM2.5, there could be a resulting increase of ∼10,000 diagnosed cases of diabetes or an overall increase in diabetes prevalence of ∼1%/10 μg/cubic meter.

According to the 2009 US Census Bureau, the Fairbanks North Star Borough population estimate was 98,660, with 8.4% under the age of 5 and 26% under 18. In our community a 10 microgram increase in the annual average PM 2.5 level would be expected to result in an additional 900 to 1,000 individuals developing diabetes. Pearson’s article concludes:

…(E)vidence based on this study and others suggests that current limits [EPA annual limit of 15 μg/cubic meter] on particulate matter exposure may not adequately mitigate the public health consequences.

The Indo-US Collaboration on Environmental and Occupational Health, recommendations and abstracts, 2008 grimly portrays the effects of air pollution. One study, on page 32, lists the common short-term air pollution exposure effects [and symptom(s) associated with that effect]:

• mortality (cardio-respiratory)
• hospital admissions (cardio-respiratory)
• emergency room attendees (cardio-respiratory)
• primary care visits (upper and lower respiratory)
• respiratory symptoms (cough, phlegm, wheeze)
• use of medications (asthma drugs)
• lung function (restrictive and obstructive)
• blood (increased viscosity, fibrinogen)
• heart (increased heart rate variability, arrhythmia)

Another abstract in the Indo-US publication goes beyond the short-term effects, see page 53-54:

(The) WHO estimates 1.6 million premature deaths from indoor air pollution (twice that from outdoor air pollution) [800 thousand]…. Chronic exposure to biomass smoke causes genetic damage, cardiovascular disease and stroke.

Brains as well as bodies are put at risk. A recent US study found lower IQ in children of mothers exposed to higher levels of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), the main toxins in woodsmoke. After controlling for variables, IQ was 5 points lower, about 4%, than children of mothers with lower PAH exposure. Study: Prenatal Airborne Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Exposure and Child IQ at Age 5 Years published in Pediatrics7/2009.

A current study found an association between childhood autism and residence proximity, during pregnancy and near the time of delivery, to freeways and major roadways as a surrogate for air pollution exposure. The study was published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives “Residential Proximity to Freeways and Autism in the CHARGE study” 12/16/2011 and also summarized in the LA Times “Proximity to freeways increases autism risk, study finds” 12/16/2011.

The New South Wales (Australia) Government’s “Action for Air” 2009 acknowledges PM 2.5 particles are particularly dangerous and that there is no safe exposure level:

Health research identifies particles of less than 2.5 micrograms (PM2.5) as a particular concern because their smaller size means they can be inhaled deeper into the lungs, and because there is no safe threshold level to use for setting standards.

Read Full Post »

FNSB Symposium: Health Effects of PM 2.5

[UPDATE: FNSB 2009 Symposium Summary file is corrupted; assess the original file: 2009 Symposium Summary (recovered).]

From FNSB 2009 Symposium Summary, pp 5-6

Health Effects

Two presentations were given on the health effects of PM 2.5. The first, by Dr. Lori Verbrugge of the Alaska Division of Public Health, explained that fine and ultra fine particles (i.e., PM 2.5) behave like a gas—they penetrate indoors from outside air, they adsorb toxic compounds, and they penetrate deep into the lung. Groups who are at most risk from exposure to elevated concentrations include children, the elderly, people with heart and lung disease, people with weakened immune systems, and people who work outdoors. Children are more susceptible because they breathe more air per body weight than adults, they tend to be active, they mouth-breathe when active (i.e., crying), and their lungs are still developing. An additional concern is that their immune and brain defenses are not fully formed. Older adults lose immune and respiratory defenses with aging; they may also have lung injuries, circulatory illness, diabetes, etc., which increases their vulnerability to PM 2.5.

Health effects from short-term exposure can include eye, nose, throat and lung irritation, headache, nausea, aggravated asthma, acute respiratory symptoms, and increased risk of heart attack. Health effects of chronic exposure to elevated PM 2.5 can include inflammation of respiratory membranes, bronchoconstriction, impaired respiratory defense, decreased heart rate variability, and accumulation of particles in the lung. The consequences of chronic exposure are increased hospital admissions and ER visits, chronic bronchitis, reduced lung capacity, increased cardiopulmonary mortality, reduction in life expectancy, and increased risk of lung cancer.

Dr. Verbrugge said the literature was very clear and consistent about the health effects of PM 2.5 and cited over 20 separate studies that consistently showed an increase in mortality associated with long-term particulate exposure. Collectively, the studies showed a 6–17% increase in relative mortality with each 10 microgram per cubic meter of PM 2.5 exposure. She said the available data showed there is increased mortality with short-term exposure to PM 2.5 concentrations that are less than 20 μg/m3, which is considerably below the new “health-based” 24-hour standard of 35 μg/m3. Overall, she said it is estimated that elevated PM 2.5 levels are responsible for 60,000 deaths per year in the US.

The second presentation, by Rachel Kossover, MPH, RD, also from the Alaska Division of Public Health, outlined a study she is conducting to evaluate whether there is a relationship between daily PM 2.5 concentrations and local hospitalization rates in Fairbanks. That study, however, has just been started and results are not expected until next summer. When completed, it should provide the first insight into how relative risk varies within Fairbanks in relation to age, sex, rurality, and ethnicity.

[Results now available: State of Alaska Epidemiology bulletin on the association between PM 2.5 and Fairbanks hospital admissions 8/30/2010; State of Alaska Department of Health and Human Services fact sheet on the 8/2010 bulletin; and FDNM article on the 8/2010 State of Alaska Epidemiology study, 8/30/2010.]

Read Full Post »

Self-care for Individuals

The purpose of this post is to share resources and ideas with residents who need to protect their own families now. Adequate action to protect public health may not come for years. This page is developed for individuals in sensitive groups and those who want to stay healthy.

Sensitive Groups: All children, people with lung conditions (chronic bronchitis, asthma, or other lung conditions), heart conditions including high blood pressure, or diabetes (higher risk of having heart conditions), and elders (often have undiagnosed heart or lung conditions) are at greatest risk. In addition, pregnant mothers and women who may become pregnant need to take extra precautions because the baby growing inside is vulnerable to permanent damage from PM 2.5 pollution.

Individuals Who Want to Stay Healthy: Individuals who are currently healthy and want to prevent future health problems should take precautions. Damage can start with chronic exposure or with one thick, choking breath of toxin-laden smoke (especially harmful if you’re exercising). If you are already taking care of yourself by exercising, eating properly, using your seatbelt, and plan to live a long and productive life, you have everything to gain by reducing your exposure to PM 2.5. Athletes, because of their higher respiration rate during exercise, are at higher risk but typically are left off the list of sensitive groups.

Your Choice

Knowing your risk, exposure, and options will help you make the best choice for you and your family. As parents, we hold primary responsibility for the health of our children so they may reach their fullest physical and intellectual potential. Summer wildfires, smoke from space heating, coal-burning, and diesel vehicles all contribute to unhealthy levels of PM 2.5. For winter source analysis, see pie graph in previous post Woodsmoke Hogs the Pie (Chart).

Self-care Options:

Consult with your own doctor to assess your risk & vulnerabilities – or make an appointment with a pulmonology specialist. Consider: Chest Medicine, 1701 Gillam Way, Fairbanks, AK 99701-6056, (907) 456-3750.

Test your house – Have a local firm test your house or business for indoor or outdoor air pollutants. Solutions to Healthy Breathing (907)457-4568 offers indoor and outdoor air quality, radon, and mold testing.

Install digital CO and smoke detectors with alarms – Everyone, especially wood burners, should have a home digital carbon monoxide monitor. See EPA’s publication on protecting your family from CO poisoning. In addition, replace batteries in home smoke detectors every 6 months. If your home is on fire or filling up with smoke from a neighbor’s wood or coal boiler, you need the alarm to wake you up so you can get your family out in time.

Trade-out polluting heating systems – Move into low or zero emission heating systems, install windows designed for passive solar uptake, and upgrade your home’s insulation. Alaska Thermal Imaging conducts home energy ratings and thermal imaging to identify heat loss and install high-efficiency heating and domestic hot water systems, (907)488.4332, office@akthermalimaging.com. Alaska Thermal Imaging can also help to identify indoor air pollution sources through combustion safety and ventilation testing.

Turn off your HRV – If the air pollution source is known to be from outside and expected to be of short duration, turn off your Heat Recovery Ventilation (HRV) system. Ventilation systems can bring smoke pollution into your home as effectively as if you opened all the windows. Examine your HRV filters and look up their labels; Google “MERV” to learn more about what level of filtration your current ventilation system provides. It may be designed to filter the air just enough to keep the HRV mechanism from getting clogged. HRVs are designed to recirculate stale (and possibly contaminated air) from inside your home, conserve its heat, and replace it with clean air from outside before venting it outdoors. So, if the outside air is full of smoke, turn off your HRV to preserve the clean air you have left.

Filter your house air – Expensive but could be a lifesaver. A local firm installs heat recovery ventilation (HRV) and residential air filtration, and radon mitigation systems: Ventilation Solutions, LLC (907)374-6838, solutions@acsalaska.net, 3245 College Road, Fairbanks, AK 99709. A residential air filtration system that is nearly as good as HEPA runs around $900 for installation with an existing HRV. The Environmental Protection Agency publishes “Guide to Air Cleaners in the Home” to guide users in selecting home filters appropriate for the pollution problem. Cold Climate Housing Research Center & Alaska Housing Finance Corporation studied different ventilation and filtration strategies to improve indoor air quality during the 2004 summer wildfires.

Use a gas mask – P-100 (HEPA) filter masks are not pretty (or these either), were designed for industrial use, and are not likely to fit well enough to be effective. Mostly manufactured by 3M, these half-face or full-face (to protect the eyes) respirator mask filters cost about $20. Be sure they filter PM 2.5 and smaller particles. User would need to know when to the filter needs to be changed and what new filters cost. They are difficult to breathe through, have to be fitted to a person’s face, don’t come in child sizes, and couldn’t be on during snacks or lunch. Adults should recognize that they don’t seal properly with beards or stubble. According to one review: “The general use of RPE (respiratory protection equipment) by anyone who has not been fit tested, trained in fitting, maintenance, storage, or indeed limitations can be expected to result in seriously deficient protection.” Search Google for “air filter face mask” to see what’s available.

Move to breathe cleaner air – While this may not be your first choice, don’t wait too long to consider it. Some families have left already at the recommendation of their doctor. When forced to choose between community and family, family comes first.

For more information – Review previous posts Health Impacts of PM 2.5 Particle Pollution. Check previous post Real-time Monitoring but be advised that air quality is often much worse in hot zones in neighborhoods and near schools. Local blog North Pole Clean Air provides a wealth of information about risk, harm of exposure, and options for reducing exposure.

No compensation has been given for inclusion on these pages and in no way are they to be considered exhaustive. This posting intended to support considerations of how an individual can take control of his or her own exposure to PM 2.5.

If your business offers a service relevant to this post, please include your name, contact information, and services offered in the comments field below.

Read Full Post »