December 1998/January
1999
Clean Air 101:
Bay Area Goes Back to School
On Clearing Region's Skies Photo: © 1999, Barrie Rokeach
With the dark cloud of air pollution still hovering over many American
cities, the San Francisco Bay Area was particularly jubilant in 1995 when it became the
largest metropolitan area in the nation to meet the federal Clean Air Act's health standard
for smog-forming ozone. Now, less than four years later, a combination of factors,
including two unusually hot summers, has sent the Bay Area to the back of the class:
redesignation by the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) into non-attainment for
the ozone standard. The July 1998 announcement of redesignation was not a surprise, but it
still came as unwelcome news to the Bay Area agencies charged with overseeing the air
quality of the region: the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and MTC. The three agencies had been working hard
since the previous summer to present their case to the EPA. Their message: Let us continue
to pursue the efforts that were success0ful in helping us reach attainment in the first
place, rather than imposing another set of regulations on the region.
In achieving the 1995 objective, the three agencies each worked to their individual
strengths: the BAAQMD by regulating primarily "stationary" sources of air pollution, such
as factories, gasoline stations, paints and the like; MTC -- as the region's transportation
planning organization -- by concentrating on ways to supplement the pioneering efforts of
the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to cut emissions from "mobile" sources, such as
cars, trucks and buses; and ABAG by providing demographic information -- such as population
and employment growth, and zoning and other local ordinances -- that are critical to air
quality planning.
The work of the three agencies (with a big assist from CARB) paid off when the region
gained the coveted designation of being "in attainment," following five years of clean air
-- two more than required by federal regulations. In the same year that designation was
announced, however, the region saw one of its hottest summers ever, followed in 1996 by a
similar heat wave. The combination of stagnant air and high temperatures led to multiple
violations of the ozone standard set by the Clean Air Act: no more than one "exceedence"
per year for three years running at any one of the region's nearly two dozen monitoring
stations.
The fact that 1997 was without any violations of the federal ozone standard did not
change the EPA's 1998 redesignation. Nor did the fact that, between 1995 and 1999, reactive
organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions -- which together form ozone or smog
-- were expected to decline by 17 percent each. Despite these encouraging trends, the EPA
is requiring the Bay Area to adopt and implement a new set of measures in order to meet
federal air standards by November 2000 (see timeline).
Old Data, New Measures
Over the past decade and a half, the region has instituted a wide array of
transportation control measures (TCMs) in its efforts to reduce mobile source emissions.
Twelve TCMs were developed for the 1982 Bay Area Air Quality Plan, of which all but two
have been fully implemented, and those are measures that require ongoing work. The 16
additional TCMs adopted in 1990 also have been largely put into effect; again, the few
still under way are ones that entail continuing activities (see TCMs chart).
By June of this year, ABAG, BAAQMD and MTC must prepare a revised 1999 State
Implementation Plan, or SIP (see glossary). In addition to a new list of measures to reduce
emissions, the plan also must include an inventory of the ROG and NOx emissions produced in
1995, followed by a strategy for achieving emissions reductions needed to re-establish
attainment of the so-called "one-hour" national ozone standard (see glossary). Also needed
are contingency measures that would go into effect if the Bay Area does not attain the
standard by the deadline EPA has set.
Because of this fast-track schedule, local planners are being asked to make their
estimates of needed emissions reductions based on existing data, rather than taking the
time to gather new information and develop the analytical base for determining why the
region fell out of attainment.
As the Air District's executive officer, Ellen Garvey, noted, "The abbreviated EPA
schedule mandates that the agencies use the best available data rather than follow the
planning practice that has worked successfully in the past -- that is, collect new data and
perform a new analysis."
Complicating the preparation of the SIP is the fact that the one-hour ozone standard was
supplemented in 1997 by a new, eight-hour standard (see glossary). The EPA is requiring
that the Bay Area meet the old standard on an accelerated schedule, and at the same time
begin taking action to implement the new standard, which must be reached only five years
later.
Gene Leong, executive director of ABAG, voiced some of the partner agencies' frustration
with the short timetable set by the EPA: "If you strip away everything else, what EPA is
asking us to do is virtually impossible. They have asked us to guarantee that, using
legally enforceable measures, the region will be in attainment by the year 2000. As the
government agencies responsible for air quality planning, we have an obligation to be
honest with the public. And, honestly, it's not clear there is anything we can do to
guarantee meeting those standards by 2000 without a firm understanding of why we fell out
of attainment in the first place."
The Emissions Variables
While mobile source emissions -- which currently account for roughly 48 percent of the
ROG and 52 percent of NOx in the region's air -- are expected to decline rather
dramatically over the decade from 1994-2003, stationary sources -- already subject to
stringent controls -- are expected to continue to produce emissions at or close to the
current rate (see graph this page). Of the drop in mobile source emissions, only a small
fraction can be attributed to transportation investments or control measures that MTC has a
direct say in (see TCMs chart).
Instead, the decline in mobile source emissions can be traced primarily to vehicle and
fuel emissions standards imposed by CARB and the technological improvements developed in
response to these standards by car, bus and truck manufacturers, and oil refineries. In
fact, the decline in vehicular emissions is predicted to continue despite a population
growth of 30 percent and a 50 percent increase in daily vehicle miles of travel over the
next 30 years.
ABAG's Leong commented, "Despite the fact that emissions have dropped dramatically in
the last decade, we're now in an era where we're likely to bounce into and out of
attainment for quite some time -- something that was never envisioned when the Clean Air
Act was passed." As a recent Air District report noted, "...The meteorology that
contributed to the ozone exceedences in 1995 and 1996 is likely to recur every five to 10
years."
What Could Help
This is not to say that air quality cannot be improved. The EPA itself is developing
more stringent federal standards to be met over the next few years by diesel-powered
vehicles, including heavy-duty trucks, tractors and locomotives, according to Deborah
Jordan, associate director of the Air Division of EPA Region IX, which covers the Bay Area.
She also noted that the EPA is working with the Federal Aviation Administration and
aircraft manufacturers on voluntary emission reduction programs (including, potentially,
retrofit of aircraft), which should result in pollution reductions in the next three to
five years. Airport ground services' emissions could see improvement even sooner -- by
2000, according to Jordan.
MTC supports such measures, as well as those that CARB has enacted, for example, to
place more stringent emissions controls on sport utility vehicles and jet skis. "We need to
focus on things that make a difference, not spend time on those that don't," Steve
Heminger, MTC's deputy executive director, stated.
In addition to the continuing advances in technology made in response to tighter
emissions regulations, other trends are likely to help. One is in the area of
transportation investments. For example, in MTC's 1998 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP),
82 percent of the $88 billion targeted for transportation projects over the next 20 years
will go toward operation and maintenance, not expansion. As Heminger points out, "Filling
potholes and replacing worn out buses doesn't pollute the air."
In addition, by improving public transit services, planners hope to take more
single-occupant cars off the road. MTC's 20-year plan spends more than 50 percent of that
$88 billion on public transit, even though transit carries only 7 percent of the region's
trips.
"MTC is committed to providing good transit options for Bay Area travelers. We already
allocate $400 million per year in operating funds to public transit, $300 million per year
in capital funds to transit, and the RTP policy is to 'flex' over $50 million per year of
highway funds to transit capital programs on top of that," Heminger notes.
Also included in MTC's RTP is funding for a number of other air-quality-friendly
initiatives over the next 20 years. These include traffic management programs such as the
TravInfoTM traveler information phone line and roving tow
trucks that clear highway incidents ($600 million); pedestrian and bicycle projects ($370
million); and the Transportation for Livable Communities program that promotes and supports
transit-based development ($100 million).
Biting the Legislative Bullet
While admirable and useful, all of these transportation control measures achieve only
very modest emission reductions. As MTC's Heminger pointed out, "When you add up all the
TCMs we can implement under our existing authority, you save one to two tons of emissions
per day, which represents only about one half of one percent of the total mobile source ROG
inventory."
Greater emissions savings can only be accomplished with the help of the state
Legislature, Heminger argued. To strengthen the Bay Area's vehicle inspection and
maintenance program, colloquially known as "Smog Check," legislation would have to be
passed. Likewise, legislative action would be required to institute higher gas taxes,
bridge tolls or "congestion pricing" -- charging higher tolls during peak travel
periods.
"The simple truth about the 'mobile source problem,'" Heminger noted, "is that the
dramatic reduction in emissions has come about through cleaner cars and fuels. If we have
to go beyond the technology frontier, it will mean pretty significant changes in personal
driving behavior, an issue that members of the Legislature have been reluctant to
confront."
-- Reka Goode
|
