Clear Full Forecast

New Report Says Canada Not Tough Enough On Air Quality Issues

By 250 News

Friday, August 25, 2006 09:40 AM

  
The David Suzuki Foundation has given residents of North Nechako a little more fuel for their air quality battle.
The Foundation has released a report which says Canada’s air quality standards are too low, and estimates air pollution is a contributing factor in 5,900 to 16,000 premature deaths in Canada each year.
The report’s author, David Boyd, says Canada’s limits for sulphur dioxide are a good example;
SO2 limit
Canada                         115 parts per billion
European Union               48 parts per billion
Australia                         80 parts per billion
It was an excessive release of SO2  from the Marsulex plant in the BCR industrial site in Prince George  recently that sent more than a dozen  neighbouring sawmill workers to hospital for treatment of eye, skin, nose and throat irritations.
Meantime, the City of Prince George staff continues to gather data on the air quality issues surrounding the asphalt plant complaints raised by residents along the Nechako River. That information includes interviews with all involved, and data from the B.C. Ministry of Environment as well as the Greater Vancouver Regional District.
GVRD is considered to have the most stringent requirements on asphalt plant permits.  Comparisons will be made between all existing permit levels and presented to Prince George Council.
It was confirmed last week that Pittman Asphalt had exceeded limits during a stack test.  The company has a total of 120 days from season start up to comply with the limits set out in its permit. 
While stack emission limits may be met, there is still a concern raised by some residents about the cumulative effects of those emissions.  There are three asphalt plants in the same area of the city, and no ambient air quality monitoring in place.  So while it may be that each individual  plant is operating within the set limit, there is nothing in place to either assess or regulate the cumulative effect of the emissions.
Although the regulations make it clear municipalities have the option to set specific limits for emissions that raises several other questions about who would pay for monitoring and enforcement.
  
Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

3 asphalt plants in the same vicinity.
Accumulated emissions from all 3 would total what? I assume exceeding what is allowable-if one ran over the limit for a period.
When one drives a few miles out of the city-the freshness of the air is decidedly noticeable.
Prince George residents must thrive on air pollution, as there is no clear evidence an honest effort is made to rectify the problem.
Just more studies, and excuses.
When will it be time to "get serious?"
This problem must also be putting pressure on the health system.
Why are they not in the mix to insist on remedies being used-and getting serious about it?
I really cannot see where monitoring it and making the assessments known to the public is the answer.
It is like a sign I once possessed-which read-
"Please do not breathe when I am smoking."
Stupidity reigns.
Either clean it up-or shut up.
Bang on with the health system not involved enough. The local health officers are much more concerned about second hand smoke than air pollution.

When was the last time we saw a medical health officer speak about the need to step up the efforts to reduce air pollution in this city? On the other hand, there have been presentations to Council on several occasions about the effects of second hand smoke and the need to put in tougher laws for workplace situations.

From the article above: "..air pollution is a contributing factor in 5,900 to 16,000 premature deaths in Canada each year."

From the linked page: "over 1,000 (and possibly as many as 7,800)" Canadians are estimated to be killed by second hand smoke each year.

http://www.smoke-free.ca/factsheets/pdf/Q&A-healtheffects.PDF

First, it is interesting to note the language. "Canadians are KILLED by second hand smoke" while air pollution is a "CONTRIBUTING FACTOR in premature deaths"

Maybe those who are serious about this have to start speaking a different language. "Simply stated, between 5,900 and 16,000 Canadians are killed by air pollution each year."

Also note that in each case the number is an estimate since it is difficult to attribute deaths in either case. The numbers are derived through epidemiological studies in both cases.

In addition, this community has both more smokers and more pollution than the average community in Canada. While we say that, it is not buyer beware in the case of smoking in the workplace, and we thus put regulations in place which removes the known emitter of the smoke. We do not do the same with air polluters, except for the family that has a fire pit in the back yard because we are supposed to think that 1,500 people in the bowl with firepits going on a Saturday afternoon produce more pollution than the various industries in the bowl.
Yes, I agree with Owl
At the same time, I support the David Suzuki Foundation financially.
I am wondering if,as well as leaning on our Muncipal and Provincial politicians if we perhaps could be looking at a Federal policy on air pollution?
Perhaps a bit naive but we are a country-community and if we all look after one another perhaps things could change.
Communities come from Municipalities; Communities come from Provinces and Communities come from the Government of Canada.
Perhaps if Nova Scotia and PEI and New Brunswick were linked with Central Canada and British Columbia we could all be a "Community" that says "enough is enough" and we all need clean air to breathe!
Has anyone looked into the gas emissions that find their way into our local atmosphere from all of the dump sites in our fair community? I can think of the piece of property between the Coast Inn of the North and the old RCMP building. Before that, it was a ball diamond. Before that it was a dump.

I look over at Parkwood, guess what? that whole area was also a dump. In fact, just about anywhere where the ground was marshy or called a slew, that was the next location of the next dump. We just kept filling in any low areas and then began using them for development and expansion.

Remember the area surrounding 1st Avenue and Fremuiller? That was also a dump. I am aware that previous dump sites are a concern when digging basements for new home construction.

There has been lots of focus on dust, pulpmills and refinery emissions, but how much has been discovered about emissions coming up out of the ground that is seriously affecting our health? It seems that cancer is just too common in PG nowadays. So, what's up with that? The incidence of cancer doesn't seem to have any correlation to the amount of cancer research fundraising activities in this area. They are both growing at the same rate.

Do I think doing more of the same thing is a solution to this cancer problem? No I don't. I think we should be looking in a different direction for a solution. And I don't have a solution, but I would like to know why some people stay healthy working and living in exactly the same environment? Chester