One of the things that stuck with me while researching transportation policies in Barcelona is this map series of noise pollution that show the before and after full adoption of the superblocks:
As someone who studied GIS for my undergrad, I wonder about how the data for these maps were collected. Looking at the symbology, the data was likely collected at several points over a set period of time at regular intervals along streets. This is evidenced by the clear boundaries between noise levels, and their spatial co-incidence over major streets. The points were then symbolized as a heat map through interpolation, allowing us to see the different noise values as a continuous fabric over the city. Looking at the maps, I have 2 thoughts:
1) The equipment to measure noise pollution is fairly low tech and affordable (Amazon sells professional decibel meters with an accuracy of +1.5 dB, and there are iPhone apps approved for use by The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society)
2) If one were able to record air quality at the same level of measurement, my instinct tells me one could expect to see a similar map of tailpipe emissions.
The reason this thought seems to persist in my head is that measuring air quality is expensive, and generally inequitable: it requires a high level of expertise to analyze the data, and most air quality sensors are static. While noise pollution does affect our health, this is often overshadowed by the effects of air pollution. This is problematic because air quality measures can be more compelling data points while discussing whether a project should move forward, or whether more robust pollution abatement measures must be put in place, but air quality data is harder to collect and analyze. If one were able to come up with a reliable method to estimate tail pipe emissions based on noise levels, it might help eliminate barriers for communities that struggle to make their needs heard and make progress on both fronts.
***
This year I volunteered with Verde, a nonprofit organization that "serves communities by building environmental wealth through Social Enterprise, Outreach and Advocacy." I translated information about a program that sought to install low cost air quality sensors in the Cully Neighborhood into Spanish. Cully is one of the most diverse neighborhoods in Portland, but it also suffers from some of the worst air quality in the city, in part because it abuts industrial zones in North Portland, and in part because there are no permanent air quality monitors in the area. Heat maps show values in an area by mathematically filling in the gaps between measuring points. The closer the points are, the more confident you can feel about the accuracy of the level displayed on the map.
The overall distribution of permanent air quality monitors in Portland is very inequitable: every inner neighborhood is within close range of at least 2 monitors to reliably interpolate from, but large areas of Northeast and East Portland lack reliable coverage, leaving those communities susceptible to unmonitored air pollution from industrial zones and tailpipe emissions. Without reliable data, these communities have little to arm themselves with to advocate for cleaner air.
In October, Owens-Brockway Glass Container Inc, "Oregon's largest glass container recycler has agreed to control emissions at its Northeast Portland plant or else shut down". The company has until the end of 2023 to install pollution controls or it must shut down. According to the Oregonian, the company has "been fined nine times by the state for air quality violations since 2004." Below is a map of Owens-Brockway in Portland. Note its proximity to neighborhoods without permanent air quality monitors:
I do not know whether any of the air quality monitors that Verde has distributed this year played any part in the decision to cut air pollution from the plant. It will be nearly 20 years since Owens-Brockway's first recorded air quality violation before its surrounding neighborhood gets respite from the pollution it's been spewing this entire time. On the one hand, I am glad that the plant will finally stop poisoning its neighbors. But on the other hand I am quite livid that this pollution was allowed to go unchecked for so long. Would this have happened if Cully, and other close-by neighborhoods had adequate air quality monitors? Would this have happened if these neighborhoods were predominantly affluent and white, as is the case with the rest of the city that has good air quality monitor coverage?
***
The only thing that is clear to me is that air quality measures can empower a community to advocate for cleaner air. It is also clear to me that there are a lot of barriers to collect this data, of both expertise and cost. If one is able to take more precise noise measurements at a fraction of the cost of air quality measurements, then one should be able to take these as a proxy (or at the very least a predicting factor) of transportation-based air pollution. The more I think about it, the less important it seems whether we have an iron-clad method for extrapolating air pollution from noise pollution. Waiting to see the (more) correct measurement before enacting clean air policies has terrible, irreparable consequences for communities that are not able to perform exhaustive air quality monitoring.
And while it is an absolute win that Owens-Brockway will stop polluting, take a closer look at these neighborhoods. They are bounded by highways and major arterials that serve the 18-wheeled needs of industry and freight. If we measured noise pollution at a similar level of accuracy that the Barcelona Superblock maps present, and we understood that in transportation, noise and air pollution go hand-in-hand, we would see a greater need for bold transportation policies that would address these sources of pollution. We would also see many other parts of the city display in darker hues than current air quality maps suggest. If we legitimize the use of alternative data sources that are easier to collect, we eliminate barriers that prevent people from successfully advocating for their needs.
By Alan De Anda-Hall
Edited by Yingjia Zhou
Sources:
Barcelona wants to build 500 superblocks. Here's what it learned from the first ones.Web. April 2019.
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/4/9/18273894/barcelona-urban-planning-superblocks-poblenou
Verde. Web. November 2021. https://www.verdenw.org/
The Accuracy of iPhone Applications to Monitor Environmental Noise Levels. Web. February 2020. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lary.28590
Portland glass recycler Owens-Brockway agrees to control pollution or shut down. Web. October 2021. https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2021/10/portland-glass-recycler-owens-brockway-agrees-to-control-emissions-or-shut-down.html
Professional Decibel Meter. Web. November 2021. https://www.amazon.com/Professional-Backlight-Accuracy-Measuring-30dB-130dB/dp/B01MZ0IUGY/ref=asc_df_B01MZ0IUGY/?tag=&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312357852128&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=12342762214536365379&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032930&hvtargid=pla-348660547600&ref=&adgrpid=62539486699&th=1
Portland Air Quality. Web. November 2021. https://www.iqair.com/us/usa/oregon/portland
Google Maps. Web. November 2021. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Owens+Illinois+Glass+Plant/@45.5628827,-122.5731292,15.02z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x5495a406c25b340b:0xad8c659ad07b4684!8m2!3d45.5634184!4d-122.5662168
Hi, Allan, thank you for your thoughtful post! I appreciate your analysis of the effect of superblocks in alleviating noise levels, and how analyzing noise levels may be used as an affordable, cost-effective proxy for analyzing air pollution, considering that vehicular and traffic-related noise constitute a majority of the noise pollution that a city may experience. In other words, I agree with you that it is hard to conceive of a place that is suffering from high levels of noise pollution that is not also simultaneously suffering from high levels of air pollution. I also appreciate your analysis about the disparities in air quality monitors across Portland, disparities that seem to fall along the lines of racial, economic, and possibly other sociodemographic characteristics. Well done with locating Owens-Brockway Glass Container Inc, in relation to the air quality monitors, finding that the industrial company is located in an area that lacks such monitors and suffers from an intersectional array of disparities along the lines of sociodemographic and transportation development characteristics. I feel you in that it is infuriating to think this industrial company has been allowed to continue its operations for decades while being out of compliance with air quality standards. But unfortunately, I wonder how the company’s closure may affect its labor force, considering the possibility that its labor force is disproportionately diverse, low-income, and/or low-educational attainment, among other possible disparities at play, in relation to the surrounding area and the city as a whole. I agree with you in that legitimizing by using alternative, more easily-collectible data sources to gauge air pollution should be a top priority; but I also think that potentially the area would be better off if the industrial company was brought into compliance with air quality standards, and this procedure could also benefit from those alternative, more easily-collectible data sources. The city and also the state should be behind these fronts, funding mitigation as much as possible. Again, thank you for such a thoughtful post.
ReplyDeleteThanks Asif! The irony of Owens-Brockway is that they provide a service that is necessary to reduce waste, something that is good for the environment, they recycle glass! I like what they do, but they must do it better.
DeleteI think that the penalty is extremely fair, they have time to add a legitimate filtration system to stop polluting NE Portland, they are far from being shut down. Per the article:
The company had faced a $1 million fine over emissions at the facility, located just west of Interstate 205 off Northeast Columbia Boulevard. The agreement brings the financial penalty down to $662,000, of which $529,000 must be spent on a DEQ-approved air quality project near its facility.
My hope is that they absolutely do better instead of shutting down. Especially if the labor force is disproportionately diverse, low-income and/or low-educational attainment, they should not be working in such toxic conditions. I sure hope that Owens-Brockway doesn't hold their jobs hostage, or claims that doing business with proper filtration systems is too expensive to keep operations. Keeping your employees (and your neighborhood) safe should be considered part of the cost of doing business, not as an obstacle.
Really appreciate this post Alan! I'm all for the idea of using noise pollution as a proxy for air pollution to identify areas of concern for further study with the more costly air quality equipment. This reminds me of the situation a few years back where the artisanal glass manufacturers here in Portland were releasing heavy metals and some other chemicals into the air. Whoever was doing the study (I don't remember off the top of my head) looked at prevalence of the pollutants in moss samples around the city and was able to draw patterns to the glass factories as the sources. They then confirmed this with more expensive equipment but the moss samples ended up being pretty effective indicators. I'd be interested to see if that's specific to industries like glass manufacturing or if moss could be used to measure air quality more generally. Either way, I like your idea of measuring noise pollution and agree that low-cost proxies could be a great way to identify areas of concern and could hopefully lead to some good community health outcomes.
ReplyDelete