June 15, 2004
GVRD Dirty Fuel Proposal Threatens Our Health
The GVRD proposal to consider reducing air pollution emission standards for local industry is shocking and irresponsible. ("Staff urges GVRD to allow dirty fuels " (Sun.A1.Nov 22) It threatens the health of children and adults throughout the region and is in stark contrast to more progressive approaches to public and environmental health adopted by other North American cities.
The proposal encourages the use of cheaper fuels such as coal, wood waste and fuel oil. GVRD residents should know about some of the toxic pollutants this will release into our environment, and they should be aware that many of the most toxic are not even tracked by the GVRD. Coal combustion releases toxic metals, such as mercury and chromium. Mercury is a potent reproductive toxin, and adversely affects neurological development. Hexavalent Chromium is a well-known human cancer-causing agent, and a reproductive and respiratory hazard. It is more hazardous when inhaled than when ingested in drinking (It was Chromium pollution that was the subject of the popular film, "Erin Brockovitch", and the lawsuit by the citizens of Hinkley, California.)
Coal combustion also produces a mix of other hydrocarbon pollutants, some of which are carcinogenic, while others, such as the nitrogen and sulphur compounds, can severely harm the respiratory system. The burning of wood waste and fuel oils produces a similar mix of pollutants. For example, diesel oil combustion products are classified as carcinogenic by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), an internationally recognized centre for the classification of human carcinogens. Wood waste burning can produce dioxins and benzene, two potent and well-known cancer-causing substances.
How might the GVRD proposal to burn dirty fuels affect children in the GVRD? Long-term exposure to air pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter can cause reduced lung growth in children, and the effects are more pronounced in areas where air pollution is highest, according to published findings (October 2000) from the Children's Health Study, a 10-year study at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. Exposure to nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and acid vapours has been found to have the greatest association with impaired lung growth. In addition, these children may be at increased risk as adults for chronic respiratory problems such as asthma and emphysema.
Unlike the GVRD, many regional governments are committing themselves to innovative pollution prevention programs. The city of San Francisco recently adopted the "precautionary principle" of pollution prevention as a criterion for all of its public policies and regulatory initiatives. The City of Boston recently committed itself to take steps to eliminate all present and potential dioxin pollution in its jurisdiction. Similarly, in Canada, the federally sponsored Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control, a network including the Canadian Cancer Society, cancer control agencies, researchers, industry, labour, and environmental representatives, affirmed its commitment to the precautionary principle, and has targeted the reduction of Canadians' exposure to carcinogenic environmental pollutants as one of its principal activities.
The City of Toronto has targeted carcinogens and developmental toxins in its pollution prevention sewage bylaws. Every incremental increase in these pollutants has the potential to significantly harm the health of children and adults in our region. It is figuratively, and literally, a dead-end to debate how many may ultimately be affected. How many "extra" children who develop lung disease is the GVRD willing to say is "acceptable"? How much more toxic, heavy metal is "acceptable" in our environment? How many more carcinogens should GVRD residents be exposed to?
Responsible public policy requires a commitment to reduce and eliminate these toxic pollutants from our environment wherever possible. The public is strongly opposed to the irresponsible and backward suggestion that we reduce emission standards and increase pollution of the Lower Mainland, and rightly so. The health of our children and of the entire community is at stake.
Larry Stoffman, Labour Environmental Alliance Society Canadian Labour Congress Representative, Canadian Strategy for Cancer Control 604 250 3713
3561 W. 35th Ave. Vancouver
