The Los Angeles Times Wonders What Can Be Done About Freeway Pollution

This Freeway in San Diego is part of the problem. Is part of the solution building more freeways in San Diego? Image: ##http://www.sandiegopersonalinjurylawyersblog.com/2011/05/injured-in-a-san-diego-automob.html##San Diego Personal Injury Lawyers##

The Los Angeles Times published a remarkable editorial today questioning why so little is done about the public health crisis caused by Southern California’s reliance on freeway travel. However, either because of confusion or lack of will, the editorial stops short of proposing any real solutions to the crisis. It merely note it exists.

The first step, is admitting you have a problem.

The Times reports:

University research over the years has found substantially worse air pollution adjacent to freeways, and worse health among nearby residents as well. A 2005 USC study concluded that children who lived within a quarter of a mile of a freeway were 89% more likely to have asthma than those living a mile away. The closer they lived to freeways, the higher the asthma rates. But these university studies, though they added to our collective knowledge, did not affect government regulations.

While the Times earns kudos for talking about the danger posed to those living near freeways, there are two points left out of the editorial that are crucial to understanding why freeway pollution is ignored in policy settings and informs just how difficult a battle to reign in said pollution will be.

The first is that there are powerful interests that want to see the current transportation system, a system that literally cripples and enfeebles the people that live near it, continued. Oil companies, car manufacturers, construction unions, are just some of the giants that will fight meaningful change in transportation policy unless the new policy involves clean car programs.

For examples, Xcel Energy is looking to pervert the democratic process in Boulder, Colorado because the city wants to convert to clean power. Locally, AAA and car dealerships have eschewed the public process to pull the levers of power behind the scene to attempt to block a road diet and protected bike lanes plan on South Figueroa Street.

The second problem missed by the Times is that the people whose lives are devastated by the pollution creating freeways are not the people creating the pollution. Traditionally, the communities dissected by asphalt scalpels are the poorest and least likely to wield power behind-the-scenes. Not coincidentally, they are also least likely to own cars and travel on a freeway for work/recreation/whatever.

The Times’ only proposed solution isn’t actually a solution at all, but a proposal to mitigate just a small portion of the impacts of our fossil-fuel transportation system. By suggesting air filters for residences near freeways, the Times’ wel intentioned solution would do nothing for people that spend part, or most, of their day outside.

If the Times’ is serious about reducing the destructive impacts of freeways on our region’s public health, the first step would be stopping the expansion of the network while the region builds out a transit system. That means opposing the 710 Big Dig. It means opposing the other 710 expansion project. It means fighting the 405 expansion in the O.C. It means exposing the ridiculous waste of the I-405 Sepulveda Pass Project. Transportation writer Laura Nelson is more than capable of writing these stories, the issue is whether researching and writing them will be a priority for the editorial board.

Sadly, “admitting you have a problem” is the easiest step in what would be a long battle against freeway impacts. The steps above don’t stop the damage that is already occurring, just slow its growth. The next step involves a campaign to halt highway expansion statewide while a Fix-It-First policy of road and transit repair goes into place. Once California has done that, the next step is working on some freeway removal.

If today’s editorial is the first of many needed steps to begin a real campaign, than kudos to the Times. If it’s just a one-shot editorial, the Times could have done more for the environment by saving the paper and not printing.

  • John Lloyd

    What is to be done about freeway pollution? Why, drive less of course. How to make this happen? Invest heavily in public transit and bike and ped-friendly infrastructure. Charge drivers the true cost of parking, infrastructure maintenance, congestion, and air pollution mitigation. Here’s betting the LA Times editorial board would balk at all these suggestions.

  • Anonymous

    Vehicles are becoming more and more clean at point of use. Electric cars will further this trend more. In 10-15 years, pollution at point of use for road vehicles will be vastly reduced.

  • calwatch

    The Times is taking it as far as you reasonably can. If you start going in Damien’s path, of removing freeways, you seriously endanger goods movement in the Southern California region, and the thousands of blue collar jobs going to people with high school educations and similar in the Inland Empire, Commerce, Industry, and other places. Now these people are unemployed, on welfare, or becoming criminals; goods movement and shipping move to places like Ensenada or Lazaro Cardenas with fewer air pollution restrictions, or to Southern ports like Savannah and Mobile where they are closer to the vast majority of the American population in the Eastern and Central time zones. We need cleaner vehicles, more rail (although then people who live around tracks bitch about the pollution from locomotives) and more efficient logistics; but removing freeways and putting people out of work and unable to feed their families is not the answer.

  • KakCarpenoust

    I think what Damien meant by fwy removable is fwy conversion, which will creat a personal connection with communities, and attract development and jobs closer to neighborhoods around Downtown LA. Fwys will become blvds around downtown, which is still union and business friendly; and will still maintain the flow of goods. That will safe the city and the state more money in the near future. Examples: Seoul, San Francisco, Boston, and Seattle.

  • davistrain

    As someone who has been reading the LA Times since the days of Otis Chandler, I find it hard to ignore the page after page of motor vehicle ads, especially in the Thursday, Friday and weekend editions. One does occasionally see ads for LA Metro, so public transit is not completely invisible. But I don’t recall ever seeing an ad for bicycles, except in the store ad inserts, and many of those may be what one critic called “bike shaped objects”–low quality mass market bikes that do not make for a good cycling experience. As the old time wandering minstrel said, “His coin I take, his song I sing.”

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

USC Research: Freeway Pollutants Cause Brain Damage in Mice

|
In a study that should give pause to anyone proposing a highway expansion project near where people live, A  new study out of the University of Southern California should give them pause.  Research by University Professor and senior author Caleb Finch and Constantinos Sioutas of the USC Viterbi School of Engineering demonstrates a direct correlation […]

Integrating Land Use and Transportation VI: Industry

|
Last month, Streetsblog introduced a six-part series by Mark Vallianatos looking at how city leadership can start truly integrating land use and transportation in the six geographic zones he outlined: parks, hills, homes, boulevards, center and industry. First, he outlined the series and wrote about parks. Later, “The Hills”, “Homes Zone”, “Boulevard Zones” and “Centers” got […]

Daily News: Valley Needs Smart Transit

|
An editorial in today’s Daily News calls for smart, strategic transit investments in the San Fernando Valley to insure that The Valley streets don’t resemble their clogged counterparts on the Westside.  Including their editorial two weeks ago wondering when the SFV is going to get CicLAvia, this marks the second time in October that the Valley’s […]

No 710 Coalition: No on Measure J

|
(This is the third of four op/eds on Measure J that Streetsblog will publish this week. Monday, Gloria Ohland of Move L.A. made the case for Measure J and Wednesday Streetsblog Board Member Joel Epstein did the same. In between, the BRU made their case for a no vote. – DN) Only in the car capital of the world could […]