A new study has found that air quality monitors used by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are disproportionately positioned in whiter neighbourhoods, raising concerns about the unknown impact of pollution on communities of colour, reports the Guardian.
Researchers evaluated the positioning of nearly 8,000 EPA monitors across the country, comparing their locations with census data to determine the racial makeup of the area. They found that monitoring disparities exist for all pollutants, particularly sulphur dioxide and lead, followed by ozone and carbon monoxide. Health impacts from these pollutants range from asthma and chest pain to cardiovascular disease and cancer.
While disparities were consistent across most racial and ethnic groups, indigenous populations and Pacific Islanders faced the largest inequities in monitoring, particularly in sulphur dioxide. Commonly released during natural gas and petroleum extraction, oil refining and metal processing, sulphur dioxide affects the respiratory system and can exacerbate existing issues like asthma and chronic bronchitis.
University of Utah doctoral student and study co-author Brenna Kelly warned of the danger of such disparities in the “gold standard” for air quality data collection. “It’s how we establish thresholds for safety, and who’s going to be susceptible to exposure to air pollution.”
[See more: There are only 7 countries in the world with safe air]
The positioning of EPA monitors is determined by federal, state and local authorities. Although variables like population density and concentration of polluters factor into the decision, Kelly told the Guardian that there is not a clear process in place for how these actors determine where to locate a monitor.
Each monitor measures a single point, meant to be a representative sample of the wider region, which is then used to estimate broader regional air quality. With so many communities of colour falling into the gaps between these points, it calls into question the current placement choices – and the policies and actions based on the data produced. That communities of colour consistently have fewer monitors, despite being more likely to live near major polluters, may be due to a lack of representation in the process. As Kelly noted, the process of determining where to put monitors “can get pretty political.”
One way to improve monitoring, the study suggests, is to pair ground-based air monitors with use of satellite imagery, which can capture pollution across a region. While there are limitations on this technology, it could also help highlight the gaps in ground-based monitors and encourage more equitable placement.
“The dream,” Kelly told the Guardian,“ is that we understand air pollution in every area at all times, how people move throughout their environment and how that changes what they’re exposed to.”
