Air Pollution, Poor Neighborhoods, and Environmental Inequality

Introduction

It is well-documented that air pollutants have a negative effect on people's health. While the adverse effects can potentially affect the entire body, it is generally the lungs that suffer most. Emphysema, bronchitis, and asthma are all directly correlated with long-term exposure to the pollutant nitrogen dioxide, or NO2. NO2 is a pollutant released from fuel combustion, meaning nearly all automobiles, buses, power plants, and off-road equipment are constantly pumping the gas into the air we breathe. It is also well-documented that poorer areas in urban environments are located nearer to busy freeways, heavily trafficked streets, and large factories and plants that produce massive amounts of air pollutants. People living in poorer neighborhoods are more consistently exposed to air pollution and are therefore more likely to develop health problems.

The Problem of the Built Environment

Part of the problem of the built environment is that these environments are not always constructed with all the needs of human beings in mind. Human beings need green space, safe parks and playgrounds where they can get outdoor exercise, and clean air to breathe. But if one looks at an urban area like downtown Louisville, one finds abandoned buildings packed closely together, little green space, and heavy air pollution from the incessant stream of traffic on the city's roads and highways. The built environment of poor neighborhoods in urban areas, in other words, was created to facilitate business and transportation—commerce—rather than to facilitate the healthy lifestyle that human beings need to thrive.

Air pollution, according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) under the guidance of the World Health Organization (WHO), is a leading "cancer-causing agent" in the industrialized world (Simon). Wealthy communities like Burbank, California, do not face the same problem: they are designed not so much for profit as for peace and comfort. There is plenty of fresh air and green space, and the neighborhoods are safe. Residents there can also afford to purchase electric vehicles (EVs), which produce no exhaust and run on battery power. Thus, the air is easier to breathe and the cancer-causing agents identified by the WHO are less likely to be found in the air of such neighborhoods.

However, where the parts for these EVs are manufactured—or any car, for that matter—production areas like Detroit, Michigan, for instance, are polluted and economically depressed. These environments are the complete opposite of affluent neighborhoods like Burbank. Detroit is a city built for industry, and the built environment reflects this reality: polluted air and streets, factories producing cars, and related industrial activity all contribute to a toxic environment for the working-class people who spend their lives in these settings. Setting aside the vehicle exhaust that pollutes the streets of cities like Detroit, one can also point to the manufacturing of automobile parts and how that production contributes to environmental degradation. Even the plastic exterior and interior components of vehicles rely heavily on petroleum—not just for fuel but for the manufacture of plastics, moldings, and other materials. Today's cars contain, on average, about 260 pounds of plastic, which equates to roughly 130 gallons of oil (Schirber). Thus, even those who believe they are helping the environment by driving EVs in Burbank are still contributing to harm in other parts of the world where EV components are manufactured.

Major oil companies remain essential to the production of EVs, which means that driving an electric vehicle is not necessarily better for the overall environment than driving an internal combustion engine vehicle—at least not yet. What Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, and many Tesla advocates argue is that in the future, EVs will have a zero carbon footprint as renewable energy sources replace petroleum in both electricity generation and parts manufacturing (Berndt). Yet that would require replacing much of the existing U.S. energy infrastructure, a project that could cost trillions of dollars and is viewed by many as unrealistic (Natter).

Another problem in urban areas where spatial design has prioritized maximizing commercial space is that planners have not adequately considered the health needs of residents or of the healthcare providers who must operate in safe facilities to serve these communities. Access to care is a significant issue in the United States because of its mixed healthcare market. The Affordable Care Act was intended to improve supply and bring 20 million more people into government-subsidized or private insurance plans. Access to care remains a challenge, however, because in many states Advanced Practice Registered Nurses are still required to practice under physician supervision, despite being trained and certified for independent practice. This creates a situation in which supply is constrained by outdated regulations (IOM; O'Brien).

In the UK, France, and Japan, supply exists within single-payer systems that guarantee care for all, but delays and long waits are inevitable (Carroll, Frakt). In India, healthcare supply is concentrated in urban areas and greatly reduced in rural regions. In the United States, poor neighborhoods tend not to attract healthcare businesses because there is insufficient profit to be made. Large healthcare facilities are typically located in wealthier suburbs, where insured, health-conscious upper-middle-class residents are concentrated. The problem of the built environment, therefore, cannot be examined in isolation from economics, business, and politics—all of which are deeply integrated and determine who receives care and who does not. Wealthy urban areas can attract healthcare providers, but urban low-income communities fail to draw that investment, leaving residents without the access to care they need.

The Health Impacts

If the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated anything, it showed what can happen when fewer people are driving on the streets and fewer factories are releasing pollutants into the air: pollution decreases and air quality improves (Ellis-Petersen). How these same communities fare once life returns to normal, however, is another matter entirely. Factories are likely to return to full production, streets are likely to be overwhelmed with traffic once more, and air pollution is likely to climb back to toxic levels.

As Kravitz-Wirtz et al. point out, elevated pollution levels increase health risks such as asthma. Research shows that early-life exposure to NO2, a marker of traffic-related pollution, and fine particulate matter PM2.5, "a mixture of industrial and other pollutants, are positively associated with subsequent childhood asthma diagnosis" (Kravitz-Wirtz 1114). These findings have been confirmed by multiple studies across the country—particularly in heavily polluted regions like the San Fernando Valley, where stillbirths, congenital heart defects, maternal diabetes, and preterm births have all been associated with air pollution (Padula et al.). Connolly further demonstrates that a high rate of mortality has also been linked to air pollution in the Valley, and argues that reducing PM2.5 concentrations could lead to a meaningful reduction in premature death in poorer neighborhoods. The challenge is that these neighborhoods struggle to secure the support they need because they contribute relatively little to the broader economy. Cities that attract the most investment and are spatially designed to support health are precisely those where wealth is concentrated. Poor neighborhoods are largely left to develop haphazardly, without the planning and foresight that characterize wealthier communities.

The Hewlett Foundation has documented that among residents aged 30 and older in the poor neighborhoods of the San Fernando Valley, there are approximately 460 premature deaths annually and more than 20,000 asthma attacks each year. Children in these neighborhoods experience over 3,000 cases of bronchitis, with more than 300 new cases recorded every year. Additionally, there are over 250 hospital admissions and a total of 17,000 days annually during which children in these poor neighborhoods suffer from respiratory problems caused by air pollution (Hewlett Foundation).

Conclusion

Poor neighborhoods are more susceptible to pollution and toxins in the air than wealthy neighborhoods, where the built environment is more open, greener, and inhabited by people who have both the means and the inclination to care for their surroundings. People who drive Teslas tend to live in communities with parks, playgrounds, and safe streets for walking and cycling. People who commute by bus to factory jobs tend to live in communities where the environment receives far less attention. The air in these neighborhoods is laden with PM2.5 and NO2, which can cause asthma, cancer, bronchitis, and a range of other health and respiratory conditions. Air pollution in poor neighborhoods directly harms the health of residents, and their limited access to healthcare compounds the problem significantly.

To address this inequity meaningfully, the culture of the country must change—and that change can begin with something as simple as bringing community gardens to poor neighborhoods. This represents a small but genuine first step toward environmental equitability and toward creating greener, healthier spaces in which all people can live.

Works Cited

Bell, Michelle, and Keita Ebisu. "Environmental Inequality in Exposures to Airborne Particulate Matter Components in the United States." Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 120, no. 12, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Dec. 2012, pp. 1699–704, doi:10.1289/ehp.1205201.

Berndt, Chad. "A Tesla is Greener Than You Think and Getting Greener." Teslarati, 4 July 2017, https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-greener-think-getting-greener-look-manufacturing/

Carroll, A. and A. Frakt. "Best Health Care System." New York Times, 18 Sept 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/18/upshot/best-health-care-system-country-bracket.html

Connolly, R. E. Estimating Mortality Impacts From Vehicle Emission Reduction Efforts: The Tune In and Tune Up Program in the San Joaquin Valley. Doctoral dissertation, UCLA, 2018.

Davis, Angela. The Meaning of Freedom. City Lights Books, 2012.

Ellis-Petersen, Hannah. "'It's Positively Alpine!'" The Guardian, 11 Apr. 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/apr/11/positively-alpine-disbelief-air-pollution-falls-lockdown-coronavirus

Glover, Troy D., Diana C. Parry, and Kimberly J. Shinew. "Building Relationships, Accessing Resources: Mobilizing Social Capital in Community Garden Contexts." Journal of Leisure Research, vol. 37, no. 4, 2005, pp. 450–474.

Hewlett Foundation. "New Study Finds Central Valley Air Pollution Costs Regional Economy $3 Billion Annually." Hewlett Foundation, 2006, https://hewlett.org/newsroom/new-study-finds-central-valley-air-pollution-costs-regional-economy-3-billion-annually/

IOM. "The Future of Nursing." NACNS, 2013, http://nacns.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/5-IOM-Report.pdf

Kravitz-Wirtz, Nicole, et al. "Early-Life Air Pollution Exposure, Neighborhood Poverty, and Childhood Asthma in the United States, 1990–2014." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 15, no. 6, May 2018, doi:10.3390/ijerph15061114.

Marshall, Julian, et al. "Healthy Neighborhoods: Walkability and Air Pollution." Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 117, no. 11, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Nov. 2009, pp. 1752–59, doi:10.1289/ehp.0900595.

Natter, Ari. "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal Could Cost $93 Trillion, Group Says." Bloomberg, 25 Feb. 2019, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-25/group-sees-ocasio-cortez-s-green-new-deal-costing-93-trillion

O'Brien, J. "How Nurse Practitioners Obtained Provider Status: Lessons for Pharmacists." American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, vol. 60, no. 22, 2003, pp. 2301–2307.

Padula, Amy M., et al. "Prenatal Exposure to Air Pollution, Maternal Diabetes and Preterm Birth." Environmental Research, vol. 170, 2019, pp. 160–167.

Schirber, Michael. "Chemistry of Cars." LiveScience, 6 May 2009, https://www.livescience.com/5449-chemistry-life-plastic-cars.html

Simon, S. "World Health Organization: Outdoor Air Pollution Causes Cancer." American Cancer Society, 2013, http://www.cancer.org/cancer/news/world-health-organization-outdoor-air-pollution-causes-cancer