In the era of global warming, plain vanilla air pollution -- like smog -- sometimes gets pushed to the side.  Some people may consider it the less popular sister of the homecoming queen (CO2). However, this does not diminish the importance of this pollution.  In fact, more and more data is mounting up that creates a further call to action to fix America's smog problems.  The March 12, 2009 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine includes the results of a nationwide survey that determines ozone exposure is linked to higher risk of premature death.  Science Daily includes a brief article on the study on its website.  Even with these alarming findings, lobbyists, including those representing the trucking, coal, petroleum, and many other industries, continue to fight tough smog regulations.  This is despite the fact that we are losing a medium sized city each year to death from respiratory diseases.   

"World Health Organization data indicate that about 240,000 people die each year from respiratory causes in the United States," said Jerrett. "Even a 4 percent increase can translate into thousands of excess deaths each year. Globally, some 7.7 million people die from respiratory causes, so worldwide the impact of ozone pollution could be very large."

According to these World Health Organization's statistics, over the next four years, we will lose approximately 960,000 people prematurely due to respiratory causes in the United States -- that loss over a four year period is greater than losing the entire population of Detroit, San Jose, or San Francisco.  Thus, the stakes are high, and this is not just an environmental issue but a moral issue. 

The New England Journal of Medicine study found that places like Los Angeles, Riverside, the San Joaquin Valley, and Houston are more vulnerable to premature death because of the higher ozone levels.  The increased chances of dying from a respiratory cause can be as much as 50% greater in these most extreme ozone areas.  Thus, we need even greater anti-smog leadership in these ozone hotspots.  Places like Minneapolis faired better on the ozone front. 

All in all, this additional study cements the fact that we need strong plans to reduce pollution in these high ozone/densely populated areas.  The timing of this study is also fortuitous because it will hopefully help push the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") to adopt a stronger standard for ozone under the Clean Air Act.  Two days ago, the EPA, represented by the Department of Justice, asked for more time to review the controversial ozone standards it set during the Bush era -- for previous blogs about the ozone debacle from my colleagues at NRDC, click here, here and here.  The court case stems from a lawsuit filed by several states and environmental groups in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.  David Baron, the Earthjustice lawyer representing the environmental groups that challenged the Bush EPA ozone standard, identified EPA's request as "an encouraging step."  

Luckily, many efforts to reduce pollution concurrently reduce ozone and climate change impacts.  A recent NRDC report discusses just this issue -- namely how implementing California's landmark AB 32 legislation will also improve air quality and health throughout the state.  

So, today, I am officially reaffirming my commitment as a soldier in the War on Smog.  Care to join me?