Asthma: Benicia deserves better
In her letter of March 6, Constance Beutel wrote, “Benicia deserves better health and safety protection from potentially dangerous industrial mishaps and toxic emissions.”
She went on to describe the actual experience of many in our community who suffer from asthma, relating their suffering to the huge amount – 3 million metric tons – of toxic emissions released annually in California (source: California Air Resources Board).
In a March 2018 report prepared by the Solano County Department of Health (SCDH), I learned that Benicia has a higher rate of emergency room visits for asthma than Californians as a whole. The numbers are startling: in Benicia, 202.13 per 10,000 individuals went to the emergency room for asthma in 2011-13. The rate for California was 148.86 per 10,000. (SCDH source: California’s Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development.)
The same report showed statistics on hospital admissions due to asthma: Benicia 81.08 per 10,000 compared to California at 70.55.
Rates for emergency room visits for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and mortality from chronic lower respiratory disease (CLRD) were similarly higher in Benicia than statewide. Air pollution and asthma are contributing factors to these lung diseases.
I am working with a volunteer group of Benicians who believe that a refinery town like Benicia needs a seat at the table when it comes to air pollution. We and our government officials should have a voice on circumstances that affect the health and safety of our workers in the Industrial Park and of all of us wherever we are, in our homes and schools and workplaces. Benicia should have real-time air monitoring throughout our community, and early warnings and transparent investigation and follow-ups when there is an incident.
Our Working Group has studied carefully the provisions of the local Industrial Safety Ordinance currently protecting workers and residents of all the other refinery towns in the Bay Area – and we are asking our Benicia City Council and staff to carefully consider adopting such an ordinance here.
For more information about a community Industrial Safety Ordinance, go to tinyurl.com/BeniciaISO.
Roger Straw,
Benicia ISO Working Group
Sharing is caring!
Roger, state already has one. How many cases of emergency room visits in Contra Costa County home of four refinery’s. Maybe all that stuff across the straits is not working and Benicia is getting the run off or wind blown toxic emissions. Like to see a report on that.
I think the City Council should explore all aspects of an ISO. It may well be worth pursuing.
At the same time, some mistakes have propagated regarding toxics coming from the Valero plant and their potential effects.
On toxics: one can see the full report here:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/engineering/air-toxics-annual-report/2015/2015_toxic_annual_report-xlsx.xlsx?la=en
Note that it is the BAAQMD that tracks toxics, not the ARB. And the levels from Valero are nowhere near the claimed 3 million tons annually. That number, found in an ARB report, refers to Green-House-Gas equivalents, not toxics. GHGs, while bad, are not immediate term health risks (long term yes, but they are not linked to asthma, only to atmospheric scattering of light, whence global warming). Note in the table the toxic air emissions in Benicia that come from our own sewage treatment plant (which are not small) and other industries (formaldehyde from coffee roasting for example). At the same time, the potential from Valero is much larger in an accident, so this should also not be used to discount that possibility. It is simply to point out that under normal operations, the toxic emissions are much smaller than mistakenly claimed.
The Asthma report can be found here:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/ab617-community-health/vallejoab617-presentation_green-pdf.pdf?la=en
Note that Benicia has very low levels compared to Solano County as a whole, and the hot spots are in Vallejo and far to the east, with levels far above those of Benicia. Why? The report says the major causes are 1) poverty (and the associated poor housing/ventilation conditions and smoking, including secondary smoke), 2) Freeway pollution and 3) pesticides in agricultural areas. Yes, Benicia’s levels are above the state average, but far below the Solano County average. Not surprising they are above the state average: we are surrounded by 80 and 680, with 780 running through town and there are toll booths on the Carquinez Bridge that, as we all know, stop traffic and allow tons of car emissions to blow straight over to us.
Does any of this mean that we should not consider an ISO? No; It means we should work with the facts while considering an ISO.
The toxic data in the link above also indicate what parameters might be considered for inclusion in monitoring (or not, as they are obviously already measured).
Thanks for the comment, Greg, facts are good.
As an asthma/COPD sufferer the issue hits home to me as I’ve felt the air quality in Benicia degrade over the past 40 years. An ISO wouldn’t do anything to help, IMO. The air quality is poorer because there are just too many people packed into this area. I’d consider moving to better air quality except now that I need them, all the DRs that I need are also packed into this area. Ironic, huh.
As usual Greg your comment is full of facts and very well done. I agree that the city should explore an ISO. But at the same time the facts should be accurate as you have shown and your kind words of ‘MISTAKENLY CLAIMED” tells a story of facts not scare tactics. I also think your word of considering are very important along with all the facts. I do not doubt others and their conclusions but at the same time it must be accurate to what they are taking about and what the final solution is. We may not need an ISO, but explore is an excellent word. Thank you very much. Glad you live in Benicia.