City Has Done Much To Clean Air

Spokane does have a few air-quality problems, as those of us who cough and wheeze during grass-smoke season can attest. But it would be ridiculous, as well as damaging, to rank our very occasional pollution difficulties in the same category as the chemical cocktail that hangs over Los Angeles.

Nevertheless, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has been pondering whether to change our air-quality classification from “moderate” to “serious.” Within the next few weeks, EPA will decide whether to postpone a reclassification so it can examine some serious questions about its assessment of Spokane’s air.

Both common sense and the simple facts of the matter support taking some more time.

Unlike urban areas stricken with multiple pollutants and chronic, complex smog, Spokane came to EPA’s attention for one pollutant only - carbon monoxide. Particulates, the worrisome ingredient in smoke, are a separate issue, and the area is taking aggressive steps to deal with them.

Ironically, dramatic progress also has occurred in regard to carbon monoxide over the past 20 years. New cars with cleaner engines are replacing older cars that pollute. Mandatory inspections keep cars running well. Stepped-up use of oxygenated gasoline cuts pollution. Work continues on traffic bottlenecks such as Division.

All of these measures, as well as innovative new car-pooling and education programs, enjoy support from local business and government. That’s because clean air is in everyone’s best interest - for health reasons as well as for business reasons such as the effort to recruit employers.

Spokane’s carbon monoxide “problem” may not be a problem at all in terms of overall air quality. All of the violations that placed Spokane on EPA’s hit list were recorded at a single monitor. That monitor is at 3rd and Washington, next to an awning that overhangs the service entrance to a large auto dealership - a place where cars sit with engines idling. The existence of a few CO violations under such an awning says nothing about the air that residents around the city are breathing.

The chamber of commerce has pointed out that this monitor violates EPA’s own criteria for monitor locations. Local air quality officials recently backed up the chamber’s concerns.

Common sense suggests that a community working steadily and voluntarily to improve its air shouldn’t be rewarded with an attack with EPA’s heaviest club on the basis of dubious data. Rather, we need a chance to show what we have shown in the past: progress toward cleaner air.

, DataTimes The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = John Webster/For the editorial board