SMOG WAR STYMIED AIR QUALITY GETS WORSE AFTER YEARS OF PROGRESS.

Byline: Kerry Cavanaugh Staff Writer

Southern California's long battle to clean up the nation's dirtiest air has hit a dead end after three decades of improvement, with future progress stymied as much by the lack of political will as by the need for better technology and more cost-effective solutions.

In extensive interviews, air quality officials and environmental experts concur that worsening smog the last two years is a warning signal that Southern California is backsliding in its fight against pollution, even as deadlines loom that could lead to the loss of billions of dollars in federal funds.

They said pollution controls have not kept pace with increases in population or the number of vehicles; expansion of shipping and trucking traffic; or the use of polluting chemical consumer products.

But the heart of the problem, they said, is that authority to regulate cars, trucks, consumer products and the ports - which generate 80 percent of the smog - is split between state and federal agencies, which often are at odds with one another. And local attempts to cut emissions have been killed by fierce industry lobbying or stalled in court battles.

``The science and technology is there to make great strides in improving air quality in Southern California,'' said Barry Wallerstein, executive director of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. ``We need the political will at the state and federal government (levels) to make this happen.''

Smog was on the rise the last two summers - a troubling trend attributed to weather. But take weather out of the equation, and smog levels have been flat for the last five years.

Coarse particulate matter that tickles the lungs and tortures asthmatics is largely under control. But monitoring of fine particles that started in 1999 shows that national health standards have been exceeded all the way from the coast to the Inland Empire. These minuscule particles create haze on the horizon, reach deep into the lungs, damage cells and are linked to heart attacks.

``Most people have kind of grown accustomed to the idea that our air is getting cleaner,'' said Suzanne Paulson, a professor with UCLA's Institute of the Environment. ``Overall, it has kind of ground to a halt. I think it's a big problem.''

Through the 1990s, the population in the South Coast region - including Orange County and the non-desert areas of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties - grew by 1.8 million people. And it will continue to grow by about 200,000 people each year.

It's a constant struggle just to maintain air quality gains in the face of population growth, congestion and roughly 10 million cars, trucks and buses on the road.

Even though newer passenger cars are 98 percent cleaner than vehicles manufactured in the 1970s, they still emit 540 tons per day - or 32 percent - of all smog-forming emissions. Additionally, higher-polluting SUVs and trucks make up half of vehicle sales in California.

State officials admit the Smog Check program has not delivered on its promise to catch the worst polluters on the road.

``If we had better inspection and maintenance, that would be a real boost to the clean air program,'' Paulson said.

In addition, carpooling was down and drive-alone commuters were up in 2002, according to a recent Southern California Association of Governments report. Public transit use was up 6 percent, but that only makes up 2 percent of the total person trips.

``We're big believers in where people live and work really matters. There are too many people living in Palmdale and driving to Long Beach,'' said Douglas Kim, director of long-range planning for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

Despite talk about getting more commuters to use public transportation, funds for transit are not increasing, said Todd Campbell, policy director for the Coalition for Clean Air.

``The money allocation is the same as in years past between public transportation and infrastructure. There's not a lot of talk about how we make public transit viable.''

EPA moving slowly

Ships, trains, planes and interstate trucks are all regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which sets national pollution standards for equipment that crosses state lines. So far, the EPA has been slow to adopt the kind of strong pollution controls that Southern California needs by 2010 to avoid losing $8 billion in transportation funds.

It also hasn't signed on to the non-traditional pollution control measures, such as tax credits for high-polluting engine owners who voluntarily switch to cleaner models.

Local officials point to a pending U.S. Supreme Court case in which the EPA sided with engine manufacturers who sued the AQMD, challenging a rule requiring private vehicle fleets to switch from diesel to cleaner fuels.

``The U.S. EPA and the administration could have been supportive or at a minimum sat on the sidelines,'' said Wallerstein.

Southern California also didn't get a cent of federal funding to upgrade diesel school buses to cleaner fuels, and AQMD officials said they're having a hard time securing federal dollars for hydrogen fuel cell projects.

Both Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Pasadena, and Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Redlands, said regional elected officials haven't teamed up to pressure federal agencies for help and funding.

``Our (congressional) delegation has really not acted cohesively enough to bring its collected weight to bear, both in Southern California and the state in general,'' Schiff said.

Jeff Holmstead, who heads the EPA's Air Division in Washington, D.C., said the agency has ordered new diesel trucks to cut pollution in 2006 and 2007 and will soon set new limits on pollution from construction equipment. But he conceded those rules will do little to help Southern California meet the 2010 deadline.

``We are certainly aware of the unique issues Southern California faces ... we're doing everything we can as quickly as we can,'' he said.

Problems at ports

Serious problems also exist in reducing the single-largest source of pollution - the hundreds of uncontrolled diesel dock equipment and ships that use the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

Ocean-going ships use the dirtiest fuel on the market and in Southern California alone they spew 52 tons per day of smog-forming emissions. The third-largest maritime complex in the world, the ports are expected to triple traffic over the next two decades.

Yet, environmentalists say, regional leaders haven't offered a strategy for cutting existing pollution from the trains, ships and thousands of diesel engines serving the ports.

Community pressure and a lawsuit forced the city-owned ports to adopt green measures, such as offering electricity at the dock for diesel ships and a water and diesel blend for equipment that cuts particulate matter pollution in half.

Despite their role in generating pollutants, the two ports are now among the cleanest in the nation.

But the lack of proven technology is a problem, said T.L. Garrett, marine environmental supervisor at the Port of Los Angeles in San Pedro.

``Yes, (companies) care about the environment, but the bottom line is they can't adopt a technology that will make it difficult to complete the job they need to complete,'' Garrett said. ``We certainly don't want to put our customers at a competitive disadvantage within the industry.''

One thing that could help, Garrett said, is a 1999 international treaty that set pollution limits on new ships and allows the U.S. to require cleaner fuels at its ports. But the U.S. is one of three nations that has yet to ratify the treaty.

Trains also are big polluters, producing 36 tons per day of smog-forming emissions - more than the 100 largest oil refiners, chemical plants and industrial plants combined. The exhaust from diesel sources can cause cancer and the gases and fine soot form fine particulates.

AQMD officials said a 1999 agreement with railroad companies to bring their cleanest locomotives into Southern California is weak. Instead Sen. Martha Escutia, D-Norwalk, wants railroads to retrofit locomotive engines or pay a pollution fee.

It will be a battle. Last year industry lobbyists helped block similar legislation that would let the AQMD require cleaner engines on heavy trucks and off-road vehicles.

Cost considerations

Almost every debate over controlling air pollution comes down to cost. How much will private industry and taxpayers pay for cleaner air?

The debate becomes more intense as businesses struggle in a lackluster economy or relocate and workers fear job losses.

``What happens when you put more costs on people than they can bear? They go out of business,'' said Stephanie Williams, senior vice president of the California Trucking Association.

Her group fought state legislation last year allowing the AQMD to require trucks and off-road vehicles to retrofit engines to cleaner models. Heavy diesel trucks are the second largest source of smog-forming pollutants and are among the biggest producers of fine particulates.

``Retrofit is a good idea, but it needs to be incentive-based and there needs to be a pot of money for it,'' Williams said.

Past regulations to curb smog and particulate matter from California trucks just pushed companies to border states where laws are more relaxed. Now just 2 percent of the trucks on California roads are registered here and abide by state pollution controls.

For most people, the real cost of smog is the impact on health.

``When we talk about economics of air pollution it's not one-sided,'' Wallerstein said. ``In terms of public health and loss of time from work, clean air always comes out the winner.''

Kerry Cavanaugh, [phone]

kerry.cavanaugh(at)dailynews.com

CAPTION(S):

photo, chart

Photo:

no caption (Exhaust pipe)

Chart:

OZONE LEVELS IN THE SOUTHLAND

SOURCE: South Coast Air Quality Management District

Gregg Miller/Staff Artist