city's air cleaner than in 1960's but pollution level is unknown - air cleaner

Deirdre carmodymay 26, 1981 this is a digital version of an article from The Times Print Archive, before it starts online in 1996.
To keep these articles as they appear initially, the Times will not change, edit, or update them.
There are occasional copywriting errors or other problems during the digitization process.
Please send a report of such issues to archid_feedback @ nytimes. com.
In 1960s, when New York had a key air
Mayor John V. pollution.
Lindsay always uses the phrase "I never believe the air I can't see" to attract audiences all over the country to laugh.
"Today, the air in New York City is cleaner than before, but cleaner than it should be.
Federal, state and city officials who monitor the air say the problem is that no one really knows how clean or dirty the air is.
What officials know is that sulfur dioxide and soot have been significantly reduced, and the city meets federal standards in these categories.
What they don't know is to what extent the car contaminants are
Carbon monoxide and ozone
The air is polluted.
Based on very little monitoring of these contaminants, it is clear that these levels exceed the standards set out in the federal Clean Air Act.
In 1979, the annual data for the most recent year, 143 days of carbon monoxide levels were higher than acceptable levels.
Federal standards indicate that these levels cannot be exceeded without the risk of endangering health.
Air director William Baker said most civic groups canceled the ads "we have very serious problems with ozone and carbon monoxide"
The program branch of the federal Environmental Protection Agency in the region.
"Unfortunately, there is no really good carbon monoxide monitoring in the city.
"In 1960s, cleaning up the air was an impassioned issue.
Today, most civil groups fighting for clean air have been dissolved.
One of the few people that still exist is the clean air citizen, which reportedly has 1,000 members and continues to be highly critical of what the city is doing or is not doing, to clean the air.
"Clean air is not on anyone's list of city or state priorities and it's not at all," said Brian ketchham, one of the group's partners. leaders.
"It's no longer a sexy question.
People think that something is being done, but this is not the case.
Stan Pinkwas, another colleague, said: "It won't get paid off if the state cleans the airleader.
"It will only be punished if it is not punished.
If they can keep vague figures that they can defend, they can avoid their responsibility.
"Even with the best intentions, measuring the amount of carbon monoxide in the air is an inaccurate science.
Measurements from the roof do not fully disclose the ground
Ground pollution, ground pollution
Liquid level measurements performed in a crowded block may differ significantly from those performed in less locations of cars a few blocks away.
The question is how to come up with a figure that shows the city's total carbon monoxide levels.
The state took over the city's vehicle pollutant measurements in 1978, and now there are six stations in the city that monitor carbon monoxide.
Almost all experts agree with this, but they also doubt whether there is any real point in federal standards here.
He said the focus of federal regulations is on California, which is completely different from New York City.
Assistant Commissioner of municipal environmental protection Edward Ferrand.
"It's really stupid to apply for California for free --
Standard of space in canyon
Like the streets of New York.
This creates problems in how to measure and interpret.
"In the 1960s S, New York was considered a pioneer in dealing with air pollution, and it installed the most complex and extensive air-
National monitoring network.
Terry agres, regional director of the Department of Environmental Protection of the State Council, said: "It is difficult to keep advertising", which is very innovative and great for the artistic level at that time. ".
"But with the financial crisis in the city, monitoring is beginning to lag behind the artistic level, and it is difficult for the city to keep up with what it has.
"Today, monitoring of fixed or non-automotive contaminants --
Mainly due to the burning of oil.
The municipal Ministry of Environmental Protection is responsible.
Although the financial crisis has reduced the number of institutions monitoring these pollutants to one
In its size of 1975, third, and even critics generally acknowledge that it significantly reduces the content of sulfur dioxide and suspended particulate matter, which are commonly referred to as soot.
Federal Standard for sulfur dioxide, from burning @ sulfur-
Coal and oil are 0.
03 out of millions.
According to the doctor, at 1980
Ferrang, who is in charge of the Bureau of Science and Technology of the Environmental Protection Agency, has an average sulfur dioxide level of 0 in New York City.
024 in Bronx, 0. 021 and 0.
017 two places where measurements were made in Brooklyn, 0.
Queens 016,0.
Staten Island 013 and 0. 026, 0. 026 and 0.
029 in Manhattan
The standard for suspended particles is 75 per million. Dr.
In 1980, the average for the Bronx was 72, Brooklyn was 62 and 54, Queens was 47, Staten Island was 48, and Manhattan was 66, 59 and 58, according to Ferrand.
The reasons for the strict sulfur standards for these pollutant drops include the city's ban on coal burning, mandatory removal of grading of all site incinerators, and the requirement to inspect every oil burner burning residual fuel oil every three years, and must operate at a 80% efficiency.
Please click on the box to verify that you are not a robot.
The email address is invalid. Please re-enter.
You must select the newsletter you want to subscribe.
View all New York Times newsletters.
New York City law stipulates that sulfur in fuel oil cannot exceed 0.
3%, is one of the most stringent standards in the country.
The Ministry of Environmental Protection monitors fixed pollutants. Its 24-
Hour complaint call966-7500 -
Every year, 15,000 phone calls are received about alleged violations.
According to Assistant Environmental Commissioner Samuel Stempler, 27% of calls resulted in subpoenas and personal fines could be as high as $1,000.
25 inspectors for 7-to 10-
The day's response, he said, sent nearly 7,000 subpoenas last year.
"There will be better execution if we have additional staff," Mr. Stempler said.
Ozone monitoring is much more difficult than measuring static pollutants.
However, measuring ozone is a bit easier than measuring carbon monoxide because it can be done from the roof, and because it doesn't fluctuate from one block to another.
Ozone is mainly caused by automobile exhaust gas, which is formed by chemical reaction in the case of sunshine between the two pollutants.
Hydrocarbons and antioxidants
While advertising is easier to measure, ozone is more difficult to control because it is not necessarily caused by car emissions in nearby areas.
For example, ozone over New York City could be caused by car congestion in neighboring states.
He said: "We may have problems because our headwind state does not fully control their problems. our headwind state may have problems because of us . "
Baker of the federal Environmental Protection Agency
"There is ozone problem throughout the Northeast.
According to the provisions of the Clean Air Act, the acceptable level of ozone is 0.
Twelve out of millions.
According to the Queen's College, on 1979, the ozone level was 15 days above federal standards, and it measured a higher five-day period on monitors on Manhattan's second largest road and 16 th Street.
The Clean Air Act, which was passed by Congress on 1970 and substantially revised on 1977, will be submitted for review later this year, so, it is not clear whether the existing compliance schedule will take effect or be modified.
One provision of the Act is that each state has its own implementation plan, detailing when and how to comply with federal standards.
The New York plan is full of political, legal struggles, names --
Calls, personal friction and endless drills are not over yet.
Since car contaminants are the real culprit in polluting the air, any implementation plan cannot be considered sufficient unless it includes a plan to reduce traffic congestion in New York City.
It turns out that such a plan is almost impossible.
Early traffic
The control plan recommends toll charges for bridges on the East and Harlem rivers to reduce traffic in Manhattan.
However, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan and the representative of Elizabeth hozman proposed an amendment to remove the terms of the charges and said that public transport should be used to meet "basic transport needs"
The process has become more complicated by the Battle of Westway, which opponents of Westway think will increase pollution and comply with cleanliness
What is more difficult is the air standard.
It is widely believed that it seems futile to draft a comprehensive plan to reduce congestion before the fate of Westway is clear.
According to Mr Final, the Final plan for 1982
Agriss of the state Department of Environmental Protection, the state must submit a final revision of its implementation plan by 1982 to show how it can meet all federal environmental air quality standards by 1987.
Another tedious process is to merge Edison's application to convert three oils
Burn coal in the power plant.
The sulfur content of coal is higher than that of oil, and utility companies must prove that it can burn coal and still satisfy the air of the Federation, states and cities
Quality standards.
Con Ed is in the process of testing combustion in three factories where it is licensed to burn 1.
5% of sulfur oil is equivalent to coal in sulfur content.
If the utility can prove that it can satisfy the air
Quality standards, which paved the way for seemingly endless applications to enable it to switch to coal.
Some city officials are pessimistic that the city will eventually have clean enough air. Said Dr.
Ferrand: "We really hope to reach the standard by 1985.
"A version of this article was printed on page A00001 of the National edition on May 26, 1981, with the title: the city's air is cleaner than it was in 1960s, but the level of pollution is unknown.