Thanks to Todd Whitcombe for an informative column on air pollution in his May 3 Relativity column. Unfortunately, the good professor may have left readers with the impression that Prince George's air quality is OK, like when he says, "Prince George is actually blessed with relatively clean air..."
Please allow me to set the record straight.
The WHO air quality thresholds that Whitcombe cites are not a "healthy" threshold, below which we can breathe easy. They are "thresholds for health-harmful pollution levels," meaning that above those levels the pollution is so bad that we can readily measure the health effects in things like excess deaths.
Some years ago, The Citizen reported on excess deaths in Prince George due to our air pollution, something like 40 citizens per year if memory serves. It will be cold comfort to their surviving relatives to know that our air is "relatively clean." Because in this context, "relatively" means that we are not breathing the toxic fumes of Beijing or New Delhi.
Our air is far from pristine.
Personally, I think we should set our sights higher. We live in an area of tremendous natural beauty, but we have been told for decades that the price of this privilege is shortened lives due to air pollution and reduced health services compared to urban centres. As citizens of one of the wealthiest countries on earth, we can afford to implement pollution control measures.
As a wise elder has noted, "We treat this planet as if we have somewhere else we can go."
For the sake of your children's health, get involved with a clean air advocacy group like PGAIR, and let Prof. Whitcombe and your city councillors know that we won't settle for marginally better than health-harmful.
Stephen Rader
Prince George
