Alexis Everland

ENVL 2105

Term Paper

Climate Change and Its Effect on the Smog Problem in Las Angeles

I. Introduction

Climate change is a term we have all come to know as a hotly debated, contemporary topic that

will be persistent and become increasingly important in the years to come. It has grown to be

increasingly accepted as factual by the science community but still has its critics within the field. Outside

of the field has a decreasing, but still incredibly large population of disbelievers as well. Overall, all well

studied individuals know that there is absolutely no doubt that climate change is real and that there is

ample scientific data to prove it. Climate change is a natural phenomenon, but the current rate of its

change cannot be attributed to natural causes. The human impact causes it to occur at a rate of fourteen

times the natural rate. The term climate change became globally recognized by the formation of the

IPCC (The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) in 1988. The IPCC regularly puts out reports

including data and solutions to climate change. If nothing is done to slow the situation, it is known that

it will have detrimental effects.

Climate change's main contributor is the increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that

causes an increase in the greenhouse effect. Most of these gases come from the burning of fossil fuels.

The net radiation is positive, thus, the earth retains the heat from the sun and slowly warms. Climate

change effects everything on the planet. From polar ice caps melting, to sea level rising, to evolutionary

processes, populations of organisms, human activity, human, health, all global circulations, and the list

goes on and on and on. In this paper, climate changes effects on the condition known as smog will be

studied, and what it means for cases where smog is extremely concentrated like in Las Angeles
California.

Las Angeles California is renowned for its smog problem. There are many places around the

world that are, all due to being under certain conditions where smog accumulates. This paper examines

many works that suggest that global changes due to climate change will increase air pollution problems,

such as the smog problem in LA, and cause serious damage to the environment and human health if

steps towards solutions are not taken. This paper will examine what smog is and how it accumulates, the

smog problem in LA and why it accumulates there, climate changes effects on smog and smog’s effects

on climate change, smog’s effects on health, and potential solutions to help lessen the effects.

II. Smog

The first order of business, is to understand what smog is, where is comes from, and how it

accumulates. Of course we all know that smog is that brownish haze that sometimes floats above cities

when we look at them from a distance. Sometimes we can even see it while we are in a city, and even

notice that it becomes harder to breathe. But what is it actually? Smog starts with both gases and

particles, known as smog precursors. The gases consist of volatile organic compound (VOCs), nitrogen

oxides (NOx), and sulfur dioxides. The particles consist of organic carbon and soot. All of which are

products of combustion processes. These smog contributors can come from natural sources though, like

some trees, grasses, and microorganisms (Mickley).

Ozone or O3, which is one of the most hazardous components of smog, is not emitted directly by

a source, but is photochemically produces from the precursors. It is produced by the oxidation of VOCs,

methane, and carbon monoxide in the presence of NOx and sunlight. O3 is good in the ozone layer or

stratosphere because it protects us, but in the troposphere, it harms us. Particulate matter less than 2.5

millimeters in diameter (PM2.5) is also very hazardous component of smog. It can be a primary aerosol

and be emitted straight into the atmosphere, like soot from diesel engines. It can also be a secondary

organic aerosol that is formed through photochemical reactions much like how O3 is formed. This

happens when some oxidation products are not very volatile and condense to from particles. This is
what happens to sulfur dioxide from coal-fueled power plants that form sulfur particles (Mickley).

Cars and motor vehicles are infamously the primary sources smog, especially in Las Angeles.

They primarily contribute to O3 levels due to two motor vehicle exhaust emissions, NOx and VOCs, that

photo chemically react in the way described previously (Las Angeles). A lot of people think refineries

contribute existentially to the smog problem, but refineries in the Los Angeles basin area are actually

very sophisticated and conscientious. Leaking seals in valves and compressors within the refineries

actual contribute more organic gas than the refinery stacks emit into the air. More tons of organic gases

and hydrocarbons actually come from more unexpected sources. The refineries emit 12.6 tons of organic

gases daily. Again, most of which come from leaking seals. Forty six tons a day come from HAIRSPAY!

A lawns mower ran for thirty minutes emits hydrocarbons that equates to 170 miles more than the

average LA civilians commute in a newer car. A chainsaw ran for thirty minutes equates to an entire

month of driving. Two hundred and eighty tons of VOC's come from LA's trees and shrubs. Car tires

emit 45 tons of rubber dust particles. Six tons of methane a day comes from garbage. Four hundred tons

come from the mishandling of paints and solvents. For five days out of seven in a portion of a

summertime smog event in Arizona’s Grand Canyon, there was traces of fuselage paint from LA

aerospace industry. One hundred tons of hydrocarbons come from other consumer products like

deodorant, windshield washer fluid, oven cleaner, bug repellent, floor wax, and spray paint (Boly).

III. Air Pollution in Los Angeles

Now that we know where smog comes from, we can introduce the smog problem in Los

Angeles, and why it is so severe. At one time Los Angeles had a large sophisticated public transit system

of electric trollies. But the people of LA, who made 280 million passenger trips a year were forced to

resort to other miens of transportation when the system was dismantled. It was dismantled when it was

bought by National City Lines in the 1930's, which was a “holding company owned by corporate

partners in the automobile industry”. Most of these people resorted to personal auto mobiles and other

gas powered vehicles. As said before, the emissions of cars is the main contributor to LA's smog
problem. Southern California also holds the nation's largest marine port complex and several airports,

which contribute a lot (Kunzli). In 1950 LA had a population of 4 million. As of 1990, LA had a

population of 10.47 million, and keeps growing. It also possibly had the greatest number of vehicles per

person (0.67) and this keeps growing as well. Of course, as the population increases, the number of

vehicles used increases. This creates an even greater problem for LA (Los Angeles).

LA is coined the “Superbowl of Smog” due to the conditions that are perfect for its

accumulation (Boly). Atmospheric stagnation over LA enables precursors to react and turn into O3 and

PM and also build up. The air circulation pattern during periods of steady high pressure brings the

pollutants out to sea at night and back over land during the day. This allows for buildup until a new

weather front passes. Atmospheric stagnation in the LA area is caused by the surrounding mountain

ranges, subsidence inversions, and high solar intensity (Los Angeles). Most smog events occur during

the summer because the photochemical reactions that produce smog depend on high temperature and

sunlight. As sunlight increases, so does the concentration of reactive molecules that catalyze smog

formation. As temperature increases, so does the rate at which the photochemical reactions take place

(Mickley). Now what does this say about climate changes effects on smog?

IV. Climate Change and Smog

A study done are three different air quality episodes in Southern California concluded that the air

quality in California is sensitive to temperature, humidity, mixing depth, and background concentrations.

Due to global changes like climate change, O3 background concentrations and temperatures are

expected to rise. The study was done using a regional air quality model with data from three different air

quality episodes displaying perturbations in temperature, humidity, mixing depth and O3 and PM

concentrations. They found that increasing temperature with no change in relative humidity increased O3

concentration by 2-15 ppb per Kelvin. This was due to the increased production of hydroxyl radical and

increased reaction rates caused by the increase in temperature. Higher temperatures usually cause

pollution to become lofted into higher layers of the atmosphere but increased mixing depth increased O3
formation in regions with excess NO emissions like central Los Angeles due to extra dilution. It reduces

primary PM but also increased secondary PM in areas with excess NO. Background O3 transported into

California from other areas increased particulate nitrate. Also, when the background O3 was doubled,

PM2.5 increased even with a 5K temperature increase (Kleeman). This all means that as temperatures and

O3 concentrations rise with climate change, air quality will certainly decrease.

Many agree that greenhouse gases that cause climate change bring about atmospheric conditions

that are favorable for smog production. Increase temperatures also cause vegetation to emit more

VOCs. Not only warmer temperatures and increased O3 concentrations, but also stagnation in the air.

Heat waves are typically studied in order to get an idea on how climate change might affect air pollution.

Episodes of stagnant air typically happen during the summer but can also happen at other times of the

year. Stagnant air traps pollutions and allows the precursors to interact and build up. Heat imbalance due

to the sun’s rays hitting the earth at different angles at different latitudes causes cold front to push

warmer air towards colder, higher latitudes causing circulation. Cold fronts are expected to happen less

frequently over mid latitudes due to warming caused by climate change, which will increase stagnant

episodes (Mickley). Another study found that O3 concentration tend to be the highest in the summer, on

the weekends, and inland. All due to the atmospheric conditions at those times (Gong-Yuh). So as you

can see, the atmosphere plays a big part in air quality.

The ozone layer (the O3 layer in the stratosphere) is what really causes the greenhouse effect. It

has also been found that since smog mostly consists of O3, and excess O3 lofted into the stratosphere

increases the greenhouse effect, exacerbating climate change. So not only does climate change increase

air pollution. Air pollution exacerbates climate change as well. It is a positive feedback loop (Mickley).

Many other house hold expenditures are found to add to the problem that we would not think of.

A study on the amount of pollutants added to the atmosphere in the Netherlands in 2000 per Euro spent

on the expenditure was conducted. The emission of CO2 was attributed to the classification of climate

change. And C2H4 was attributed to Smog formation. They found that development, leisure and traffic
accounted for 0.71 kg of CO2 per Euro and 1.20 kg of C2H4 per Euro, mostly from gasoline emissions.

Housing contributed 0.90 kg CO2/ Euro and 0.24 kg C2H4/ Euro mostly from the use of gas and

electricity. Potatoes have high GHG emissions (1.69 kg CO2/ Euro) from N2O emitted from arable

farming. Dairy products and meats have such high GHG emissions from CH4 the animals emit at the

farms (Meat = 1.05 kg CO2 /Euro, milk and dairy = 1.77, and butter, cheese, and eggs = 1.86)

(Kerkhof).

V. Health

Acute adverse health effects of air pollution have been well documented, but it wasn’t until The

Children’s Health Study that began in 1993 that the chronic adverse health effects were proven. The

study followed more than 6000 public school children from 12 different communities in Southern

California. The children’s activity patterns, lung function via spirometry, and school absences were

recorded, as well as if any respiratory symptoms developed. Concentrations of O3, PM2.5, PM10, NO2,

and acidic vapors in the 12 different communities were also recorded. The study found that lung

function growth was about 10% slower in children who lived in communities with higher NO 2, PM, and

nitric acid vapor concentrations (all coming from traffic). This was found in both normal and asthmatic

children. When children moved out of these areas, their lung function growth improved. The rate of

school absences increased with increasing O3 levels. A slight increase in O3 by 20ppb correlated with and

83% increase in absence due to acute respiratory illness. Kids with asthma experienced more phlegm and

bronchitis in communities with higher NO2 and PM concentrations. Children that played sports or spent

more time out side in communities with higher O3 levels had a higher occurrence of newly diagnosed

asthma. Before this study, people believed that air pollution only exacerbated illness in children who

already had asthma rather than causing new onset asthma (Kunzli). It is clear air pollution has adverse

effects on human health, but what about our ecosystems?

A study done on the Ulan Bator basin of Mongolia shows that air pollution and increased

temperatures due to climate change can effects areas of colder climates as well, and in the winter. The
study correlated the climate change experienced in the area with the health of the forest found there. The

Ulan Bator Basin exceeds contemporary global average warming, even in Polar Regions, making it an

excellent area for global warming research. It experiences a substantial increase in winter temperatures

(+7.2K since 1950). An increase this steep is not found in any of the other surrounding areas nor in any

other season. This is thought to be caused by the increase in black carbon aerosols due to the increase in

the city’s population and the steady winter atmospheric inversion causing pollutant buildup. Climate

warming caused many people living in rural areas to move to Ulan Bator because the climate could no

longer support their miens of living. There, as immigrants, they had to live in provisional dwellings that

cause Ulan Bator’s thick air pollution. In short, GHG caused climate warming forced habitants of rural

areas, where they hardly contributed to climate warming, to immigrate to the city of Ulan Bator for

socioeconomic reasons, where they cause additional, substantial local climate warming. The forest found

here is part of the southernmost Inner Asian boreal forest, which favors low winter warming. These

forest along with everything found from boreal forests to the arctic tundra oppose higher winter

warming than summer warming. Evidence of reduced tree-ring length of Siberian larch trees in the area

shows that they are suffering from high December temperatures. This is because mild winters promote

gypsy moths and other insect herbivores. Global warming also adds to summertime drought stress, and

emissions of sulfur dioxides cause acidic deposition of the trees. Smog and climate change does not only

affect us humans that exponentially increase the rate of the process, it also effects our innocent forests

and ecosystems (Hauck).

VI. Solutions

In the 1940’s, serious smog events in Los Angeles and Donora, PA raised awareness about the

hazards of smog. In the 1955 the Air Pollution Control Act was passed that mainly provided funding to

the research of air pollution. The Clean Air Act of 1963 and its amendments established standards for

automobile and industry emissions. The Clean Air Act of 1970 set the first National Ambient Air Quality

Standards for six pollutants. The Clean Air Act of 1990 tightened the regulations on NO2 and added
soot and lead to the list (Mickley).

Many steps have been taken towards cleaner air, especially in California. Refineries and plants

have been controlled in CA since the 1970’s by the Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District

(LAAPCD). It began emission controls in 1947 when hourly O3 levels exceeded 1,200 Mug/m3. In the

1960’s O3 level approximated 1,000 Mug/m3. In the 1970’s, when the state government started imposing

vehicle emission standards, O3 concentrations decreased to 700 Mug/m3, but was largely undermined by

a huge population increase. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) succeeded

LAAPCD in 1976 when they realized smog extended past the borders of LA. SCAQMD put in effects a

three tier NO2 reduction plan in order to reduce O3 levels (Los Angeles). In 1989 SCAQMD instituted a

very strict plan that targeted not only automobiles and industries, but farmers, ship captains, bakeries,

furniture manufacturers, drycleaners, fast food restaurants, and even every individual. Certain BBQ

lighter fluids, nail polish remover, and many other house hold items were outlawed. The LA plan would

also reduce refinery emissions by 90% by requiring leak proof pumps and valves. It also outlaws old

biasply tires so that people will use more durable radial tires. It calls for all solid waste to be trucked out

of the basin area. The California Air Rescources Board requested that by 1998, 2% of all light cars and

truck sold in the state to be zero emission vehicles ran on electricity. The Air District Board provides

incentive and seed capital for new idea in air pollution reduction. Some alternatives that have emerged

are automobiles that run on methanol, reformulated gas, compressed natural gas, and propane. Also

catalytic converters that heat up quickly in order to filter out the maximum amount of pollution from

automobile emissions have been a success. California passes pollution control standards that are beyond

the means of current technology, and auto makers say that they cannot meet these standards. Then they

meet the standards because they have to cater to one of the largest auto markets in the world in order to

survive. Often times, we believe that things are impossible until we actually do it (Boly).

One problem with moving forward is the way in which we make policies to improve air quality. A

study conducted in China on how people associate air pollution and climate change showed that we
must redirect our aim in policy making. The study used information from a survey that asked people to

either list words they associated with air pollution or list words they associate with climate change. The

study found that people distinguish between the two through their manifestations. They associate the

two through similar causes and similar negative impacts on humans. It implies that using clean air

policies to mitigate climate change is not effective. Instead policymakers should confidently institute

policies that are aimed at both air pollution and climate change (Tvinnereim).

Solutions must be thought of according to their life cycle energy efficiency. This is known as

energy payback, which is the ratio between total energy produced during that systems lifespan and the

energy required to build, maintain, and fuel the system. The higher the ratio, the better the performance.

A conventional coal fueled boiler has an energy payback ratio between 1.6 and 5.1%. A conventional

boiler fueled by oil has a ratio between 0.7 and 2.9%. Fuel cells are between 1.5 and 3%. Conventional

nuclear PWR is between 14 and 16%. Wind power is between 14 and 16%. Hydropower is between 170

and 280%. Battery powered electric vehicles run at 80% vehicle efficiency but only have a 24% life

cycle efficiency (Gagnon). When determining how we should move forward, we need to consider the

energy it takes to produce energy. But then we must also consider the effects of the sources on many

other things like hydroelectric plants and dams effects on fish populations and physical geography of the

land.

VII. Conclusion

In conclusion, extensive evidence is given on why we need to change our habits as an entire

species. Not only do we compromise our own state of being, but we also compromise every ecosystem

and the entire planet. Many scenarios such as smog superbowls, heat waves, stagnation episodes, ect.

Show us what the future may be like if we do not change. The adverse health effects for humans and

other organisms are well documented and we have begun to take steps in the right direction. Climate

change and smog are linked directly and create a positive feedback loop that must be mitigated. Our

dependency on combustion is killing us slowly. More research needs to be done on other atmospheric
conditions that may affect smog and climate change as well. Stricter and stricter policies need to be set

in place that initiate advances. The planet depends on it!

 Works Cited

Boly, W. (1992). Smog city wants to make this perfectly clear. Health (Time Inc. Health), 6(2), 54.
http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=29&sid=c1ea5ef5-0946-4577-9b1c-
f4fa27488a08%40sessionmgr4008&hid=4204&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d
%3d#AN=9204131483&db=a9h

Gagnon, L. (2008). Civilisation and energy payback. Energy Policy. 36(9), 3317-3322.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421508002401

Gong-Yuh, L., & Bland, W. R. (1980). SPATIOTEMPORAL VARIATIONS IN

PHOTOCHEMICAL SMOG CONCENTRATIONS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY. California
Geographer, 20,28-52.

Hauck, M., Dulamsuren, C. & Leuschner, C. (2016). Anomalous Increase in Winter Temperature and
Decline in Forest Growth Associated with Severe Winter Smog in the Ulan Bator Basin. Water, Air, &
Soil Pollution. (2016) 227-261. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11270-016-2957-1

Kerkhor, A.C., Nonhebel, S., Moll, H.C., (2009) Relating the environmental impact of consumption to
household expenditures: An input–output analysis. Ecological Economics. 68(4), 1160-1170.

Kleeman, M. J. (2008). A preliminary assessment of the sensitivity of air quality in california to global
change. Climatic Change, 87, 273-292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-007-9351-3

Künzli, N., McConnell, R., Bates, D., Bastain, T., Hricko, A., Lurmann, F., Peters, J. (2003). Breathless
in Los Angeles: The Exhausting Search for Clean Air. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1494–
1499.

Los Angeles: Traffic and smog. (1994). Environment, 36(2), 12.

http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=23&sid=c1ea5ef5-0946-4577-9b1c-
f4fa27488a08%40sessionmgr4008&hid=4204&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d
%3d#AN=9403107525&db=a9h

Mickley, L. J. (2007). A future short of breath? Possible effects of climate change on

smog. Environment, 49(6), 35-43. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.stockton.edu:2048/login?
url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/224024363?accountid=29054

Tvinnereim, E., Liu, X. & Jamelske, E.M. (2017). Public perceptions of air pollution and climate
change: different manifestations, similar causes, and concerns. Climatic Change 140(3), 399–412.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-016-1871-2