Reporting for this story was supported by the Nova Institute for Health.
In the decades following the passage of the Clean Air Act in the early 1960s, air quality monitoring has become a critical tool for the EPA to fulfill its mission of protecting people from polluted air. The EPA, in collaboration with state regulators, manages a network of approximately 4,000 monitors nationwide that measure levels of six pollutants harmful to human health, including ozone, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter. However, these monitors were originally established to track pollution from vehicles and industrial facilities, resulting in an uneven distribution across the United States.
A 2020 analysis by the Natural Resources Defense Council revealed that over 100 counties projected to have unhealthy levels of particulate matter lacked air quality monitors for Clean Air Act compliance. Additionally, research shows that communities of color are often disproportionately exposed to air pollution due to their proximity to industrial polluters. Even with the emergence of non-EPA low-cost air quality sensors like PurpleAir, these devices are predominantly found in affluent White communities.
To bridge these monitoring gaps, the EPA granted $53 million to 133 community groups in 2022. With this funding, many groups began installing their own air quality monitors to detect pollution from various sources such as industrial operations, waste burning, and oil and gas development. This initiative, supported by the Inflation Reduction Act and the American Rescue Plan, aims to prioritize public health in underserved and overburdened communities.
Despite this financial support, there is no guarantee that the data collected by these community groups will lead to regulatory changes. Some states have passed laws preventing regulators from utilizing data collected by community monitors. This poses a challenge for communities facing significant air quality issues who must now manage the installation, operation, and maintenance of monitors without sufficient technical expertise.
In southwest Louisiana, Micah 6:8, a community group led by Cynthia Robertson, was granted funding by the EPA to purchase an air quality monitor. However, legislation signed by Governor Jeff Landry prohibits the use of community air monitoring data for regulatory purposes in the state. Robertson’s efforts to provide her community with crucial air quality information face resistance from regulators. A similar struggle is seen in Texas, where Air Alliance Houston’s community-based monitoring data has been disregarded by the state environmental agency.
Efforts to address these challenges and advocate for improved air quality monitoring in communities of color persist. Community groups like the Port Arthur Community Action Network in Texas are partnering with organizations to highlight the need for enhanced monitoring in areas with high pollution levels. The response from state regulatory agencies, such as the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, will be pivotal in determining the impact of community-generated air quality data on policy decisions and public health outcomes.
