Northern Hills Homeowner's Association

Logan emerging as top polluter

Mar 13, 2001

Airport is now state's 6th-worst smog producer

By Beth Daley, Boston Globe Staff, 3/10/2001

With almost no public notice, Logan Airport is quickly emerging as one of the state's single greatest contributors to summertime smog and is expected to top the list within the decade, a top state official says.

Environmentalists' attention has been riveted on cleaning up pollutants spewed out by Massachusetts' oldest and dirtiest power plants, derisively labeled ''the Filthy Five.'' But jets at Logan are emitting tons of nitrogen oxides every year, a key ingredient in both smog, which aggravates asthma,
and acid rain, which harms trees and wildlife.

Already, the airport ranks sixth on the list of the worst emitters of smog.
But state Environmental Affairs Secretary Robert Durand predicts Logan will rank number one by 2010 as the airport grows and regulators crack down on the old power plants.

''It's probably going to be the largest single source, and we're working now
with Massport to figure out ways to reduce those gases,'' said Durand. ''The auto industry, the business community, and homeowners have to take steps to reduce emissions, and the one industry that has gotten the free ride is the airline industry.''

By the end of this month, Massport, which runs the airport, will submit a plan to the state to reduce the emission of nitrogen oxides, often called NOx. While jets are by far the worst offenders, cars, rental vans, airline
baggage trucks, and other vehicles also spew NOx into the air. Massport officials did not release details of the plan yesterday, but said they are committed to reducing the emissions at Logan in both airplanes and ground vehicles.

The news doesn't come without irony for residents who live near the airport.
After years of complaining about noisy jets, they are getting quieter ones -
but it turns out the engines in those planes were redesigned to release more
NOx.

''We spent all our time on the noise issue and it turns out we closed our
eyes to the bigger problem - the air,'' said Gail Miller of East Boston, a
community activist. ''But I'd rather be deaf than not have clean air.''

It's not that environmental and Massport officials have ignored airport pollution. But they've largely focused on cars, buses, and trucks because their NOx emissions are easier to control than the hundreds of jets that fly
in and out every day.

As airports become more congested, however, their pollution patterns are
becoming similar to power plants' - both spew a concentrated amount of
pollutants into the air. While a variety of gases and particles is released
at Logan, nitrogen oxides are increasing the fastest.

Air pollution concerns at Logan couldn't come at a worse time for airport
officials, who are trying to get approval for a fifth runway to ease congestion. Still, adding that runway will cut down on air pollution, contends Betty Desrosiers, Massport's director of aviation planning, because planes would not be idling as long as they do now before taking off.

''NOx concerns us, and we are working hard to reduce them,'' Desrosiers
said. While Logan's NOx production is far from ideal, she said, it still
represents less than 2 percent of what all Greater Boston emits - mostly
from vehicles.

Durand would like Massport to charge higher landing fees to jets that emit
more NOx, a proposal already in practice at the airport in Zurich now.

''There need to be incentives on the ground'' to get airlines ''to look at
these issues,'' Durand said. ''The challenge for us is to create those
incentives.''

Airline officials were unavailable for comment yesterday evening.



Massport officials said charging the worst-polluting planes higher landing fees may be difficult. They said the higher fees have failed to reduce NOx in some overseas airports, and landing fees are such a tiny part of an airline's total cost in the United States that the financial incentive may not be there for airlines to use reengineered planes.

Exactly how to solve the NOx problem is not Logan's alone. Around the world, airports are struggling to figure out a way to keep ever-growing airports clean. An international committee has convened, and a national panel is looking at air pollution from airports for the first time. Cutting airport pollution at a national level may allow a more comprehensive solution that doesn't pit one airport against another.

Some argue there will always be a tradeoff in air transportation, whether it's quieter planes in exchange for more NOx or busier airports to help
local economies thrive. Striking a balance is difficult.

''While there are many techniques used to make engines more efficient, it
tends to make it more difficult to reduce NOx,'' said Ian Waitz, associate
professor of aeronautics and astronautics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ''When you put into place various regulatory strategies, you are
weighing the social costs among the social benefits.''

But those living near Logan say there must be jet engines that are both quieter and less polluting.

''It's all a soup here of noise, vibration, the smell of jet fuel, and air
pollution,'' said Barbara Bishop of Winthrop. ''We need to start focusing on the health effects.''

This story ran on page A01 of the Boston Globe on 3/10/2001.
?¿½ Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company