Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Climate

Wildfire Smoke Is a Wheezy Throwback for New York City

This looks familiar.

Manhattan in the smoggy 1950s and today.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

“An eye-smarting, throat-irritating twilight gray hung over New York, New Jersey, Long Island, and Westchester all day,” reported The New York Times, warning local residents that “today is to be warm, which would prolong the four-day smoky haze plaguing the East.”

True enough. Only, The New York Times published those words … back in 1953.

It’s been smokier in New York than California this year, with the Air Quality Index (AQI) hitting triple digits across the East Coast on Tuesday due to air blowing down from Canada, where there are more than 400 active fires. In addition to triggering a region-wide Air Quality Alert for more than 8 million people, all the smoke gave Manhattan the appearance of being in a brownish cloud:

Before the success of the Clean Air Act, scenes such as these were common over Manhattan — though not due to wildfires. Building incinerators, rampant coal burning, and vehicle emissions would regularly cause stagnant “killer smogs” that made “downtown Manhattan [look] like a Cloud City” during the mid-century. One such event, in 1966, is thought to have killed as many as 400 people.

Smog in 1953.Smog covers New York City in 1953.Library of Congress/Walter Albertin

Smog in 1870.More smog in 1970...Library of Congress/Bernard Gotfryd

Smog in 1973....and again in 1973.The National Archives/Environmental Protection Agency/Wilbert Holman Blanche

The smoke in New York this week is not directly comparable to the 1960s and 1970s in terms of concentration — the inhalable particles (PM 2.5) circulating on Tuesday were concentrated between 52 micrograms of pollutant per one cubic meter of air (that is, “52 µg/m³”) and 70.2µg/m³, depending on time of day and where you were on the East Coast. That’s still over 10 times the World Health Organization’s annual air quality guideline and “unhealthy for sensitive groups,” but a far cry from the 100 to 200 µg/m³ annual average concentration of fine particle pollutants that sickened and killed New Yorkers in the 1960s and 1970s.

Still, wildfire smoke is nothing to sneeze — or rather, cough — at; there is no single AQI number where the air stops being safe to breathe. That said, researchers have estimated that people of all ages are 1% more likely to die of nontraumatic events like a heart attack or stroke on days where the PM2.5 value is above 20.4 μg/m3 (that is, less than half the concentration in New York on Tuesday). The cumulative effect is bad too: People are “2% more likely to die on the day immediately after a smoke event,” Crosscut reports. There are also increased cancer risks from living near wildfires, another study found.

Though there have been major national improvements in air quality, contemporary New Yorkers are still no strangers to bad air, wildfires or no. From gas stoves that renters can’t avoid to subway platforms to trucks, buses, and power plants that spew cancer-causing particulate matter, we may have air that is technically better than our arch-rival Los Angeles’, but it still definitely isn’t great. That gives us all the more reason to pay close attention when it gets even worse.

Some throwbacks should stay in the past.

Blue

You’re out of free articles.

Celebrate the Fourth of July with us and save 20% off an annual subscription, now just $99 $79/year with code: FIREWORKS
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Spotlight

Trump Taps Nashville Legend to Fight Solar and Wind Farms

And data centers might be collateral damage.

Farmland.
Simon Abranowicz | Getty Images | Unsplash

After derailing gigawatts of renewable power with a permitting freeze, the Trump administration is expanding its war on renewable energy, retaining one of country music’s biggest stars in a PR offensive against utility-scale projects on “prime farmland.”

The administration recently onboarded John Rich – one half of the stadium-packing American musical duo Big & Rich – to be Trump’s “special envoy for American landowners.” Rich entered activism around landowner rights last January when he backed opponents fighting a large Tennessee Valley Authority transmission project routed through his home county of Cheatham, Tennessee. This led to him joining the Trump team, where he’s fashioning himself as a go-to guy and cheerleader for anyone who wants Trump to help stop a solar or wind farm they don’t want built.

Keep reading...Show less
Hotspots

Data Centers Are the Election Year Villain

And more of the week’s top news around project fights.

Data Centers Are the Election Year Villain
Heatmap Illustration

1. Kansas City, Missouri – Data centers are so toxic that politicians are using them as boogeymen in totally unrelated policy discussions.

  • All week I’ve been thinking about Missouri, where a widely-screened TV campaign ad is airing screeds against AI hyperscale projects to sell a constitutional amendment initiative up for a vote in this year’s November elections. “That hum is the sound of Big Tech making money on online gambling, for porn,” says a nameless man in the ad. “Amendment 5 makes Big Tech pay so you don’t have to. Yes on Amendment 5.”
  • What does Amendment 5 do? Based on the ad, you would think it was focused on tax exemptions for data centers. But no – a yes vote supports cutting the state income tax, a proposal backed by Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe.
  • The ad is misinformation and a mind-blowing use of a confusing conversation around tech infrastructure most were unfamiliar with before this year. Per reporting by the Missouri Independent, the state’s existing tax exemptions for data centers would stay in place if the amendment was adopted.
  • My gut tells me this is only the beginning of the data center industry’s transformation into an election year villain.

2. Ingham County, Michigan – We have our first major anti-data center candidate in a Democratic congressional primary.

Keep reading...Show less
Q&A

Why Data Center NDAs Are a Big Mistake

A conversation with Grant Gutierrez of Carbon Direct

Why Data Center NDAs Are a Big Mistake
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Grant Gutierrez, head of community impacts at carbon management company Carbon Direct. This week Carbon Direct published a white paper Gutierrez authored on opposition around data centers he’s studied. His research reinforces much of what Heatmap Pro has uncovered, but I was particularly intrigued by a topline finding – that transparency is the most common thread in the 46 data center fights he looked into. Was he seeing what I’ve been seeing? So I asked him to hop onto a Zoom call and let me know his thoughts.

The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less