Performance Indicator 14: Air Quality

Where BC Ranks, Provincial Comparison

	Notes Nationwide air quality data are available for many communities, not just major metropolitan areas. To keep the provincial and North American comparisons manageable, the Progress Board has included major metropolitan areas with high and low air quality to compare with BC, subject to availability.

Vancouver ranked fifth in 2005 and second on the 2001-2005 average behind Winnipeg, Manitoba using the concentration of PM2.5 particulates in the air.

Four of the seven cities reviewed had higher PM2.5 concentrations in 2005 than in 2004 with increases ranging from 6.2 percent in Montreal to 18.6 percent in Toronto.

Three of the seven cities reviewed had lower PM2.5 concentrations in 2005 than in 2004 with decreases ranging from 11 .7 percent in Calgary to 20.0 percent in Regina.

Fine particulates include dust, dirt, liquid droplets and smoke. Factories, cars, power plants, construction activity, and numerous other man-made sources emit fine particulates.

North American Comparison

Among the cities reviewed, Calgary had the lowest annual mean concentration of fine particulates (PM2.5) in its air in 2005. Vancouver was second-lowest and Los Angeles the highest.

Six of the ten cities reviewed had higher PM2.5 concentrations in 2005 than in 2004. Four of the ten cities reviewed had lower PM2.5 concentrations in 2005 than in 2004 with decreases ranging from 11 .7 percent in Calgary to 26.3 percent in Los Angeles.

Additional Air Quality Measures

Particulate matter based air quality measures provide a good method of benchmarking pollution levels. However, questions frequently arise regarding their reliability. Air quality measurements are vulnerable to measurement bias. For example, a measure taken upwind of an industrial area or in a rural location will appear much more favourable than one taken elsewhere. And as the types of industry, and the pollutants released, change over time and between jurisdictions the continued relevance of focusing on particulate matter-based measures is questioned.

While air quality measures continue to be valuable indicators, it is necessary to pay careful attention to where, and how it is being measured before making firm claims about overall air quality improvements.

Using additional measures of air quality to enhance the information provided by traditional particulate matter statistics provides a more comprehensive view of the current quality of the air we breathe. Measures such as mercury, ground-level ozone, nitrogen oxide, climate change trends and carbon monoxide are all valuable indicators that are gaining acceptance and will help to provide a more comprehensive environmental snapshot.

Unfortunately, widespread measurement continues to be restricted both by data collection challenges and costs.

>> Other Environment, Health and Society targets and indicators