Connect with us

Science

44% of Americans breathe dangerously polluted air. In California, it’s 82%

Published

on

44% of Americans breathe dangerously polluted air. In California, it’s 82%

Greater Los Angeles remained the most ozone-polluted metro area in the nation, according to the American Lung Assn.’s 2026 State of the Air report, which found that Southern California continues to face some of the country’s dirtiest air.

The report, released on Wednesday, ranked Los Angeles-Long Beach as the worst U.S. metro area for ozone pollution, with an average of 159.2 unhealthy ozone days a year. The region also ranked seventh worst nationally for annual particle pollution and seventh worst for short-term particle pollution.

The American Lung Assn., or ALA, assigns grades based on the number of unhealthy air days and the severity of pollution levels, using federal air quality standards. Los Angeles County received failing grades across all three categories measured in the report: ozone, short-term particle pollution and annual particle pollution.

Riverside and San Bernardino counties also failed all three measures.

Orange County received an F for ozone, a failing grade for annual particle pollution and a C for short-term particle pollution.

Advertisement

Ground-level ozone, often called “smog,” is a corrosive gas that forms when pollution from vehicles and other sources reacts in heat and sunlight. It can irritate the lungs and trigger serious breathing problems.

Short-term and annual particle pollution refer to fine particulate matter, known as PM2.5. These microscopic particles come from sources such as vehicle exhaust, industrial emissions and wildfires. Because they are small enough to enter the bloodstream, they are linked to asthma attacks, heart disease, strokes and lung cancer, according to Will Barrett, assistant vice president for Nationwide Clean Air Policy at the ALA.

The report did find some signs of progress. Los Angeles posted its lowest annual particle pollution level in the history of the report, even though the region still ranked among the nation’s worst overall.

On the other hand, ozone pollution in Los Angeles worsened from last year’s report, keeping the metro area in the top spot nationally for smog. The report says Los Angeles has ranked worst for ozone in 26 of the 27 years the ALA has issued the study.

Speaking to the press Tuesday, Barrett said the region’s pollution comes largely from transportation sources “primarily burning gasoline and diesel,” along with refineries and other local emissions sources. He said those pressures are compounded by climate and coastal conditions that push pollution inland, especially into the Inland Empire, where unhealthy ozone days are even more severe.

Advertisement

Nationally, the report found that in the U.S., 152.3 million people, or 44% of the population, live in places that received a failing grade for at least one measure of ozone or particle pollution. That includes 33.5 million children, or 46% of people under 18. In California, the ALA said 82% of residents live in counties affected by unhealthy air.

Of the 15 U.S. counties with the most bad smog days last year, eight were in California.

When it came to bad PM2.5 pollution days, California had seven of the 15 worst counties.

And of the 15 counties with the worst year-round PM2.5 pollution, nine were in California.

In the report, the ALA said recent federal actions could undermine California’s efforts to improve air quality. Those include missed deadlines for stronger particle pollution standards, rollbacks of clean-vehicle and fuel-economy rules, exemptions from toxic air pollution regulations, and a Congressional Review Act challenge targeting three of California’s clean-vehicle standards.

“This [Environmental Protection Agency] is making significant rollbacks to life-saving clean air rules,” Diana Van Vleet, the report’s lead author and the ALA’s director of nationwide clean air advocacy, said during Tuesday’s press call. “Federal actions have weakened, delayed and repealed many pollution limits.”

She referenced the EPA’s February revocation of a longstanding scientific conclusion that man-made climate change threatens the health of Americans.

Advertisement

“The recent actions by the federal government to interfere with California’s state rights to protect residents’ health are a major challenge to the ongoing success of our local air districts and state Air Board,” said Barrett. He added that state estimates show federal actions weakening California’s clean-air authority could lead to more than 14,000 deaths, thousands of emergency room visits and hospitalizations, and $145 billion in cumulative health impacts through 2050.

Children are especially vulnerable to polluted air because their lungs are still developing, they breathe more air relative to their body size, and they often spend more time outdoors, the report said.

“In my daily work life, I treat children with asthma that is often made worse because of the heavy doses of pollution they breathe,” said Afif El-Hasan, physician-in-charge at Kaiser Permanente San Juan Capistrano Medical Offices.

El-Hasan added that air pollution “also inhibits lung development in children, which can lead to reduced lung capacity as adults. This is not reversible. Once it happens, it’s done.”

Southern California’s air pollution burden has long been shaped by a mix of traffic, freight movement, industry, geography and climate.

Advertisement

The county rankings show the concentration of that burden. San Bernardino County ranked as the most ozone-polluted county in the nation, with 159.2 weighted average unhealthy ozone days, followed by Riverside County at 126.7 and Los Angeles County at 119.0.

The report also highlighted cleaner-air successes elsewhere in California. Sacramento recorded its lowest annual particle pollution levels and fewest unhealthy ozone days in the report’s history.

Four California cities also ranked among the nation’s cleanest in at least one category: Salinas and Chico for having zero high-ozone days, and Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo for recording zero days of unhealthy particle pollution.

The ALA urged state lawmakers to keep funding programs aimed at cutting emissions from the biggest sources. “The Lung Association is calling for the California Legislature to invest in zero-emission truck programs,” Barrett said, as well as for funding for cleaner agricultural equipment and consumer cars.

The health and environmental arguments for these political positions have been argued to death, but Barrett says that the economic consequences of dirty air are often overlooked. “What is often missing is this impact of the cost of air pollution on family budgets, on kids missing school, their parents staying home from work, on and on and on,” he said. “Air pollution is a costly societal problem that needs to be addressed.”

Advertisement

Science

On Earth Day, House Cancels Vote to Narrow Endangered Species Protections

Published

on

On Earth Day, House Cancels Vote to Narrow Endangered Species Protections

House Republicans had big plans for Earth Day this year: They would pass a bill to narrow protections for endangered species that they had long seen as federal overreach.

It didn’t work out that way.

On Wednesday afternoon, Republican leaders suddenly canceled a vote on the measure after an initial procedural vote showed shaky support from party members. One Florida Republican, Representative Anna Paulina Luna, publicly aired concerns about the bill before the scheduled vote, writing on social media: “Don’t tread on my turtles. Protected means protected.” Her post contained an image of a yellow flag emblazoned with a sea turtle and the slogan “Don’t tread on me,” a phrase dating to the American Revolution that some conservatives have embraced in recent years.

The flip-flop on Wednesday was an embarrassing setback for Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana. And it left uncertain the fate of the ESA Amendments Act, a sweeping bill that would limit protections for species whose populations are beginning to recover, among a slew of other changes.

The bill’s lead sponsor, Representative Bruce Westerman, Republican of Arkansas and chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources, said he was trying to shore up support in the hopes of rescheduling a vote on the measure. “We just have a few provisions we’ve got to work through on it, and hopefully in the next couple of weeks, we’ll be able to vote on it,” he said.

Advertisement

Representative Kat Cammack, a Florida Republican, said she had raised concerns about a provision in the bill that would allow state and federal officials to exempt certain activities from Endangered Species Act restrictions. She said she worried that officials would codify an exemption that the Trump administration recently granted for oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

“I have coastline in my district,” Ms. Cammack said, citing the possibility of an oil spill sullying her state’s beaches. “I want to make sure that we’re doing everything that we can to be the best stewards as possible.”

Before the vote was postponed, conservationists had warned that the bill could speed extinctions and risk the recovery of numerous species, including piping plovers, black-footed ferrets and North Atlantic right whales. And they called the planned timing of the vote, on Earth Day, a cruel stunt.

“It’s a slap in the face to the American people and all the wildlife they love, and the ecosystems that support our lives,” Mary Beth Beetham, director of legislative affairs at Defenders of Wildlife, an advocacy group, said on Wednesday morning.

A few hours later, she was rejoicing.

Advertisement

“Now we can really celebrate Earth Day!” she said in a statement after the measure was pulled from the House floor. “The public defeat of the Westerman bill is a direct result of sustained constituent pressure. Congress is finally listening to the majority of Americans who support the Endangered Species Act, rather than centering politics and money in its policy decisions.”

Republican supporters countered that the Endangered Species Act needs a serious overhaul. They said the bill would make it easier to remove unnecessary protections from gray wolves, grizzly bears and other predators whose populations have rebounded in certain areas over the past several decades.

“Folks in my district have an incredible frustration regarding the gray wolf population because they have recovered,” said Representative Michelle Fischbach, Republican of Minnesota, during a hearing on the bill on Monday. She said that gray wolves had killed cattle as well as “family dogs tied up in the front yard.”

The planned vote was the latest recent effort by congressional Republicans to erode environmental protections.

Last week, the Senate voted to allow mining upstream from Minnesota’s Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, one of the country’s largest and most visited expanses of federally protected lakes and forests, sending that measure to President Trump to be signed into law. And the House approved three bills that would narrow the reach of the Clean Air Act, although their fate in the Senate remains uncertain.

Advertisement

At the center of the debate over the Endangered Species Act are two polarized views of the law. Democrats and conservation groups tend to celebrate it for preventing extinctions, noting that less than 1 percent of species protected under the act have been lost. But many Republicans criticize the law for recovering only a small number of species to the point of removing them from the list.

The bill that the House had aimed to pass Wednesday would make a number of changes to the law. It would require regulators to conduct economic and national security analyses when determining whether to list a species as endangered, while limiting their ability to consider future impacts, such as climate change. It would also weaken requirements that the federal government limit harm to endangered species, reduce certain habitat protections and cap fees awarded to lawyers in endangered species litigation.

The first Earth Day, in 1970, came in response to a series of environmental disasters. The pesticide DDT was devastating bird populations. A record-breaking oil spill had polluted the waters off Santa Barbara, Calif. In Cleveland, the Cuyahoga River had caught on fire.

For the initial commemoration, Congress effectively closed down so that lawmakers could attend events. More than 20 million Americans participated in rallies, lectures and protests across the country, including at more than 1,500 college campuses and 10,000 schools.

The public outcry galvanized the modern environmental movement. It also spurred Congress to create the Environmental Protection Agency and to enact three landmark environmental laws within three years: the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and, finally, the Endangered Species Act.

Advertisement

Megan Mineiro contributed reporting from Washington.

Continue Reading

Science

Pace of N.I.H. Funding Slows Further in Trump’s Second Year

Published

on

Pace of N.I.H. Funding Slows Further in Trump’s Second Year

Spending on new medical research by the National Institutes of Health has fallen roughly $1 billion behind the pace of years past, delaying thousands of scientific projects and raising concerns within the agency that it may struggle to pay out the money it was allotted by Congress.

Instead of canceling grants en masse, as the N.I.H. did in the first year of this Trump presidency, it is now vetting them before approval with a “computational text analysis tool” that scans for terms including “racism,” “gender” and “vaccination refusal,” according to documents obtained by The New York Times.

That tool was meant to formalize a campaign against “woke science” that was initiated last year by the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency.

But the screening system is now exacerbating a slowdown in research spending: The N.I.H. awarded only about 1,900 new and competitive grants from October to late March, less than half the number it tended to give out by that point in the fiscal year during the Biden administration, an analysis by The Times showed.

The heaviest damage to the grantmaking apparatus was done by the protracted government shutdown in the fall, which delayed grant review meetings by months. The N.I.H. has struggled to catch up, and delays are affecting fields far beyond those ostensibly targeted by the administration’s crusade against diversity, equity and inclusion.

Advertisement

As of late March, for example, the National Cancer Institute had earmarked only about $72 million for new and competitive research grants, less than one-third of the nearly $250 million it had agreed to spend by that point in a typical fiscal year during the Biden administration, according to The Times’s analysis.

“It means that people get fired because there is uncertainty about whether the grant will come through,” said Dr. Joshua Gordon, a professor of psychiatry at Columbia University and a former director of the National Institute of Mental Health. “It means budgets get busted. It means research projects get stalled.”

However alarming the canceled grants and spending delays were last year, Dr. Gordon said, “I’m more worried this year.”

The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the N.I.H. and is led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has become involved this year in flagging certain grant awards and stopping their release, according to emails reviewed by The Times.

Mr. Kennedy faced sharp criticism from Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike over N.I.H. spending delays in congressional hearings this week. He is set to appear at two more hearings on Wednesday.

Advertisement

The N.I.H. has fallen behind in part because it lost thousands of workers last year to layoffs and early retirements. In some branches of the agency, what workers remain can barely keep up with renewing existing grants, much less awarding new ones.

One N.I.H. institute has less than half of the workers needed to vet grants for legal and financial compliance, employees were told at a recent meeting, notes from which were reviewed by The Times.

Under the most dire projections, the institute could leave $500 million of congressionally appropriated funding on the table because of difficulties processing grants, N.I.H. officials said at that meeting. They were temporarily deploying career scientists to what were effectively business roles to speed up grant awards.

The N.I.H. director, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, has said that he is trying to root out ideologically motivated and insufficiently rigorous science. Conservatives accuse the N.I.H. of having fostered such research during the Obama and Biden presidencies by, for example, encouraging grant proposals on sexual- and gender-minority groups.

“Scientists will no longer have to mouth D.E.I. shibboleths to garner funding,” Dr. Bhattacharya and his top deputy wrote in an online article in December, the day before the N.I.H. outlined the new screening process to its employees.

Advertisement

Andrew Nixon, a health department spokesman, blamed the spending shortfall on “the Democrat-led shutdown,” which he said “delayed N.I.H.’s ability to issue grants” at the start of the fiscal year. Since then, he said, “timelines have returned to typical funding patterns.”

He added that the agency “uses a variety of review tools to ensure alignment with agency priorities” and that it was working to hire additional employees. “The N.I.H. intends to obligate all appropriated funds, as directed by Congress,” he said.

To understand why spending has slowed so dramatically at the N.I.H., the world’s premier funder of medical research, The Times interviewed 10 agency employees and reviewed internal documents, including spreadsheets of grants flagged by the screening tool and the list of roughly 235 terms it searches for.

The employees spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly.

Advertisement

The documents painted a picture of an agency whose leaders were seeking to exert greater control over scientific spending by, among other things, deciding whether certain grants were compatible with agency priorities. But in clamping down on the funding process, the N.I.H. created new choke points, leaving some proposals in limbo for days or weeks.

That has frustrated some senior N.I.H. officials, one of whom lamented in an email seen by The Times that it was taking too long to rework grant proposals. The official asked his staff to simply strip the proposals of disfavored terms instead.

The delays have also angered lawmakers. Congress sets the country’s medical research spending levels, even as the administration has leeway to prioritize types of studies. And despite Mr. Trump’s proposing major cuts last year, Congress preserved the N.I.H. budget at roughly $47 billion for 2026.

Advertisement

“It is very frustrating to understand that this administration can circumvent dollars that were designated for our scientists,” said Senator Angela Alsobrooks, Democrat of Maryland.

Congress’s budget buoyed American scientists. By late 2025, many believed that they had weathered the worst of Trump-era funding problems. The N.I.H. spent aggressively toward the end of the last fiscal year, overcoming earlier blockages and delays.

The Supreme Court also let stand a lower court’s ruling that the policy behind the cancellation of more than $780 million in N.I.H. grants was probably unlawful, a victory for groups that had argued the terminations were arbitrary and capricious.

But the Trump administration was preparing a far more systematic crackdown on what it saw as unreliable research.

In August, Dr. Bhattacharya publicly outlined the agency’s new priorities, including opposition to “research based on ideologies that promote differential treatment of people based on race or ethnicity,” a template that could be used to guide grant reviews.

Advertisement

Then, in December, the N.I.H. introduced its employees to the “computational text analysis tool,” allowing the agency to comb through new grant proposals and existing projects for phrases suggesting a grant “may not align with N.I.H. priorities,” a guidance document would later tell employees.

Roger Severino, a vice president of the conservative Heritage Foundation and a health official in the first Trump administration, said that weeding out such grants was necessary to rid the N.I.H. of the “politicization” of the Obama and Biden eras.

If the result was less spending on science, he said, that was only because the agency had been wasting money.

“There was a tremendous amount of bloat that grew up like barnacles on the N.I.H. research ship,” Mr. Severino said. “Those barnacles are being scraped off.”

Within some divisions of the N.I.H., the text search tool is flagging as many as half of grants, officials said, requiring staff scientists to extensively document how they will be reworked or why they already conform to agency priorities.

Advertisement

Flagged grants address cancer, diabetes, autoimmune diseases, H.I.V., heart disease, stroke, Alzheimer’s disease, nutrition and prenatal care, internal documents show.

In part because many of them look at the use of screenings or treatments, they sometimes include mention of “inequities” in access to care or “minority” groups who disproportionately suffer from a disease, causing the system to deem the grants not “clean.”

In one case, a biological science grant was held up for a week because the proposal had used “sex” interchangeably with “gender,” a flagged word.

American scientists already spend some 40 percent of their time on grant-related administrative tasks. Now they are being deluged by ever more paperwork, said Dr. Michael Lauer, who led external grantmaking at the N.I.H. until last year.

And because the N.I.H. is awarding grants to far fewer researchers this year, the chances of success have rarely been lower.

Advertisement

“This is lost time for all of us,” Dr. Lauer said. “Instead of spending their time doing science and hopefully making discoveries that will make us all healthier, they’re rewriting grant applications.”

Sheryl Gay Stolberg contributed reporting.


Methodology

The Times analyzed N.I.H. grants data from N.I.H. RePORTER for the fiscal years 2021 through 2026. The analysis excludes awards for intramural research conducted at the N.I.H. Clinical Center. The analysis focuses on new awards (Type 1 awards) and competitive renewals (Types 2, 4 and 9).

The analysis uses data through March 2026, the most recent month comparable to prior years. Previous records suggest that the data available on RePORTER for that month, however, may still be missing up to 10 percent of awards. The analysis accounts for that possibility.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Science

Lyrids Meteor Shower: How to Watch, Peak Time and Weather Forecast

Published

on

Lyrids Meteor Shower: How to Watch, Peak Time and Weather Forecast

Our universe might be chock-full of cosmic wonder, but you can observe only a fraction of astronomical phenomena with the naked eye. Meteor showers, natural fireworks that streak brightly across the night sky, are one of them.

The latest observable meteor shower will be the Lyrids, which has been active since April 14 and is forecast to continue through April 30. The shower reaches its peak April 21 to 22, or Tuesday night into Wednesday morning.

According to NASA, the Lyrids are one of the oldest known meteor showers, and have been enjoyed by stargazers for nearly 3,000 years. Their bright, speedy streaks are caused by the dusty debris from a comet named Thatcher. They appear to spring from the constellation Lyra, which right now can be seen in the eastern sky at night in the Northern Hemisphere.

The moon will be about 27 percent full tonight, appearing as a thick crescent in the sky, according to the American Meteor Society.

To get a hint at when to best watch for the Lyrids, you can use this tool, which relies on data from the Global Meteor Network. It shows fireball activity levels in real time.

Advertisement

And while you gaze at the heavens, keep an eye out for other stray meteors streaking across the night sky. Skywatchers are reporting that the amount of fireballs is double what is usually seen by this point in the year.

There is a chance you might see a meteor on any given night, but you are most likely to catch one during a shower. Meteor showers are caused by Earth passing through the rubble trailing a comet or asteroid as it swings around the sun. This debris, which can be as small as a grain of sand, leaves behind a glowing stream of light as it burns up in Earth’s atmosphere.

Meteor showers occur around the same time every year and can last for days or weeks. But there is only a small window when each shower is at its peak, which happens when Earth reaches the densest part of the cosmic debris. The peak is the best time to look for a shower. From our point of view on Earth, the meteors will appear to come from the same point in the sky.

The Perseid meteor shower, for example, peaks in mid-August from the constellation Perseus. The Geminids, which occur every December, radiate from the constellation Gemini.

Michelle Nichols, the director of public observing at the Adler Planetarium in Chicago, recommends forgoing the use of telescopes or binoculars while watching a meteor shower.

Advertisement

“You just need your eyes and, ideally, a dark sky,” she said.

That’s because meteors can shoot across large swaths of the sky, so observing equipment can limit your field of view.

Some showers are strong enough to produce up to 100 streaks an hour, according to the American Meteor Society, though you probably won’t see that many.

“Almost everybody is under a light-polluted sky,” Ms. Nichols said. “You may think you’re under a dark sky, but in reality, even in a small town, you can have bright lights nearby.”

Planetariums, local astronomy clubs or even maps like this one can help you figure out where to go to escape excessive light. The best conditions for catching a meteor shower are a clear sky with no moon or cloud cover, sometime between midnight and sunrise. (Moonlight affects visibility in the same way as light pollution, washing out fainter sources of light in the sky.) Make sure to give your eyes at least 30 minutes to adjust to seeing in the dark.

Advertisement

Ms. Nichols also recommends wearing layers, even during the summer. “You’re going to be sitting there for quite a while, watching,” she said. “It’s going to get chilly, even in August.”

Bring a cup of cocoa or tea for even more warmth. Then lie back, scan the sky and enjoy the show.

Storm systems sweep across the country in early spring, and some will be obscuring skies tonight. But there will still be plenty of areas with clear skies, particularly in parts of the central United States.

“The best spot is going to be in the Upper Midwest,” said Rich Bann, a meteorologist with the Weather Prediction Center.

Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa will offer especially good sky-viewing weather and a beach on the Great Lakes could be a nice spot to look up at the stars.

Advertisement

But don’t expect to view the show from Chicago, as Illinois could see some thunderstorms. The weather will be better in the Northern and Central Plains, particularly the eastern Dakotas.

High, wispy clouds are expected over the Ohio and Tennessee Valleys and into parts of the Mid-Atlantic. But, Mr. Bann said, “you may be able to see some shooting stars through thin clouds.”

Clouds will be draped across much of the Southeast and the Northeast, though there could be some clearing in Florida, Georgia, the Carolinas and Virginia. Remember, the meteors could be visible all night long. If you look outside and see clouds, try again later.

Catching the spectacle will be challenging across much of the West, particularly from Washington into Northern California, where a storm system is bringing rain and snow. That system will move east overnight.

There are likely to be some pockets of clear skies at times across southern Nevada, northwest Arizona and southwest Utah, Mr. Bann said.

Advertisement

Amy Graff contributed reporting.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending