Facts, Myths, and FAQs
Facts and Myths
about
The Phase-Out of Gas-powered Leaf Blowers in the District of Columbia
Introduction: The City Council of the District of Columbia is considering legislation that would phase out the use of gas-powered leaf blowers because of their excessive noisiness. The bill would limit their sale after December, 2021. Gas-powered leaf blowers sold in DC would need to be labeled as not allowed to be used in the District. Battery-powered and electric leaf blowers would be allowed. Enforcement of the ban would be the responsibility of the DC Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs. This legislation would follow models applied in some 170 cities across the country.
FACTS THAT YOU MAY NOT KNOW:
1. Fact: Gas-powered leaf blowers are noisier than battery-powered blowers, even when their labeled noise levels are the same.
a. Gas blowers have a unique and loud low frequency noise that makes them sound much louder than battery-powered blowers, . [Pollock2; Fallows2,p. 2; Small2 (Video)]
b. Even gas blowers that are rated by the industry as emitting the same 65 decibels as battery blowers are significantly noisier. [Transcript (Pollock) p. 16; Pollock2, p.8-9; Small p.2]
2. Fact: Gas-powered leaf blowers have a much larger impact on the neighborhood
a. The low frequency noise from gas blowers travels much longer distances and penetrates windows more easily and therefore affects significantly larger numbers of neighbors in urban settings. [Banks2, p. 5; Transcript (Pollock) p. 15; Pollock2, p. 8; Transcript (Sainburg) p. 5]
b. Not only neighbors, but customers and operators as well appreciate the major reduction in the noise. [Transcript (Sainburg) p. 5-9]
3. Fact: Noise can lead to permanent hearing loss
a. Many gas leaf blowers impact the operator’s ears at 100 decibels or more. [Transcript (Johnson) p. 14; Transcript (Banks) p. 19; Banks2, p. 4]
b. 91 decibels for 2 hours or 100 decibels for only 15 minutes a day can result in permanent hearing loss according to the CDC.
c. Even exposure to an average of 75 decibels over a lifetime can result in permanent hearing loss. [Fink, p. 2]
4. Fact: Noise can lead to a wide variety of additional serious effects on humans and wildlife
a. Adverse effects from noise include cardiovascular impacts, and effects on the immune system and on development. [Fink, p. 12; Banks, p. 2, 10, Elkins2, p. 3; Fallows2, p. 7]
b. Low frequency noise such as emitted by gas blowers is such a special health concern that additional protection is warranted, especially for children, the elderly, and other sensitive populations. [Banks2, p. 4]
c. Workers frequently walk into the path of approaching traffic since they cannot hear the traffic because of the noise. [Transcript (Small) p. 26]
d. Loud noise interferes with habitats and life cycles of birds and animals. [Transcript (Cottingham), p. 7]
5. Fact: Gas-powered leaf blowers emit large quantities of hazardous air pollutants for workers and neighbors.
a. Gas-powered blowers emit high levels of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxides. By the year 2020, air emissions from lawn care equipment in California are expected to exceed the air emissions of all the cars in California. [Elkins2, p.3]
6. Fact: DC’s Current regulation of leaf blowers’ decibel levels is so difficult to enforce that a more effective solution is demanded.
a. Enforcement of the current regulation in DC is either non-existent or ineffective resulting in demands that the DC Council to do something about noisy leaf blowers, from:
i. 14 Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (more than 1/3rd of the ANCs in the city),
ii. over 2300 people who signed a Change.org petition; and
iii. virtually all of the public witnesses at the Council’s July 2nd hearing. [Transcript (Orlins), p. 26; Elkins .1; Transcript(Cauman, Spatafora) p. 29-30]
b. Current enforcement requires the presence of an inspector with a noise meter at the time of the violation, and that is not practical, but the new legislation will be much easier to enforce. [Transcript (Johnson), p. 12; Fallows2, p. 4; Elkins 2, p. 6; Banks2, p.6]
MYTHS ABOUT THE PHASE-OUT OF GAS-POWERED LEAF BLOWERS:
1. Myth: Battery blowers are weak and not capable of doing the work
a. Over 140 lawn care companies use blowers other than gas-powered blowers, and they are profitable.
[Transcript (Banks) p. 20]
b. Five of these successful lawn care companies testified or submitted statements to the Council.
[Transcript (Sainburg) p. 5; Transcript (Kline) p. 7; Banks2, p. 11 ]
c. Current lawn care companies use battery leaf blowers for large acreages and for sustained periods of time and can accomplish the work in the same amount of time. [Transcript (Sainburg) p. 5; Transcript (Kline) p. 7, 10; Elkins2, p. 4]
d. Nationwide, many businesses, schools, and 170 municipalities, are making the switch away from gas-powered blowers. [Banks2 p. 1, 6]
2. Myth: Courteous behavior on the part of lawn maintenance companies is a solution
a. The manufacturers of the equipment (OPEI) and the Lawn Care trade association (NALP) have no control over lawn care companies, all of which are independently operated. [Elkins2, p. 1; Blackwelder, p. 4]
b. The financial interests of the commercial lawn care companies incentivize the most aggressive use of blowers. [Fallows2, p. 3; Blackwelder, p. 4; Transcript (Johnson) p. 14]
3. Myth: Over time the marketplace will solve this problem without further regulation
a. Marketplace forces do not reflect the interests of those affected by the use of this noisy equipment (workers, neighbors). If the workers and neighbors were buying the machines, they would buy the quieter ones but they don’t have a voice in the decision. [Elkins2, p.2; Blackwelder, p. 2]
b. The marketplace promotes the noisiest leaf blowers, equating power and effectiveness with the loudness of the sound. [Transcript (Johnson) p. 13; Banks2, p. 4; Transcript (Kline) p. 7; Elkins2, p. 1]
4. Myth: Banning gas-powered leaf blowers will impose a serious financial burden on lawn care companies
a. The allowed phase-out over three years gives companies time to replace old gas-powered blowers with battery-powered blowers since gas-powered blowers wear out quickly. [Transcript (Small) p. 28; Transcript (Kline) p. 7]
b. Most of the lawn care companies operating in the District are Maryland and Virginia companies with clients in those states as well. They will not have to switch their entire inventory of blowers in order to serve the District.
[Elkins2, p. 6]
c. Battery-powered blowers are cheaper to run and maintain than gas-powered blowers over time.
[Transcript (Kline) p. 7]
d. More manufacturers are introducing battery-powered blowers as alternatives and prices are coming down. [Transcript (Kline) p. 7; Fallows p. 5-6]
5. Myth: Banning gas-powered leaf blowers after 2021 is unenforceable
a. The existence of laws in 170 communities across the country demonstrate that a ban on noisy blowers can be effectively implemented. [Banks2, p. 6]
b. Enforcement techniques such as the use of citizen affidavits eliminate the need for an inspector to observe a violation while it is occurring. [Elkins2, p.6]
c. DC already uses citizen affidavits to enforce violations of the allowed hours for private trash haulers in the city. [Elkins2, p. 6]
6. Myth: Workers can protect themselves from hearing loss caused by gas-powered blowers
a. Leaf blowing is an entry-level job where the worker has little job security or control over the equipment he must use. [Transcript (Plume), p. 6; Fallows2, p. 8]
b. OSHA policy requires that employers use safe equipment to protect workers (e.g. battery-powered blowers) before requiring workers to use protective equipment, such as hearing protectors. This is important because hearing protectors are often not effective in preventing hearing loss because of their poor quality and the need for even the high quality protectors to fit correctly. [Elkins2, p. 3]
_____
Here is a set of Frequently Asked Questions.
LEARN MORE ABOUT GAS-POWERED LEAF BLOWERS
Isn’t this just a “first-world problem,” for privileged people with too much time on their hands?
On the contrary: indifference to the public-health and environmental-justice aspects of this issue reflects more of a “first-world” attitude.
For the householders who hire lawn crews, the emissions and noise of two-stroke engines are a momentary inconvenience — or one they don’t notice at all, if they hire crews to do the work while they are off at work or otherwise away from their homes.
The people most at risk to health damage from gas-engine emissions, the spray of fine particulates, and ear-damaging noise are the lawn workers who may be handling this equipment many hours a day, many days a week. In major cities the members of hired lawn crews are typically low-wage, non-English speaking, and unlikely to be covered by health insurance; often they use the equipment without ear or nose protection. Indifference to this dangerous equipment implicitly means discounting their long-term health concerns.
Is there any realistic alternative?
Definitely yes, and increasingly so. The revolution in battery technology is one of the fastest-developing fields of high-tech improvement. The demand for battery-powered transportation systems, from cars to aircraft, and the ceaseless expansion of battery-powered mobile equipment is rapidly driving down the cost and weight, and driving up the power and durability, of portable batteries. Lawn-equipment manufacturers are responding with a rapid sequence of new clean, dramatically quieter leaf blowers and other equipment. And many cities across the country, including at least 25 in California alone, have already mandated this shift.
Is noise any more than a nuisance?
Yes. Increasing public-health evidence shows that rising exposure to urban and suburban noise has measurable effects on physical and mental health, especially in children and older populations. View this study for more information: Environmental Noise Pollution in the United States: Developing an Effective Public Health Response.
Apart from the effects on workers, are any other groups of people especially vulnerable to the effects of this outdated equipment?
Yes. As with many other environmental stressors, very young and very old people are the most susceptible. Precisely because their bodies are developing so quickly, children can be disproportionately affected by fumes, aerosol contaminants, dust, and even noise.
A joint letter from doctors in the Pediatric Environmental Health Unit at Mt. Sinai hospital, urging a ban on gas-powered leaf blowers, listed a range of their harmful effects on children. It included this passage about noise:
"The intense, high frequency noise that leaf blowers generate can cause loss of hearing in the workers who operate these machines and can also affect hearing in children and other persons. The ears of infants and young children are especially vulnerable to the high intensity noise that leaf blowers produce because their auditory systems are undergoing rapid growth and development, and these developmental processes are easily disrupted."
How can lawn equipment be important enough to care about?
Compared with trucks, automobiles, and power plants, two-stroke engines are a relatively small portion of total fossil-fuel use and polluting emissions. But they are an anomaly on the modern environmental scene: At a time when car, truck, and aircraft engines are becoming dramatically cleaner and more efficient, and when power plants are moving to more sustainable energy sources, two-stroke engines are grossly dirty, dangerous, wasteful, and polluting. The easiest benchmark comparison: using a standard two-stroke engine for 30 minutes puts out as much dangerous aerial pollutants as driving a modern Ford F-150 pickup truck for some 3800 miles.
Because of their dirty inefficiency, two-stroke engines have been phased out of nearly all uses other than lawn equipment. The National Park Service has outlawed them for most boat engines on public waters. Scooter and motorcycle makers have moved beyond them. As part of their environmental clean-up plans, many Asian and Latin American cities with serious air pollution problems have outlawed two-stroke engines. These bans have taken effect in cities in India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and many Latin American countries. Systems too dirty for the people of Bangkok or Manila have outlived their usefulness in Washington D.C.
Have other cities tried this approach?
Yes, and this list is growing. The largest and best-known example in the United States is the city of Los Angeles, with a population of more than two million. An increasing number of other cities are following suit.
What can I do next?
For information on the public-health, environmental, technological, and economic arguments in favor of helping your city shift to cleaner, quieter equipment, please contact us here.