California Sees a 76 Percent Decline in Cancer Risks, Thanks to Cleaner Air

Air pollution regulations in California have led to a dramatic decrease in cancer risks since 1990

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Rules that regulate air pollution in California have led to a dramatic drop in cancer risks since 1990.

According to a new study published in the journal “Environmental Science and Technology,” California saw a significant drop in seven major toxic air pollutants between 1990 and 2012. All told, this cleaner air has led to a 76% decrease in Californian’s associated risk of developing cancer due to exposure to seven major air pollutants.

According to the study's authors, the most important improvements in Californian's cancer risk came from decreasing pollution from diesel vehicles. From 1990 to 2012, concentrations of diesel soot (also called “diesel particulate matter” or DPM) declined by 68%. These reductions occurred in spite of the fact that total vehicle miles travelled by diesel vehicles in California increase by more than 30% over this period.  Furthermore, between 1990 and 2012 the state’s population grew by 31% and the gross state product grew increased 74%.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


 

Reference: Popper, et. al. “Ambient and Emission Trends of Toxic Air Contaminants in California” Environ. Sci. Technol. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b02766. Publication Date (Web): September 4, 2015

These reductions have been credited to statewide air pollution rules that were established in the 1980s and have subsequently led to reductions in the amount of diesel soot, benzene, and other cancer-causing air pollutants emitted in the state.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe