Port expansion risks high public-health toll

A new study reveals that the local public health costs associated with the SPA after the North Charleston port expansion could be as high as $81 million per year. While the port provides many benefits for the state, its expansion will undoubtedly incur increased health care costs for Charleston residents. The Charleston County Medical Society is concerned that these health consequences may not have been fully considered in the discussion of the new port.

The society is dedicated to improving medical care and community health, and has been examining the health effects of air quality as outlined in an important new report, "Estimated Health Impacts of the Proposed Charleston Naval Complex Terminal." After careful scientific evaluation, physicians with appropriate expertise in this field have concluded that there is compelling evidence in this report that should be released to the public and used by decision makers. With the proposed port expansion in North Charleston, which has already been identified as having significant air quality concerns, it is essential to examine the health impacts of this project.

For three years in a row, Charleston County has received an "F" from the American Lung Association for high levels of fine particle pollution. This new study, by Abt Associates of Cambridge, Mass., focuses on fine particle pollution from the port terminal planned for North Charleston. More than 2,000 peer-reviewed medical studies link fine particle pollution to adverse health conditions, including increased asthma, stroke, cancers, heart disease, and premature death. The risk is particularly high for children, older people and people with high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease, or chronic lung ailments.

The Abt report estimates the public health impact from the proposed terminal by using the air quality information provided in the State Ports Authority's Final Environmental Impact Statement. Furthermore, it more accurately modifies the emissions model in the following ways:

It includes emissions from ships cruising in the shipping channel as they approach and leave the terminal. The calculated ship emissions are plotted to 2025 and are based on a lower sulfur fuel scenario than in practice today because of a new fuel standard expected to be adopted.

While the SPA's EIS only used vehicle emissions within six miles of the port, the Abt report recognizes that container trucks typically travel farther than six miles. Using an SPA truck study, the new report increased the average truck miles from 6 to 28 miles The new report includes secondary particulate matter formations that occur in the atmosphere when sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, ammonia, and other gaseous emissions combine and form even more particulate matter. The port simply measured primary particulates from ships and trucks. The inclusion of secondary particulate formation adds nearly two tons of secondary pollution to every one ton of primary pollution. Based on these additional data, Charleston can probably expect as much as 149 tons of extra particulate matter annually, compared to the 32 tons that were estimated in the port's EIS.

The importance of this new report is that we can now look at more accurate models of projected impacts from the port, such as increased incidence of asthma, cancer, heart disease and premature death. This study projects the cost of negative health impacts to our community due to the new North Charleston terminal to be as high as $27 million per year. The study further provides a conservative estimate of the health impacts of existing port facilities. Including the new terminal, the total cost to our community of the negative health impacts of all SPA port facilities is estimated at up to $81 million per year.

A new port, or any another industry with significant emissions, should do a cost analysis to determine the costs associated with remediating the air quality problems that they are expected to create. Just as a developer is required to add emergency medical services in order to build a large new subdivision, the port must examine the impact of expansion and add appropriate pollution control measures. Otherwise, we will all have to pay. Now is the time to be responsible and plan for significant reductions in emissions to protect public health.

A responsible approach to port expansion would create jobs, while assuring that the extra 149 tons of particulate matter are not introduced into Charleston's air. As concerned physicians who care for the health of our community, we must insist that the port industry address the air quality issue and its associated health care costs immediately. Otherwise, we can anticipate paying for the consequences with our limited resources, and ultimately with our own health.

William J. Hueston, M.D., is president of the Charleston Medical Society.