Q&A: Those loud leaf blowers

Your eco-questions, answered:

Question: I'm a Santa Monica resident and have a question for you:  Do you think there is anything we can do to stop the use of leaf-blowers in LA/SM?  I understand that they are illegal, but every single day I see one being used in my 'hood. Currently, I do call the number and report offenders, but I'm just not feeling like it's doing any good in the long term.

If the city can bother itself to ticket street-cleaning violators $47 a pop, why don't they take this environmental disaster seriously enough and have some sort of patrol?  Is it because they can't make any money off gardeners? Anyway, I would really appreciate your thoughts on the topic. -- Callie

Answer: Yes, those noisy and polluting leaf blowers are indeed illegal in Santa Monica and restricted in Los Angeles. And you're not alone in hatin' on the blowers. I too dutifully call in leaf blower violations -- and I too have dealt with the frustration of calling in every week without ever seeing permanent results.

But I did a little research, and now feel a bit more optimistic!

Here's what to do if you've got a chronic leaf blower problem in your 'hood: Call your local Neighborhood Resource Officer, or NRO. Yep -- each patrol beat in Santa Monica got its own NRO in January; you can find your NRO -- along with his (yes, they are all men) phone number, e-mail, and smiling mug on the SMPD website.

Described by the Santa Monica Police Department as a "small town sheriff," the NRO is there to serve as "the direct link between the community and the Police Department." Recurring problems -- such as weekly leaf blowing -- that can't be handled via a regular call can be reported to the NRO for more efficacious resolution.

In addition, the SMPD is working on a leaf blower door tag notice to let offenders know about the law against leaf blowers. According to Sergeant Renaldi Thruston, the Community Relations person at the Santa Monica Police Department, leaf blowers are low on the priority list for police officers -- meaning that by the time an officer actually responds to your leaf blower-related complaint, the blowing's usually stopped and the blower long gone. That, as you can imagine, makes it difficult for police officers to prevent the problem from occurring again.

Enter the leaf blower door tag. These (samples at right) can be hung by the police officer on the door of the offending property. The tags explain the anti-blower law in both English and Spanish. In addition, the bottom of the tag can be torn off to be given to the gardener, informing them about the law too.

The tags aren't being used yet because they're still going through a review process. However, Thruston says that he expects the police force to start using the tags next month.

So Callie -- I suggest either calling your NRO to report your problems now, or waiting until the end of June or so to see if your problem gets taken care of by the door tags (if not, then definitely call your NRO).

I don't, however, support the idea of having a police patrol to address this issue. Why? I get a LOT of e-mails from various Santa Monica residents asking why we don't have patrols for their specific pet peeve. Everyone has a different one -- Styrofoam use, lawn overwatering, dog poop on the sidewalk, etc., etc.  -- and each feels their peeve deserves its own police patrol. While I feel these are legitimate enviro issues, instituting police patrols for all these things  would mean 1) paying crazy taxes, 2) living in something that feels a bit like a police state.

I think our time and efforts would be better spent simply letting the city know when something's not working, then complaining loudly enough that the city hears it. Take this leaf blower issue, for instance. Clearly, enough people complained about this that the police dept. decided they needed to do something to address it -- then came the NRO thing and work on door tags.

Sometimes, I think that if Santa Monica residents who send me complaints about city issues simply made the effort to send those complaints directly to the appropriate person in the city itself, we'd get the issues resolved a lot more quickly and efficiently...

Lastly, if you're an L.A. resident who wants the city to address leaf blower problems -- Ha ha! Tee hee! Okay, just kidding (sort of). Call it in both to your police department ( [800] 996-CITY) and your City Council member, and if you're up to it, rally your neighbors around the issue to collectively push your council member to take stronger steps to resolve the issue.

Top image courtesy of zapla.org; photos by Siel

Comments

[KathyR]

Excellent response.

I do not understand the Leaf Blower People. Of all the things to get fixated upon.

Yes, leaf blowers are noisy. The gas ones have exhaust. These are not good things. Agreed. In a perfect universe there would be ample time and money to sweep and rake (as quietly as possible) each fallen leaf and each shorn blade of grass. In an even more perfect universe, everyone is Los Angeles County would xeriscape in lockstep. You know, for the good of everyone.

But where's the Real Big Picture? How important is it to screw up some guy's way of barely making a living? I've lived in a lot of neighborhoods in L.A. I've never had, met or seen a gardener that wasn't a very hard-working guy living on a cash basis and trying to get as many jobs done in a day as he could.

Exhaust bothers you? Buy the offending gardener an electric blower and let him plug in at your place. Noise bothers you? Well, really, how long does it last? Even if there's a different gardener coming to a different neighbor every day of the week, it can't go on for that long. Buy earplugs. Listen to some nice music on your headphones. Or, hey, offer to sweep up so the guy can get on to his next job.

I've lived in a lot of neighborhoods in L.A. in my 47 years. Poor to posh. There is No Such Thing as a perfectly quiet neighborhood. No, not even in the ritzy neighborhoods. Someone is always mowing the lawn, using an electric sander on their paint job, doing a construction job, jackhammering the street, driving around with the stereo thumping, having a party, getting their carpet cleaned, running a day care, turning their TV up too loud with the windows open. We live in a big sprawling metropolis with several million other people. We do not live on big spreads in the country. Should you manage to silence all of the leaf blowers, it still isn't going to be quiet.

[m]

You forgot one situation -- when people blow dirt and debris onto pedestrians with leaf blowers. Earlier this week there was major construction going on in Pasadena near one of the train stations that required taking major detours. When a crosswalk was finally located that wasn't under construction, I watched a woman walk across the street in front of me as a guy mindlessly stood in the street island, blowing a large cloud of dirt directly onto the woman in the crosswalk. There were 2 men behind this woman who were trying to gesture to the man with the leaf blower what he was doing, but he couldn't hear and wasn't watching them.

[Nick Messick]

The reason you never see any response from the police on this matter is because the law, as it was written, makes it too hard to prosecute offenders. Because it forbids "Gasoline Powered Leaf Blowers" the responding officer would have to take a sample from the fuel tank (because it could be ethanol, diesel, kerosene, etc, which aren't illegal. This sample would have to go to a lab to prove it is in fact gasoline and that sample would have to be kept around until the trial. Then, an expert witness would have to testify in court.

So, with all that. It's obvious to see why the "leaf blower task force" hasn't cracked down on this.

[Callie]

I'm not sure why every body's hating on me. That's really all I have to say.

[Siel]

Who is hatin' on you, Callie? (except for the strange person who wrote the first comment -- I'm not sure why she thinks my answer was "excellent" when really it disagrees with everything she wrote in the comment....)

Nick -- Interesting point re: the law. Just for other readers, I want to point out that the issue you point out only has to do with the law in L.A. In Santa Monica, both electric and gasoline powered leaf blowers are banned at all times.

[Matt]

I agree that we should focus less on the police (or other authority really) solving our problems and finding other solutions. Well said.

[tracy]

I guess when I see leaf blowers I tend to think, at least they're not using the hose!

[nondisclosed]

I wouldn't defend anyone's need to make a living by using a leaf blower. Although it sounds nice, it's ignorant. You should be more concerned over what the leaf blower will do to the operator physically. If the operator knew, they would be angry at anyone for subjecting them to the damages that can occur, which, if they are for any reason uninsured, taxes must pay for, and which they may never receiev adequate care for. Compassion and decency dictates that no one anywhere be allowed to use leaf blowers. In fact, leaf blowers are supposed to be used, according to evidence found in several citations, with a fully operable gas mask.

Speak to an officer and he or she might will tell you the leaf blower law is a nuisance. Let them know what the leaf blower does to people physically, the operator, and anyone in the area, and a whole new understanding takes place. This doesn't mean they rush to the scene necessarily, but at least educating people and letting them know that being within 50 feet is the same thing as sucking on the exhaust pipe of 50 CARS, and that ought help. Those machines are extremely dangerous both from noise and pollution and there is ample, ample scientific evidence all over the web and the court system of the US. Take a look at what the decibel level does to your GI system. It causes some people to undergo gastric emptying. That annoying IBS people always talk about-there's a proven link between GI distress and noise, although there are certainly many other causes of distress of any portion of the mammalian (and insect and rodent and marsupial et al) system. The leaf blower's use exemplifies a number of those causes-just do your research.

No one has to take a sample of anything, they are all illegal. They don't pursue it because many officers think the complaint is simply that leaves get blown in the air and it's annoying, and if you thought that was the only issue you might not respond either. This is an educational issue at this point, and really not that hard to solve. As for not implementing a legal task force to enforce the law, then I hope you have a bunch of dual language pamphlets that you have been give permission to distribute, so that you can form your own task force and not ask the police to do it, but you'd have to go to city hall a number of times to prove you aren't soliciting, and something tells me you won't want to do that. It's so hurtful to our health to have these machines in use, we should be grateful that there is a law in place to protect everyone.

This is NOT the same thing as a dog in someone's yard, or overwatering a lawn-this is something that can cause instant cardiac arrest, gastric emptying, read on below. It's disgusting, it's illegal, and it's only ignorance that causes it to continue. It's been illegal since 1975 in some towns in the US.

The following excerpts are from one of many helpful, fully scientifically cited websites:

From
http://www.nonoise.org/quietnet/cqs/leafblow.htm

General Comment on Level of Danger: In ordinary use, blowers are clearly not being operated according to the manufacturers' own warnings. According to warnings (such as Echo's "Power Blower Operators Manual"), everyone within 50 feet of a blower in use should be wearing hearing, eye, and breathing protection. We all know from our own observations that this is not done, and it is preposterous it ever could be, as blowers are often used within less than 50 feet of bystanders such as pedestrians, cyclists, and even people inside their own homes who can hardly be expected to put on hearing, eye, and breathing protection each time they encounter a leaf blower!

The California Air Resources Board (ARB) says air pollution costs our state billions of dollars annually in health care and crop and building damage. It irritates eyes and throats, harms lungs, and causes cancer and premature death (1), including sudden death from heart attacks. Ozone*, a gas, is Sacramento's worst air pollution problem (2), and we also have unhealthy levels of liquid and solid particulate matter (PM**) (3). Blowers, especially gasoline-powered, contribute to both of these. Emissions from the two-stroke combustion engine include PM as well as gaseous carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and hydrocarbons (CO, NOx, and HC). Leaf blowers also raise (entrain) dust from the ground. And evaporative emissions of fuel occur during the refueling process, which sometimes spills gas on the operators, and from the fuel tank. Comparisons that exclude some of these could understate the problem.

Fine PM2.5 particles, which are man-made and do not occur in nature, evade the body's defense systems. According to the EPA and ARB they can increase the number and severity of asthma attacks, cause or aggravate bronchitis or other lung disease, and reduce our ability to fight infections (4).

Leaf blower motors are inordinately large emitters of CO, NOx, HC, and PM according to a study conducted for the ARB (5). Two-stroke engine fuel is a gasoline-oil mixture, thus especially toxic. Particles from combustion are virtually all smaller than PM2.5. According to the Lung Association, a leaf blower causes as much smog as 17 cars.

Street dust includes lead, organic carbon, and elemental carbon according to a study conducted for the ARB. The Lung Association states "the lead levels are of concern due to [their] great acute toxicity... Elemental carbon...usually contains several adsorbed carcinogens." Another study found arsenic, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and mercury in street dust as well (6). The ARB states that a leaf blower creates 2.6 pounds of PM10 dust emissions per hour of use (7), and based on this a report from the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District states that leaf blower dust is responsible for two percent of our PM (8). Blowers are widely used in residential areas where many people are exposed.

The EPA and ARB, in their brochure "Particulate Matter Air Pollution: A threat to our health" advise us, "Avoid using leaf blowers." The multi-agency Best Available Control Measure Working Group agrees.

In November 1997 the Los Angeles Times reported on studies by Kaiser and the California EPA showing a correlation between levels of air pollution and hospital admissions for cardiopulmonary problems (9). These reinforce conclusions reported in the August 1997 issue of Consumer Reports, which described the effect on preschool children as "especially startling." (10) Fifty thousand people in the city of Sacramento are particularly vulnerable to air pollution because of asthma or cardiopulmonary disease (11). Healthy adults and children who play or exercise vigorously are also at risk (1).

Sacramento must reduce its smog-forming emissions by 40 percent by the year 2005 in order to achieve healthier air (3), yet the Portable Power Equipment Manufacturers Association has asked its California members to lobby against stricter emission regulations developed by the ARB for 1999 (12).

* Ozone, three atoms of oxygen in one molecule, is formed by reaction of hydrocarbons (sometimes referred to as "volatile organic compounds," or VOCs) and NOx in sunlight. It is desirable in the upper atmosphere, but irritating to living tissue.
* *PM air pollution consists of particles small enough to remain suspended in the air for a significant period of time (hours to days) unless washed out by rain or otherwise removed. PM is often described by its particle size as PM 10 or PM2.5, a number that refers to maximum diameter in microns. (Thus, PM2.5 is a subcategory of, and contained within, PM10.)

References:

1. "The California Air Resources Board", a brochure currently available at the ARB offices, 2020 L Street, Sacramento CA 95814.
2. "Spare The Air: Improving Air Quality In The Sacramento Region", published summer 1997 by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, which says, "During the summer, we are among the worst areas in the nation for ozone air pollution" and advises us, "Don't use gasoline-powered lawn and utility equipment..."
3. California Air Resources Board: Status Report 1995-96.
4. "Particulate Matter Air Pollution: A threat to our health", Best Available Control Measure (BACM) Working Group, January 1997.
5. American Lung Association of Sacramento - Emigrant Trails, "Fact Sheet: Leaf Blower Air Pollution Impacts Study Results."
6. County of Fresno, Inter Office Memo, October 14, 1982.
7. July 9, 1991 letter from Terry McGuire, Chief, Technical Support Division, ARB, states, "We estimate that a single leaf blower reentrains about 5 pounds of particulate matter in an hour, about half of which is PM10."
8. Reported in the Sacramento Environmental Commission's "Leaf Blower Recommendations From the Subcommittee", October 27, 1997.
9. Los Angeles Times, November 21, 1997, "Alerts Urged at Lower Smog Levels".
10. Consumer Reports, August 1997, page 36, "Air Quality Special Report: Clearing the air". In this long, forcefully written, informative article, the magazine reports that, "Outdoor air--even air that meets present pollution standards--still can be hazardous to your health." The article explains that the scientific evidence is "remarkably consistent" and significant, in spite of assertions to the contrary by polluting industries. And it says that industry typically threatens ruinous cost increases if new regulations are imposed, "but when regulations have changed anyway, the predicted economic disasters haven't materialized."
11. Sacramento Bee, 1997 (exact date unknown), "Capital-area air labeled bad but legal". The article said 152,000 people in Sacramento County suffer from chronic obstructive lung disease, asthma, or ischemic heart disease. We assume the city's per capita rate matches the county's.
12. Sacramento Bee's California Life, January 17, 1998, "Garden equipment group steps on the gas".

Economic issues.

* All the above harms have economic costs. The L.A. Times (3/27/99) reports, "Scientists from all 15 European Union countries who are drafting a common noise policy estimate that excessive racket costs governments as much as two percent of gross domestic product in lowered productivity, increased accidents and more-frequent illness." Two percent of the United States GDP is more than $150 billion and any fraction of that is significant, to say the least.

* Stress. In 1978 the U.S. EPA, in "Noise: A Health Problem," wrote: "Noise causes stress and the body reacts with increased adrenaline, changes in the heart rate, and elevated blood pressure" and quoted Dr. Samuel Rosen of Mt. Sinai Hospital: "We now have millions with heart disease, high blood pressure, and emotional illness who need protection from the additional stress of noise. " The report goes on to state: "Noise does not have to be loud to bring on these responses. Noise below the levels usually associated with hearing damage can cause regular and predictable changes in the body..." Even the unborn can be affected. The EPA report says, "[T]he fetus is not fully. protected from its mother's response to stress...this indirect fetal response may threaten fetal development if it occurs early in pregnancy...A Japanese study of over 1,000 births produced evidence of a high proportion of low-weight babies in noisy areas... stress causes constriction of the uterine blood vessels which supply nutrients and oxygen to the developing baby."

* Cardiovascular problems. According to the Los Angeles Times (3/27/99), "German environmental authorities have documented a greater risk of heart attacks among people exposed to excessive noise...Investigation of the lifestyles of German cardiac patients has shown about a 25 percent greater chance of heart attacks among those whose work or home environments were persistently exposed to noise above 65 decibels..." The web site of the European Academy of the Urban Environment says, "The effects of noise range from disruption of physical and psychological well-being to rapid increase in cardiovascular disease." The U.S. EPA has stated, "[A] growing body of evidence strongly suggests a link between exposure to noise and the development and aggravation of a number of heart disease problems...even a small increase in the percentage of heart problems caused by noise could prove debilitating to many thousands of Americans."

* Gastrointestinal distress. According to the League for the Hard of Hearing, "Studies have linked noise exposure with increased gastric emptying (Kaus and Fell, 1984), with increased peristaltic esophageal contraction (Young, 1987), as well as increased anxiety. Another study found an increase in the use of antacids and hypnotics, sedatives and antihypertensives in a noisy community...(Knipschild, 1977)."

* Depressed immunity. The U.S. EPA reports: "From a study done with animals, researchers concluded that noise may be a risk factor in lowering people's resistance to disease and infection." A recent study conducted at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands found that "[an] uncontrollable stressor that lasts 15 minutes can have consequences for health because it may interfere with cytokine interleukin-6 function, which plays an essential role in activating the immune defense… Uncontrollable stressors also produce high levels of cortisol, which suppresses immune system functioning."

* Interrupted sleep. It does not take a study to determine that many people must sleep during the same daytime hours that leaf blowers are used in every neighborhood. One need only consider the number of hospitals, police departments, and convenience stores along with a great many other entities and services that operate around the dock. Noise can awaken us from sleep, prevent us from falling asleep, and impair sleep even when it does not awaken us.

Sleep deprivation has a number of well-known consequences including automobile and industrial accidents and diminished mental and physical health. The L.A. Times reported (March 27, 1999) that when noise disrupts sleep, it produces stress hormones that accelerate aging and heart disease.

A 1993 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association ( Vol. 269, No. l2) stated, "Inadequate or poor sleep can result in fatigue and impaired alertness and cognitive ability, reducing productivity on the job and increasing the opportunity for human error and fatigue- related accidents. On-the-job accidents and lost productivity carry' a staggering cost--about $64 billion annually... Sleep loss and sleep disturbances also are thought to play a major role in causing automobile accidents. Drowsiness is blamed for some 200,000 to 400,000 automobile accidents annually. These accidents account for almost one half of all accident-related fatalities; as many as 13 percent of these deaths may be caused by falling asleep at the wheel."

* Social discord. The League for the Hard of Hearing cites studies that report increased aggression (Donnerstein and Wilson, 1976) and less helpful behavior (Mathews and Cannon, 1975) in noisy environments. Alice Suter, Ph.D., a nationally recognized noise consultant, was quoted in the Spring 1993 Issues in Science and Technology: "Even moderate noise levels can increase anxiety, decrease the incidence of helping behavior, and increase the rise of hostile behavior in experimental subjects."

* Impaired communication. Noise disrupts social interaction and can be dangerous by masking warning noises. According to the U.S. EPA, "People who live in noisy places tend to adopt a lifestyle devoid of communication and social interaction.. For millions of Americans residing in noisy urban areas, the use of outdoor areas for relaxed conversation is virtually impossible."

* Impairment of children's hearing, health, learning, and behavior. The League for the Hard of Hearing cites studies of children and noise. The U.S. EPA reports that learning difficulties, particularly with language development and reading ability, are byproducts of noisy home and/or school environments

* Psychological, social, and emotional problems. The [UK] Electronic Telegraph (March 28, 1999) reports that "[one] American study showed that people living on noisy main roads had far fewer friends than those in quiet suburbs. People living near airports were eight times more likely to suffer mental problems." The U.S. EPA says, "Several industrial studies indicate that noise can heighten social conflicts both at work and at home... And studies of several industries show that prolonged noise exposure may lead to a larger number of psychological problems among workers."

* Particular difficulty for certain subgroups of our population, including the hearing-impaired and sufferers of hyperacusis and tinnitus.

Noise even at 65 dB interferes with the ability of the hard of hearing to recognize speech. This is an increasing problem for Americans who are losing hearing at younger ages and in greater numbers than ever before. For example, the Sacramento Bee reported (October 19, 1998) that a study of 6,928 men and women published in the American Journal of Public Health found that "the prevalence of hearing impairment nearly doubled between 1965 and 1994 in a population based in Alameda County." According to the U.S. EPA, "When exposed to a vent, loud noise, people with partial hearing loss may experience discomfort and pain." [Expanded quote below with source noted.]

Hyperacusis (also known as dysacusis, oxylacusis, hypersensitive hearing, or phonophobia) may include about one in every 100,000 people. It is a heightened sensitivity to sound which causes noise to be traumatic. As many as 40 percent of autistic children are similarly sensitive to sound. (Information obtained from the Internet.)

Noise - effects on the operators. A leaf blower that emits 75 decibels of noise measured from 50 feet, not uncommon for professional blower models on the market today will emit 99 dB at three feet (add 6 dB for each halving of the distance). A backpack model will be even closer than that to the operator's ears and heart. The documented effects of these noise levels include:

* Noise-induced hearing damage. Robert L. Blum, MD, wrote in 1998: "The National Institute of Occupational Safety. and Health (NIOSH) has recognized for decades that exposure to sounds over 85 dB causes hearing loss...A search of the National Library. of Medicine's database for papers after 1990 ["Medline"] yielded 927 references [including]:

* "(Wu 98) surveyed 9,535 workers who were exposed to noise > 85 dB just in the past four years (with modem hearing protection programs). 34 percent of these workers had noise- induced hearing loss. 14 percent of the total had severe hearing loss.

* "(Maisarah 93) studied 524 industrial workers and compared them with non-noise exposed workers. Sensorineural hearing loss ,was present in 83 percent of the noise-exposed workers versus 32 percent in the control group.. -Although hearing protection devices were provided to 80.5 percent of the workers, only 5.1 percent were wearing them regularly.

* "(Neuberger 92) studied 260,917 noise-exposed workers and showed a highly significant correlation of hearing loss with intensity and duration of noise exposure."

Alice Suter, Ph.D., wrote in 1994, "[I]t is well known that some more susceptible workers will incur hearing losses at levels below 85 dB(A)."

* Vibration-induced hearing damage. Dr. Blum says: "Vibration is significant because commercial blowers are worn on the back... Vibration is transmitted up the spinal column to the skull and temporal bones, which enclose the cochlea...[E]ar muffs do nothing to protect the operators from vibration transmitted by bone conduction... Vibration-induced hearing loss is also well-documented.. -Scores of epidemiological studies have shown hearing losses in farm workers, factory workers, subway operators, and [workers in] many other industrial settings. ( See Medline under key words: vibration and noise-induced hearing loss.) Vibration-induced hearing loss is over and above that produced by noise."

It is worth noting here that hearing loss is deeply damaging to a person's life in many ways. It affects employability, impairs enjoyment of music and other entertainment, creates hazards by impairing the ability to recognize sounds of danger, and perhaps worst of all, creates social isolation. In its 1978 report "Noise: A Health Problem," the U.S. EPA stated, "People with partial deafness...do not necessarily live in a quieter world. The many sounds still audible to them are distorted...When exposed to a very loud noise, people with partial hearing loss may experience discomfort and pain...There is even the further pain hard-of-hearing person faces: the emotional anguish caused, perhaps unintentionally, by friends and associates who become less willing to be partners in conversation or companions in other activities. Indeed, the inability to converse normally makes it difficult for partially deaf people to participate in lectures, meetings, parties, and other public gatherings. For a person with hearing loss, listening to TV, radio, and the telephone--important activities of our lives--is difficult, if not impossible...As hearing diminishes, a severe sense of isolation can set in."/LI>

* Stress. (See the above section on stress in "Noise - effects on the general public.")

* Heart disease. Dr. Blum cites Tarter (1990), who showed "a significant correlation between hypertension and hearing loss in workers exposed to 85 dB noise. " At the very least, the same level of cardiovascular problems experienced by people in noisy environments as discussed above would be experienced by blower operators.

* Gastrointestinal problems. The U.S. EPA says, "In studies dating back to the 1930s, researchers noted that workers chronically exposed to noise developed marked digestive changes which were thought to lead to ulcers. Cases of ulcers in certain noisy industries have been found to be up to five times as numerous as what normally would be expected."

* Combined effects of noise and pollution on hearing. Research mentioned in the May 1998 issue of Noise & Vibration Worldwide says: "...[F]indings suggest that exposure to toluene [an ingredient in gasoline] has a toxic effect on the auditory system." Other information is available in the published proceedings of the Stockholm Fifth International Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem in the section "Combined Agents" which includes "Interactions Between Noise and Air Pollution" and "Noise and Solvents."

* Generally poorer health. The U.S. EPA reports: "A five-year study of two manufacturing firms in the United States found that workers in noisy plant areas showed greater numbers of diagnosed medical problems, including respiratory ailments, than did workers in quieter areas of the plants." In 1994, Alice Suter wrote that "there is growing evidence that noise adversely affects general health, and the cardiovascular system in particular...which directly affects mortality" and refers to Ising and Kruppa, 1993; Peterson et al, 1978, 1981, and 1983; Rehm, 1983 ; and Zhao, et al, 1993.

[chris Houchin]

I'm in agreement with these comments and have begun a, first of it's kind, no-gas gardening service, here in Studio City called, Quiet Garden Landscaping. We use nothing but Battery, electrical and conventional gardening tools. We've been featured on Ed Begley's, "Living With Ed" and soon others. Our service is clean and quiet. Gas is no longer needed in regards to gardening, and neither is the noise.
Go to www.quietgardenlandscaping.com to read more.