This page last updated on August 28, 2000.
Cancer Danger Rises
Study: Cancer danger rises around O'HareAugust 27, 2000
BY ROBERT C. HERGUTH
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES TRANSPORTATION REPORTERAdding weight to the long-held suspicions of those living under flight paths
and near runways, a new study suggests that the risk of getting cancer is
higher in areas near O'Hare Airport because of toxic pollutants spewed by
aircraft.The study also found that airport-related health risks apparently extend far
beyond the suburbs circling O'Hare to the North Shore, Lake County and a
large chunk of Chicago.``In layman's terms, this found that the additional cancer risk created by
O'Hare emissions alone was way above what are considered acceptable public
health goals,'' said Joe Karaganis, an attorney for Park Ridge, one of four
noise-weary towns to fund the first-of-its-kind study, which will be
released today.``It also shows that the areas of health risk ... created by O'Hare extend
well beyond the areas near O'Hare and traditionally thought to be
impacted,'' Karaganis said.The study did not chart cancer cases. Rather, it calculated possible health
risks using O'Hare pollution levels from a previous report financed by the
City of Chicago, which owns and operates O'Hare.While not dismissing the new study, a city aviation spokeswoman said Chicago
stands behind two earlier studies showing that O'Hare is not the major cause
of pollution in the area.The authors of the new study, Princeton, N.J.-based Environ Corp. and
Elmhurst-based Mostardi-Platt Associates, used computer modeling to
determine how far those toxic chemicals would travel with certain wind
speeds and directions and the levels of concentration at the end of the
travel. The consultants then applied their figures to federal tables that
estimate health risks based on concentrations. Some air testing also was
conducted.The document shows that O'Hare ``is the No. 1 toxic polluter in the state of
Illinois,'' Karaganis said.The pollution and risk levels were so high, as far away as Waukegan, that
federal and state environmental agencies are supposed to try to reduce
contaminants within the affected area, he said.Neighborhoods along O'Hare's ``fenceline'' were most dramatically affected
by toxic emissions and therefore had a higher cancer risk, the study found.
``Hypothetical lifetime incremental cancer risks associated with
concentrations measured at the airport fenceline are approximately fivefold
higher than the cancer risks associated with `background' air quality in
Naperville,'' which isn't near O'Hare, the study found.The most prominent chemicals near the airport are in aircraft emissions,
including aldehydes, benzene and naphthalene.Also affected are many communities to the north, east and northeast of
O'Hare because winds often come from the south and west. ``The risk extends
farther than was previously known,'' although it's smaller than in towns
closer to O'Hare, Karaganis said.The study says that ``O'Hare air toxic emissions alone cause cancer risks to
exceed the federal health goal of 1 cancer in 1 million people in 98 Chicago
area communities including the city of Chicago--covering an area of
approximately 1,000 square miles.''Those towns include communities nowhere near O'Hare, such as Long Grove,
Kenilworth and Cicero.``I think people should be concerned by this. I don't think they should be
frightened,'' Karaganis said. ``But they should be asking their public
officials why this hasn't been addressed before, and what's going to be done
about this.''If the same results came from a chemical plant or some factory in the
private sector, regulators would pounce on them, Karaganis charged. But the
Illinois and U.S. Environmental Protection Agencies have a bad habit of
ignoring airports, he said.U.S. EPA spokesman Mick Hans said: ``We don't have anything to say about
the new Park Ridge study because we haven't seen it yet.''Dennis McMurray, an IEPA spokesman, said four pollution monitors were
installed in late June in Schiller Park, Bensenville, the Southwest Side and
Northbrook, thanks to a grant secured by state Sen. Dave Sullivan (R-Park
Ridge). Results should start pouring in this fall, McMurray said, adding he
hasn't seen the new study.The city downplayed the findings of the new report. Chicago aviation
spokeswoman Monique Bond pointed to two 1999 studies overseen by KM Chng
Environmental Inc., which was paid $200,000 by the city. The documents, one
of which was tapped for data by the Park Ridge consultants, concluded that
O'Hare isn't the major cause of air contamination in the area. Rather,
trucks, cars and factories are largely to blame, the city studies said.Planes, one of the city's studies found, emit only 1.6 percent of the
ozone-promoting volatile organic compounds around O'Hare. Also, aircraft
are responsible for less than 2.5 percent of the benzene, which is known to
cause cancer.``Basically, if you remove O'Hare from the picture, then most of the
pollution, which comes from vehicles, industry and railroads, would
remain,'' Bond said.Unlike the city's studies, Park Ridge's effort analyzed only O'Hare
emissions, most of which stem from airplanes, Karaganis said. The new report
also suggests that Chicago's report ``may substantially understate both the
quantity and types of air toxic emissions from O'Hare.''Demetrios Moschandreas, a chemical and environmental engineering professor
at the Illinois Institute of Technology, has not seen the new study, but
told of its findings, he said: ``It's a study that should be looked at very
carefully. I don't recall of a similar study at any airport'' in the United States.An Evanston resident, he was not concerned that his community, according to
the Park Ridge study, faced the possibility of two airport-related cancer
cases in a million, twice the federal health goal.``A lot depends on meteorological conditions and emissions,'' he said. ``But
the emissions must have been out of this world to affect Waukegan.''Helen Murray, a former Park Ridge resident now living in Des Plaines, one
of the other towns funding the new study, said she ``absolutely believes'' the
findings.``I know people who get that black sooty stuff all over their yard
furniture,'' she said.