SURVEY ON PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF
OUTDOOR AIR QUALITY ISSUES IN THE CITY OF PRINCE GEORGE
by
Michelle Oster
B.Sc., California State University Stanislaus

PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

/

© Michelle Oster, 1997

THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA
July 1997
·········oe:. .

v

All rights reserved. This work may not be
reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or
other means, without the permission of the author.

ABSTRACT

A public opinion survey was conducted with five hundred area residents within
the city of Prince George, British Columbia to determine public perceptions of outdoor
air quality issues in the area. Information gathered from this survey will be used to
incorporate public input into the Prince George Air Quality Management Plan. The
survey contained 53 Likert-type, yes/no and open-ended questions which were organized
under six separate section headings: public satisfaction with air quality, air quality as a
priority in the community, perception of sources of outdoor air pollution, woodstove and
fireplace inventory, transportation issues, and public participation and education. Survey
results suggested that Prince George residents were not satisfied with current airshed
conditions, they believed poor air quality affected their quality of life and they were
pessimistic about future improvements to air quality. Industrial and mobile sources were
identified by respondents as the primary contributors to air pollution. Additionally,
residents expressed a need for more education on air quality issues and called for
increased public awareness of the negative impacts and human health consequences of
poor air quality in the city. A majority of respondents also indicated that they would
participate in pollution-reducing activities if it would help improve outdoor air quality.
Based on survey results, recommendations for future management of the Prince George
airshed were identified.

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract.......... ..........................................................................................

ii

Table of Contents.....................................................................................

111

List of Tables........... ................................................................................

iv

List of Figures..........................................................................................

v

Acknowledgment..................................................................... .................

vi

1.0 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................

1

2.0 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES...............................................................

8

3.0 METHODOLOGY............................................................................
3.1 Sample Characteristics............................................................

10
13

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION............................ ............................
4.1 Public Satisfaction with Air Quality and
Public Awareness of Air Quality Issues..................................
4.2 Air Quality as a Priority in the Community...........................
4.3 Perception of Sources of Outdoor Air Pollution...................
4.4 Woodstove and Fireplace Inventory.......................................
4.5 Transportation Issues.............................................................
4.6 Public Participation and Public Education........ ........... ....

19
19
24
26
31
33
35

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............ .. ...............

40

6.0 REFERENCES..................................................................................

47

APPENDIX A: Description of Air Pollutants..........................................

49

APPENDIX B: Additional Survey Results..............................................

50

lll

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1:

Length of residency in the Prince George area..........................................

15

Table 2:

Comparison of survey demographics with Prince George City
population estimates for neighborhood residence.....................................

15

Table 3:

Comparison of educational level of survey respondents and population
of Prince George........................................................................................

16

Table 4:

Comparison of occupations of survey respondents and population of
Prince George.........................................................................................

17

Table 5:

Breakdown of respondents categorized "Not in the labour force" from
Table 4......................................................................................................

17

Table 6:

Percent of respondents scoring each community issue on a scale from
"1" to "1 0" to indicate the importance of the issue to the community.......

25

Table 7:

Percent of respondents perceiving each source of air pollution as a small
contributor, a medium contributor or a large contributor to poor air
quality.......................................................................................................

27

Table 8:

Percentage of respondents describing the effects experienced as a result
of poor air quality in neighborhoods.........................................................

31

Table 9:

Percent of survey respondents indicating their willingness to personally
participate in five activities that could possibly improve the outdoor air
quality in Prince George...........................................................................

36

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1:

Age distribution of survey respondents in comparison to the 1991
Census data for Prince George............. .... ............................................. . . ..

14

Figure 2:

Percent of respondents utilizing various modes of transportation other
than a personal vehicle.............................................. ................................

35

v

I

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I would first like to thank my supervisor Annie Booth for always sharing her time
and experience with me, for giving me direction and advice when I needed it, and
especially, for all the "little" things she has done for me over the past two years. I would
also like to acknowledge the support and guidance of my committee members, Leslie
King lfor her undying encouragement), Peter Jackson lfor always being there) and Greg
Halseth lfor answering every question I could not). This project and my goals could have
not been realized without their time and effort.

I would also like to thank the City of Prince George, the Ministry of Environment,

Lands and Parks and the Prince George Airshed Technical Committee for supporting this
research. Additionally, my appreciation is extended to Dr. Bruno Zumbo and Dr. Alex
Michalos of UNBC for sharing their survey expertise and to Dr. Greg Poelzer for his time
and guidance.

ToRR: oo

vi

I

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to determine public perceptions of outdoor air quality
issues in the Prince George airshed. This research is part of a larger study under the
direction of the Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee and will serve
as one of the preliminary steps towards policy development and implementation of an Air
Quality Management Plan for the city. This survey is one of the consultative approaches
to be used to gather public input for incorporation into the first draft of the management
plan. The Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee considers research
into public perceptions to be a critical part of airshed management. Their goal is to
encourage a collaborative effort at the community level to find practical solutions to this
environmental problem.

Air quality issues span concerns ranging from airshed aesthetics to human health
impacts. Although this environmental problem requires the participation of federal and
provincial governments, business and other institutions, solutions to poor air quality will
also depend upon conscientious individuals and community based action. With an
integrated approach to airshed management, a broader range of solutions are available to
address air quality problems and protect human health and the environment.

Residents of British Columbia have expressed the desire for greater participation
in local decision making about environmental resources and want to become involved in
the process of sustainability, resource management and decisions impacting the natural

environment (British Columbia Round Table on the Environment and the Economy,
1992). Air pollution is a serious concern and citizens throughout the province have
recognized the need to develop community plans to address this environmental problem.
Those residing in the Greater Vancouver area said in a 1990 "Urban Futures Public
Opinion Survey" that air quality was one of their highest priority concerns which led, in
part, to the implementation of a regional air quality management plan (Greater Vancouver
Regional District, 1994). For those in British Columbia' s "northern capital" Prince
George, poor air quality is also a major issue. In a survey conducted by Michalos (1995)
titled "The Quality of Life in Prince George," air pollution was ranked the third worst
thing about living in Prince George. When asked what they would change to improve the
quality of life in the city, eliminating air pollution was again one of the top three things
indicated (Michalos, 1995). This survey uncovered the growing social concern that
residents of the city have for their air quality.

Addressing problems specific to a particular airshed requires the participation of
provincial and local governments as well as the collective efforts of the community. To
ensure this type of collaboration in addressing Prince George's air quality issues, the
Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee was created in December of
1995. Experts from the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, the Fraser-Fort
George Regional District, the City of Prince George, the University of Northern British
Columbia, the College of New Caledonia, and the Ministry of Health, work together on
this local commission to understand the variables that cause poor air quality and to find
practical solutions to alleviate the problem. The collaborative objective of the committee,

2

indeed the reason for its genesis, is to "guide the preparation and implementation of an air
quality management plan for Prince George and the immediate surrounding area" (Prince
George Airshed Technical Management Committee, 1996).

The air quality problem in Prince George is complex and its severity dependent
upon a number of factors: the local topography and location of the city, season,
meteorological conditions, individual sensitivity to pollutants, degree of industrialization
and the current laws and policies that exist to protect the environment and human health.
Unlike other large B.C. cities of the lower mainland, Prince George's primary airshed
contaminants are derived from industrial sources (e.g., pulp mills, oil refinery) rather than
transportation sources; although residential contributions to local effects of poor air
quality can be significant (Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee,
1996). Therefore, a study focusing on northern attitudes and perceptions is important in
the creation of a management plan that is tailored to meet the city's needs.

Prince George is located approximately 650 kilometers north of Vancouver with a
population of 69,655 (Statistics Canada, 1994b.). Ninety kilometers from the
geographical center of the province, the city is the major center for the northern and
central interior of B.C. The city's economy is dependent primarily on the forest industry
which constitutes about 70% of the total basic income and employs the city's largest
labour force (De Silva and Stewart, 1996). The Prince George Forest District is the top
producer of forest products in B.C., grossing twice as much as any other district in the
province (Prince George Region Development Corporation, 1994). Prince George also

3

has the highest densities of pulpmills in the province with three in total (Sinclair, 1990).
Other secondary industries include mining, producing chemical products and oil refining.
Prince George is also known as the center for commercial, wholesale and distribution
services for the central interior.

The city of Prince George is situated in a flat, river valley at the confluence of the
Fraser and Nechako Rivers. Over half of the city's population resides in this valley which
is surrounded by mountains and commonly referred to as the "bowl" of Prince George.
The mountains, or the sides of the "bowl," can dramatically reduce wind speeds. Calm
winds and frequent temperature inversions, along with the topography of the city, can
result in poor mixing conditions that lead to unacceptable ambient levels of contaminants.
Pollutants get trapped in the "bowl" area of the city because they can not escape the
valley and the risk to human health and other effects increases with the length of exposure
to these high levels of pollution. These high levels can lead to an "air quality episode"
which occurs when the concentration of a pollutant exceeds the provincial air quality
objective (guideline established to protect human health and the environment from the
negative effects of a pollutant) and rises above acceptable levels for an extended period of
time (Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee, 1996).

Fine particulates (PM 10) and Total Reduced Sulphur (TRS) have been identified
as priority contaniinants by the Airshed Technical Management Committee (see Table 1,
Appendix A for a description of these pollutants). In 1995, Prince George experienced
nine air quality episodes for PM 10 throughout the year and TRS air quality episodes

4

occurred on sixty-five days of the year. Reductions of PM 10 and TRS emissions are
required if the air quality objectives for these two contaminants are to be achieved. The
major sources of these pollutants are industrial sources, although the contribution of
mobile road dust to PM 10 levels is uncertain, indicating the need to address mobile
sources in addition to industrial sources. Other pollutants monitored in the city (e.g.,
ozone, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide) never exceeded air quality objectives in
1995, although without proper management and planning, increases in population and
industry could cause problems with these pollutants as well (Prince George Airshed
Technical Management Committee, 1996).

Earlier health studies conducted in the city have been inconclusive. A 1986 health
study showed a small but clear association between emergency room visits and incidences
of high TRS, but a later 1991 study reported the opposite effect. The researchers
concluded that using the number of visits to the emergency room at the Prince George
Regional Hospital was not a sensitive enough indicator due to the comparatively small
size of the population (Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee, 1996).
It is unfortunate that these studies do not shed light on the fact that the Northern Interior
Health Unit, which includes Prince George, ranks second in the province for death rates
and respiratory mortality rates, with respiratory disease rates 30-50% higher than those
expected for the area (Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee, 1996).

Until another health study is conducted in Prince George, findings from recent
provincial health studies will be used to shed light on the consequences of poor air quality

5

to human health. For example, it has been estimated that increases in PM 10 pollution
cause 82 extra deaths in BC every year, 69 extra hospitalizations for lung disorders and
283 extra emergency room visits for asthma; as well having large impacts on activity
restriction, school absenteeism and respiratory symptoms (Vedal, 1995). As more is
understood about the dynamics of air pollution and its consequences to human health,
concerns over the social, environmental, economic and political aspects of poor air
quality will demand attention.

One of the first goals of the Airshed Technical Management Committee was to
draft a background report that would systematically identify management objectives and
priorities and help in the design of an airshed management strategy. Historically, public
participation and consultation has usually been sought after policy decisions by
authorities are made, generating little to no social commitment to environmental causes
because the concerns of affected citizens were not considered (Commission on Resources
and Environment, 1995). Recognizing that British Columbians want to become more
intimately involved in local decision and policy making processes that lead to impacts on
the environment in which they live (British Columbia Round Table on the Environment
and the Economy, 1992), the Airshed Technical Management Committee advocated that
the final selection of actions to be recommended to government decision makers for
policy development should be done only after the incorporation of public input into the
management plan. This advocacy ensures that those who will receive the benefits, or bear
the costs, of management actions are consulted and that all relevant issues and priorities
have been identified and discussed (Prince George Airshed Technical Management

6

Committee, 1996). The background report recommends the following consultative
approaches be used to gather public input:

•
•
•

a public opinion survey
media advertising
open houses and workshops

The public opinion survey was designated to be the first step used to gather public
input on air quality issues and is the impetus for this study. Information collected from
the study will help guide the organization of the subsequent consultative steps in the
management process (Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee, 1996).
The survey results will also help to provide the framework required by the Prince George
Airshed Technical Management Committee to select management priorities for the city's
air quality management plan.

7

2.0 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

This study was designed primarily to determine public perceptions of air quality in
the Prince George airshed and issues surrounding air quality management. Some of the
major issues formulated by the committee that could help guide policy development,
identify public concerns and provide public input into the management plan were:

•

Are residents satisfied with air quality in the city?

•

How informed do citizens feel about air quality issues?

•

How does air quality rate as a priority in the community?

•

What are perceptions of sources of poor air quality?

•

What are the impacts of residential wood-burning on the airshed?

•

What pollution-reducing activities are the citizens of Prince George most willing
to participate in?

•

How do residents think public education could be improved?

•

What are the local impacts of poor air quality?

•

What are the implications of public perceptions to management and policy?
In addition, by using a questionnaire to provide answers to the above questions,

this research will assist the Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee to:

•

Determine whether public perception of air quality issues reflect problems
perceived by airshed managers.

8

•

Encourage a broad public partnership between community, government, health
and social scientists, as well as environmental researchers.

•

Increase public awareness concerning an environmental issue that directly
impacts every citizen residing within the local community.

•

Help to set standards for decision making procedures and policy development
in other northern communities.

•

Provide a means for management planning of a community issue through
community based action.

Most importantly, this study will contribute to an integrated policy making
procedure that will improve the quality of life for Prince George area residents. Survey
findings will be used by the committee to ensure that significant trends in opinion have
been identified and discussed for incorporation into the management plan. Results will
also be used by the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks to assist in completing a
residential woodburning emissions inventory for the Prince George airshed. Additionally,
it is believed that these findings and the advertisement of the publicly shaped Air Quality
Management Plan will encourage Prince George residents to actively participate in a
process they helped to create through their combined responses to survey questions from
this study.

9

3.0 METHODOLOGY

An initial draft of the survey was first designed in the spring of 1996. Survey
questions were formatted employing Likert-type scales, yes/no responses and open-ended
answers. Likert scaling, developed by sociologist Rensis Likert, is a measurement
technique based on the use of standardized response categories such as "strongly agree"
to "strongly disagree" (Babbie, 1995). Questions from the survey spanned a variety of
issues concerning air quality and included questions under the following six section
headings:
•

public satisfaction with current air quality

•

air quality as a priority in the community

•

perceptions of sources of air pollutants to identify unknown sources and
problems

•

woodstove and fireplace inventory

•

willingness to participate in source reduction and alternatives (i.e. carpooling,
restricted backyard burning) to reduce local effects of poor air quality and
mobile sources of road dust

•

demographic questions

A short form questionnaire derived from the survey was piloted at the Ministry of
Environment, Lands and Parks information booth during Environment Week at a local
shopping mall. One hundred and six members of the greater Prince George area
responded to the survey. Survey data were analyzed to identify the relevancy of issues
posed to respondents and to test question formatting. General information and

10

suggestions for additional questions were also gathered. Following analysis of
respondent comments, amendments were made to the pilot survey. Technical terms that
the general public was not familiar with were removed which made the questionnaire
more "user-friendly." A finalized draft entitled "Survey on Public Perceptions of
Outdoor Air Quality Issues in the City of Prince George" was formalized in November
of 1996.

The formalized survey was conducted from November 23, 1996 to December 10,
1996. In order to determine the social attitudes towards air quality of the Prince George
population at large, five hundred residents from the greater Prince George area were
selected at random for participation in the survey. Participants were selected through the
employment of systematic sampling procedures outlined in Babbie (1995) using the 1996
Prince George telephone directory (sampling interval =45). Participants were asked to
volunteer approximately fifteen minutes of their time to answer fifty-three questions.
Upon agreement to participate in the survey, each respondent was guaranteed that the
answers and comments they made were strictly confidential and that the design of the
study ensured that individual phone numbers were in no way linked to the corresponding
survey. Upon completion of data analysis, the original surveys were shredded.

Calls were made throughout the day and from 7-9 pm in the evenings. Residential
phone numbers were repeatedly called (up to five attempts per household) until residents
were reached and either consented or objected to survey participation. Overall, the nonresponse rate was 30.1 %, with the largest proportion of non-response consisting of those

11

contacts who were unwilling to participate in the survey (27 .7% ). Other telephone
surveys have had similar refusal rates (Lavrakas, 1993). It is possible that a certain
segment of the population could have disproportionately refused to participate in the
survey or were more likely to not be at home. This could have resulted in a loss of
representativeness from a portion of the population from which no data were gathered.
Therefore, it is important to look at the sample characteristics to determine if major
segments of the population are missing in the sample.

Using Appendix G ofBabbie (1995) with a sample of 500 respondents, the
estimated sampling error for this survey ranges from± 2.7 to± 5.0 percentage points at
the 95% level of confidence and this range should be used as a guiding principle to
estimate the approximate accuracy of any given result. In addition to sampling error,
other potential sources of bias and imprecision affect the accuracy of results and these
additional sources of error are discussed throughout the text of this paper.

Since the sampling frame for this survey on perceptions of air quality was chosen
from a telephone directory, it is important to note the bias inherent in this type of survey
methodology. Those citizens of Prince George who did not have a telephone, were new
subscribers or who had an unlisted number were automatically excluded from the sample.
Results are subject to the potential effects of this type error when generalizing to the
entire population as the conclusions drawn from this survey will only be applicable to
those Prince George citizens who had a number that could be reached. In general, those
citizens who cannot be reached via the telephone have lower incomes than the population

12

with telephones; therefore, any telephone survey is likely to find somewhat higher levels
of income-related behaviors among its participants than exists in the overall population
(Lavrakas, 1993). The loss of representativeness from this type of sampling methodology
is one of many trade-offs inherent in survey research and must be considered, in addition
to sampling error, when extrapolating to the larger population.

3.1 Sample Characteristics

Five hundred completed surveys formed the working data set for this study. On
the whole, in comparison with city demographics and the 1991 census, the sample
achieved a high degree of representativeness. Out of the five hundred respondents, twohundred and seventy-five (55.0%) were female and two hundred and twenty-five (45.0%)
were male. From Figure 1, the age distribution of survey respondents and the age
distribution of residents of the city of Prince George are relatively comparable following a
similar bell-shaped population curve (n=498).

13

30
Cl)

25

~
.J:.

CJ

as
Cl)

20

r:::

~

'j; ~
~ g, 15
C..cu

~

Ill

0

Cl)

CJ

10

Cl

as

c
~

t
D.

5
0

16-19

20-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

60+

Age categories (in years)

Figure 1. Age distribution of survey respondents (n=498) in comparison to the 1991
Census data for Prince George (Statistics Canada, 1994b.). Note: 1991 Census
data for the "16-19" age category also include those persons 15 years of age.

Approximately 75% of respondents (only 494 answered the residency question)
have lived in the Prince George area for over 5 years. The average length of residency
was 16 years with a range of 1 year or less to 59 years. This distribution is important
because of the way it links to critical dates in the city's history. For example, just over
ten years ago, the pulpmills introduced new pollution control technology to reduce TRS
emissions from their effluent ponds. Residents who have lived in Prince George before
that time would have a different experience with the air quality than more recent arrivals
to the city. Major improvements to air quality were made, which resulted in decreasing
the number of times per year the city experienced occurrences of the "rotten egg" odour.

14

Table 1. Length of residency in the Prince George area.
Range of Years lived in
Prince George n=494
1-5
6-10
11-20
21+

Percent of
Respondents
24.3
15.8
23.1
36.7

In addition, respondents were asked what neighborhood they lived in to assess the
geographic representativeness of the sample. Table 2 displays the population estimates
for different sectors of the city (Pateman, 1996) and the surrounding communities
(McEachen, 1996) compared to survey demographics. Four hundred and ninety-seven
people responded with 55.2% living in the bowl area (including Cranbrook Hill), 19.0%
resided in the North section of the city (Hart Highlands, North Nechako), 14.8% in the
Southwest area (College Heights, Parkridge Heights), 8.6% in the East (Blackburn,
Pineview) and 2.4% in surrounding communities of Prince George (Beaverly, Miworth).

Table 2. Comparison of survey demographics with Prince George City population
estimates for neighborhood residence.
Area of Prince George
n=497
Bowl
North
Southwest
East
Surrounding Communities

Percent of
Population
54.0
20.9
15.6
7.6
1.8

Percent of
Respondents
55.2
19.0
14.8
8.6
2.4

As for educational level, almost thirty percent of respondents had completed high
school with an additional 56% who reported they had some post-secondary education or

15

had completed post-secondary education (see Table 3). In comparison to city
demographics, the sample had almost twice as many high school graduates, more
respondents (14.5% more) who had some post-secondary education and was less
representative of those whose last level of education was elementary school and some
high school.

Table 3. Comparison of educational level of survey respondents and population of
Prince George.
Educational Level
n=491
Elementary school
Some high school
Completed high school
Some post-secondary education
Completed post-secondary education

Percent of
Population
9.4
28.7
15.6
17.5
28.9

Percent of
Respondents
.61
13.4
29.5
31.9
24.4

Survey respondents were also asked to state their occupation. Seventy-nine
different occupations (from 491 responses) were recorded and broken down into
categories adopted from the 1980 Standard Occupational Classification system (Statistics
Canada, 1994a.). Table 4 compares percentages of occupations from the sample and the
population of Prince George and Table 5 breaks down the category "Not in the Labour
Force" from Table 4. Teaching and related occupations were over-represented in the
survey sample (by 4.3%) while Clerical and Sales and Service occupations were slightly
under-represented (Prince George Region Development Corporation, 1994). Those
persons who stated that they owned their own business were categorized separately
because the field of their work was unknown which could explain why some of the
occupations are slightly under-represented.

16

It should be noted that errors can occur when classifying occupations.

Occupational duties and responsibilities can overlap causing a conflict as to which
category an occupation should be placed. The information summarized on occupations
should be viewed with discretion and is being used in this study to assess sample
representativeness in general terms.

Table 4. Comparison of occupations of survey respondents and population of Prince
George (Adopted from the 1980 Standard Occupational Classification system,
Statistics Canada, 1991a).
Occupational Category
n=491
Managerial, Administrative and Related
Teaching and Related
Medicine and Health
Technological, Social, Religious and Artistic
Clerical
Sales and Service
Primary and Processing
Machining, Product Fabrication, Assembling, Repairing
Construction
Transportation
Other
Own business
Not in the Labour Force

Percent of
Population
6.0
3.4
3.3
4.7
12.9
17.5
8.1
5.9
5.2
4.3
3.4
N/A
25.1

Percent of
Respondents
4.3
7.7
5.1
7.1
8.9
13.6
7.3
4.5
3.1
3.3
3.1
5.3
26.7

Note: This table includes data for those persons 15 years and older in the labour force and those
persons 15 years and older not in the labour force. Occupational data for the city provided by the
Prince George Region Development Corporation (1994).

Table 5. Breakdown of respondents categorized "Not in the labour force" from Table 4.
Participants "not in the labour force"
n=131
Students
Housewives
Retired
Unemployed
Volunteer

Percent of "not in the
labour force"
41.9
29.0
20.6
6.2
2.3

17

In comparison with city demographics and the 1991 census, the survey achieved a
high degree of representativeness on the whole. According to the 1991 census, 49.6% of
the city's residents (15-60+ years of age) were female which corresponds well with
survey results. Age distribution was also similar and respondents were distributed
proportionally in relation to city and regional population estimates. Those more educated
were over-represented in the survey sample, which could indirectly be a result of the
sampling methodology as those with higher incomes (who therefore are more likely to
have a telephone) tend to be more educated (Lavrakas, 1993). In addition, respondents
with an educational vocation may have had a greater willingness to participate in a
research project, resulting in that factor being over-represented in the sample as well.

18

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The following discussion highlights the main findings and trends identified from
the survey analysis. Section headings follow the original questionnaire format which
were created to determine perceptions of air quality issues that could have management
implications for the city.

4.1

Public Satisfaction with Air Quality and Public Awareness of
Air Quality Issues
The first section of the survey on "Public Satisfaction with Air Quality" used a 5

point Likert-type scale where respondents were asked if they strongly agreed, agreed,
were neutral, disagreed, or strongly disagreed to five statements assessing overall
satisfaction with the outdoor air quality in the city over the past year. The purpose of this
section was to find out if residents thought there was a problem with the air quality in the
city and to measure the extent to which they perceived the problem existed. Awareness
of issues concerning air quality was also addressed in this section to determine how
informed the general public felt on the issues. For a complete breakdown of responses in
percentages for this section of the results, please refer to Exhibits 1-7 of Appendix C.

When asked directly if respondents were satisfied with the outdoor air quality over
the past year, 65% of the 500 respondents surveyed disagreed or strongly disagreed with
being satisfied with the condition of the airshed. Looking at differences in satisfaction
with air quality between men and women, more women were dissatisfied with the quality

19

than men. Approximately 75% of women disagreed or strongly disagreed when they
were asked if they were satisfied with air quality compared to approximately 54% of male
respondents. Age of survey participants did not seem to factor into this issue as responses
were similarly distributed across age groups. As for location in the city, those
respondents who lived in the "bowl" area of Prince George were the least satisfied with
air quality. Seventy-one percent of respondents who lived in the "bowl" disagreed or
strongly disagreed to being satisfied with air quality compared to 59.5% from the North
and 54.7% from the Southwest. Other areas (e.g., East and Surrounding Communities) ·
were not analyzed due to the relatively small numbers of respondents from those
'

locations. Finally, looking at length of residency in the city, respondents who have lived
in Prince George eleven years or more reported that they were more satisfied with air
quality (by about 14%) than respondents who had been here ten years or less.

A majority of respondents (71%) agreed or strongly agreed that the outdoor air
quality in the city affected their quality of life. Additionally, over fifty percent of
respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they should personally make changes to
improve the air quality in Prince George, although 24.4% of responses were "neutral."
This finding could possibly suggest that many people still feel unsure about committing
to actions that might affect their personal life and level of convenience.

When survey respondents were asked if they thought that their health had been
negatively impacted as a result of the outdoor air quality in the city the response was
equivocal with 39.4% agreeing or strongly agreeing and 39.2% disagreeing or strongly

20

disagreeing. This result might reflect a low awareness on the health impacts of air
pollutants and the fact that some people felt poor air quality is more of a nuisance rather
than a serious health concern. Looking at gender differences, more women than men
(approximately 10% more) thought that their health had been negatively impacted by
poor air quality. Respondents who were 40 years of age or more also reported that they
felt their health had been negatively impacted compared to respondents who were 39 and
younger. Of those participants who thought that their health had been impacted, results
suggested that as age increased, so did the percentage who agreed or strongly agreed to
the statement that their health had been negatively impacted. It is interesting to note that
only 5.7% of respondents who were 50 years old or older were "neutral" compared to
25.9% of the 16 to 29 year olds who responded "neutral" to the question. This finding
could suggest that it is possible the younger generation is not as concerned or aware of the
short and long-term health impacts of poor air quality.

Residential location also affected respondent perceptions of negative health
impacts of poor air quality. Those respondents who lived in the North section of Prince
George felt that their health was less impacted by poor air quality than those who lived in
the "bowl" or in the Southwest part of town. Only 29.7% of respondents who lived in the
North agreed or strongly agreed that their health had been negatively impacted compared
to 40.2% from the "bowl" area and 44.2% from the Southwest section of the city. Length
of residency in Prince George was also a factor. Of those respondents who have lived in
the city 21 years or more, almost half (48.9%) agreed or strongly agreed that their health
had been negatively impacted compared to 37.5% of those who lived in Prince George 1-

21

5 years, 33.3% of respondents in the city 6-10 years and 32.5% in Prince George 11-20
years.

Next, respondents were asked if they thought the outdoor air quality in Prince
George was getting better. Over half of the 500 people asked (53.4%) disagreed or
strongly disagreed with the question, with 19.8 %responding "neutral." Looking at
gender differences, more women (59.6%) than men (45.8%) disagreed or strongly
disagreed to the statement that the air quality was getting better. Where respondents lived
in the city, and their age, did not seem to dictate whether or not they thought the air
quality was getting better. However, those who were between the ages of 16 to 29 were
twice as likely to respond "neutral" to the statement (13.1% to 16.9% higher than
participants who were older). Again, it could be that a proportion of the younger
generation in the city is not sure or is unaware of issues concerning air quality. It is
interesting to note that survey participants who lived in Prince George eleven years or
longer generally thought that the air quality was getting better compared to more recent
arrivals. This finding could be due to the fact that in the late 1980's, reductions of
effluent pond emissions (primary source of TRS) from the pulpmills in Prince George
were made, causing a decline in the number of times TRS emissions exceeded air quality
objectives (Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee 1996).

The next two questions in the survey addressed public awareness of air quality
issues. First, respondents were asked to indicate the degree to which they felt informed

22

on air quality issues and 76.4% responded feeling only "somewhat" informed. This sense
of feeling only somewhat informed could account for neutral responses where some
people felt like they did not have enough information to comment. The last question in
this section asked respondents if they had heard about air quality advisories which are
warnings issued by the province when air contaminants exceed air quality objectives for
an extended period of time. Over half (54.4%) of the people surveyed had heard the
warning through the radio with an additional 16% who received the information through
the television and 12% through the newspaper. It should be noted that attempts to
increase awareness on air quality issues should be made through these media avenues,
especially the radio. According to survey results, only 6.8% of survey respondents were
unaware of the last air quality advisory issued by the Ministry of Environment, Lands and
Parks (4.6% could not remember) which demonstrated that if information on air quality is
made available through the media, most citizens were aware of it.

In general, survey results suggested that residents were not satisfied with the air

quality in the city (65%), they felt that it was not going to get better (53.4%) and that it
affected their quality of life (71.2%). On the whole, more women than men were not
satisfied with air quality as well as those who were more recent arrivals and participants
who lived in the "bowl" area of the city. Although there was strong agreement among
respondents, these results are subject to various potential sources of error since not all
data are accurate measures of the phenomenon of interest (Lavrakas, 1993). Defining
indicators to represent a concept such as air quality is a difficult process because what
defines the concept for one individual does not necessarily work for another. This

23

introduces a measurement problem and the reliability and validity of the results can be
diminished. Providing several indicators to measure a concept can help reduce the
severity of this problem because there is a higher chance that respondents can relate to at
least one of the indicators when defining the concept in their minds (de Vaus, 1991 ). In
this section, several indicators were used to assess overall satisfaction with air quality
(e.g., quality of life, health impacts) to make conclusions on perceptions towards air
quality in general.

4.2 Air Quality as a Priority in the Community

This section of the survey asked respondents to comment on whether or not they
thought the six issues listed in Table 6 were important to the community. Respondents
scored each issue individually on a scale of 1 through 10, where "1" was not important,
"5" was in between and "1 0" was very important (percentages in the second to last
column represent participants who responded "don't know"). For example, referring to
Table 6, 15.6% of the five hundred respondents thought that unemployment scored a "7"
on a scale of "1-10," 25.8% gave it an "8," etc., which indicated that those respondents
thought this issue was relatively important to the community (total for each row= 100%
of respondents). This information was requested from participants to assist policymakers in supporting issues that are perceived to be important to the residents of the city.
With this information, the allocation of time and resources can reflect the needs of the
community as a whole.

24

Table 6. Percent of respondents scoring each community issue on a scale from "1" to
"1 0" to indicate the importance of the issue to the community.
~

.[rom "1" to "10":

<.Not ime.ortant>

<In between>

~ ime.ortant>

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

10

Don't Total
know

Crime Prevention

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

4.2

2.4

6.8

17.2 18.2 49.0

0.6 =100

Unemployment

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.4

5.2

5.2

15.6 25 .8 16.0 31.0

0.2

Air Quality

0.8

0.0

1.4

1.8

7.6

5.4

17.2 22.6 17.6 25.4

0.2 =100

Road Maintenance/
Snow Removal
Downtown Renewal

0.2

0.4

1.0

1.0

11.2

7.2

17.4 27.2 12.8 21.2

0.4

=100

4.8

3.8

5.6

10.0 16.6 12.6 15.6

=100

Parks/Recreational
Facilities

0.6

1.4

4.8

3.6

Community Issue
n=500

9

=100

14.0

4.2

11.2

1.6

17.4 23.0 17.6 15.2

4.6

9.8

2.0 =100

As indicated by Table 6, crime prevention appeared to be the most important
community issue. Almost half the respondents gave it a " 10" and nearly 90% gave this
issue an "8" or above. Unemployment received one-third of the responses in the "10"
category, about 70% gave it an "8" or above. Air quality ranked third on this list of issues
with 25% of the responses in the " 10" category and 65% of respondents gave air quality
an "8" or above. Road maintenance and snow removal came in closely behind air quality
with 21% in the "1 0" category and 61% "8" or above. Parks and recreational facilities
and downtown renewal were considered less important in the community on the whole
(about 10% of respondents gave these issues a " 10" and only 30% gave them a "8" or
above). Ranking issues on a scale of this type does introduce a certain amount of error

25

(e.g., how one person defines importance on a scale may not correlate with another
person's definition) so any specific conclusions should be made with discretion.

4.3 Perception of Sources of Outdoor Air Pollution

The following section called for respondents to determine how large a contributor
they thought a particular source of air pollution was to the airshed. There were ten
sources listed and they are displayed in Table 7 along with the results in percentages.
Each source was labeled by respondents as either a small contributor, a medium
contributor or a large contributor to air pollution in the city. For example, Table 7
indicates that 34.4% of the five hundred respondents thought road dust was a small
contributor, 41.6% thought it was a medium contributor, 22.6% thought it was a large
contributor and 1.4% did not know (for a total of 100% ). In addition to the sources listed
in the table, respondents were given the opportunity to identify additional sources of air
contaminants. Eleven additional sources were identified by respondents and those
sources can be found in Exhibit 8, Appendix B. The purpose of this section was to
potentially identify unknown sources of air pollution and to generate a data set that would
help the Airshed Committee analyze the local impacts of poor air quality and examine
whether or not perceived sources of poor air quality reflected actual source contributions
in the emissions inventory. This information can also provide insight into the areas
where there are opportunities for increased public education on air quality issues.

26

Table 7. Percent of respondents perceiving each source of air pollution as a small
contributor, a medium contributor or a large contributor to poor air quality.
List of Air Pollution Sources:
n=SOO
The pulp mills
Exhaust from vehicles
Beehive burners
The oil refinery
Road dust
Slash burning or burning from land clearing
W oodstoves and wood fireplaces
Backyard burning
Exhaust from small engines (e.g., lawnmower)
The railroads

SMALL

MED.

LARGE

Don't
Know

Total

1.4
3.8
11.0
7.4
34.4
37.8
43.4
62.4
67.8
50.6

12.4
32.4
22.0
35.8
41.6
36.2
41.6
27.4
25.0
32.8

86.0
63.2
59.6
42.6
22.6
21.4
13.4
9.2
4.6
4.4

0.2
0.6
7.4
14.2
1.4
4.6
1.6
1.0
2.6
12.2

=100
=100
=100
=100
=100
=100
=100
=100
=100
=100

There is a strong general agreement (86%) that the pulp mills in Prince George are
thought to be large contributors of air pollution to the airshed. The next largest source
identified was exhaust from vehicles (63.2%), followed by beehive burners (59.6%) and
then the oil refinery (42.6% ). Three of the four largest perceived sources were industrial
and when respondents were asked if they believed that the outdoor industrial air
emissions in Prince George were adequately regulated, 38.0% said yes they were, while
48.6% believed that they were not adequately regulated (13.4% said they did not know).
Several people added that it was not the regulations themselves that needed refinement,
but it was the enforcement of those regulations that needed more support. With the
degree of industrialization in the city, these results are not surprising but the fact that
exhaust from vehicles was perceived to be a large contributor is interesting in the sense
that, although vehicles are not the primary polluters in the city, the awareness of their
potentially increasing impact on the airshed is apparent.

27

Comparing perceptions of sources of air pollution to actual emissions from the
emissions inventory for the Prince George airshed show that the residents of the city have
a good idea about where sources of air pollution originate. From the "Estimated
Emissions Inventory for Prince George," permitted sources (industries that release
contaminants under a permit from the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks "Waste
Management Act") account for 81% of PM 10 emissions (not including road dust) and
94% of emissions of sulphur dioxide, which is formed from the incineration of TRS
(Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee, 1996). Respondents
identified the pulpmills, beehive burners and the oil refinery as large contributors to poor
air quality and all three are permitted sources. Exhaust from vehicles was also identified
as a large contributor of air pollution, but according to the emissions inventory, only three
percent of PM 10 and six percent of sulphur dioxide comes from exhaust. It is the
contribution of mobile road dust that seems to be more of a problem caused by vehicles
than exhaust emissions. High levels of PM 10 may be caused by the mobilization of fine
silt associated with winter street sanding and elevated hourly levels have occurred during
high traffic periods in late February and March (Prince George Airshed Technical
Management Committee, 1996).

In order to help identify local effects of air pollution, respondents were asked if
they had ever experienced poor outdoor air quality in their neighborhood in the past year.
Seventy-six percent stated that they had experienced poor air quality and 430 descriptions
were collected and categorized. By far, most people (69%) complained about a strong,
unpleasant odor. These occurrences are not uncommon to Prince George as exceedances

28

of the Level A and Level B Objective for Total Reduced Sulphur, responsible for the
"rotten-egg" sulphur smell, typically occur in the fall and winter. Other effects of poor air
quality described locally were smoke (from burning wood, garbage or leaves), haze,
particulates like road dust, residues on cars, smoky emissions from cars and chemical
spills (See Exhibit 9, Appendix B for a complete breakdown of these responses in
percentages).

Although gender did not seem to dictate whether or not respondents experienced
poor air quality in their neighborhood (only 7.6% more women than men had experienced
poor air quality), age of respondents, how long they have lived in the city and where their
neighborhood was located were factors that seemed to affect responses. Contrary to
previous trends, a higher percentage of respondents who were 39 years of age and
younger had experienced poor air quality than those who were 40 and above.
Approximately 80% of 16-39 year olds said they experienced some type of air quality
problem in their area compared to 73.5% of 40-49 year olds and about 68% of those
respondents who were 50 and older. Recent arrivals in the city (between one and five
years) were also more affected by poor air quality in their neighborhood than residents
who have lived in Prince George six years or longer. Looking at location of residence, a
higher percentage of those who lived in the "bowl" area of Prince George (88.4%)
experienced poor air quality compared to the North (68.9%) and the Southwest (57.9%)
sections of the city. On the whole, the downtown area (or "bowl") is the most affected by
poor air quality from TRS emissions, especially the residential areas closest to the Fraser
River where the pulpmill effluent ponds are located. For PM 10 , all monitoring stations

29

located in the "bowl" are equally affected, but the Southwest area can be as well (Prince
George Airshed Technical Management Committee, 1996). Currently, there is not a
monitoring station located in the North section of Prince George so actual levels of
pollutants in this area is unknown.

In addition to requesting information on the occurrence of poor air quality in the
neighborhood, respondents were also asked to comment on how they thought this poor air
quality affected them. There were three-hundred and eighty responses recorded which
ranged from "no significant effect" to one respondent who attributed a heart attack to air
pollution. Referring to Table 8, over half (56%) complained of direct health effects
(lower and upper respiratory effects, poor health in general and other) experienced as a
result of poor air quality in their neighborhood. Many respondents commented on the
psychological effects caused by air pollution and the restricted behavior that results from
trying to avoid exposure to the "polluted downtown area." On the whole, there was a
sense of worry and stress when it came to discussing this topic.

30

Table 8. Percentage of respondents describing the effects experienced as a result of poor
air quality in neighborhoods.
Description of Health Effects
n=380
Lower respiratory effects (adults and children): asthma, bronchitis,
difficulty_ breathing in general
Causes psychological effects: dislike, discomfort, annoyance, bothers
me, embarrassment, depression, its offensive, a nuisance, inconvenience
Poor health in general: cancer, respiratory disease, long term effects,
shortens life expectancy
Upper respiratory effects: allergy symptoms, sinuses, makes eyes and
nose water, itch and/or run
Do not know, not sure
Affects activity/ ability to work
Do not know, but are sure it can not be good
Other health effects: headaches, skin rashes, nausea, heart attacks
No significant effect
Reduces visibility
Aesthetics: dirty, bad for business and tourism

Percent of
Responses

27.3

17.0
13.4

11.0
9.8
5.8
4.7
4.3
2.7
2.2
1.8

4.4 Woodstove and Fireplace Inventory

The information from this section of the survey will be used by the Ministry of
Environment, Lands and Parks to assist in completing a residential woodburning
emissions inventory for the Prince George airshed. Additionally, data collected on woodstove usage will help the Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee
select the appropriate management strategy to deal with the local effects of woodsmoke.

Sixty-nine (13.8%) out of the five hundred people surveyed had a wood-stove on
their property. When wood-stove owners were asked if they used their wood-stove as

31

their main source of heat, 23 .2% reported that they did, while 14.5% said they used it as a
main source of heat "sometimes." Wood-stove use during the months of October to
March varied with 11.6% who used their stove once a week, 15.9% used it several times
a week, 33.3% reported using their stove every day, 18.8% never used their stove, and
14.5% reported occasional use (5.8% were not sure). The average age of woodstoves was
9.4 years (standard deviation= 5.4), with a range of 1 to 22 years. Owners were also
asked to estimate how much wood they burned in their woodstove in a year. Wood
burned ranged from 0 cords to 15 cords per year with the average wood burned in
woodstoves being about 2 cords per year.

One hundred and seventeen respondents out of 500 (23.4%) stated that they had a
wood-burning fireplace. Fireplace use during the months of October to March ranged
from less than one percent who reported every day use, approximately thirty percent
reported occasional use, to almost half who said they never used their fireplace. Fireplace
owners were also asked to estimate how much wood they burned and, of those who
burned wood and could make an approximate estimation (17.9%), wood use ranged from
one tenth of a cord to three cords with most people saying they burned about one cord of
wood in their fireplace in a year.

Thirty- six (7.2%) of the 500 people surveyed own a wood-burning fireplace
insert. For a complete breakdown of fireplace insert usage, age and amount of wood
burned, please refer to Exhibit 10 of Appendix B.

32

For management purposes, respondents were asked if they supported restricting
wood burning in the city if it would improve air quality. Sixty-six percent stated that they
supported restricting wood burning "if' it would improve the air quality (about 5% said
they did not know). With the inventory information collected in this study, the Ministry
of Environment, Lands and Parks will be able to more accurately assess the contribution
of residential wood burning to the airshed and to call for measures to reduce the impact of
woodsmoke if deemed necessary.

4.5 Transportation Issues

Information on local modes of transportation derived from this section of the
survey was collected to assist airshed managers address the impacts that mobile sources
can have on the airshed and to identify alternatives to the use of personal vehicles.
Questions in this section included asking respondents how they got around town, what
would they do if they did not have their car for the day and if they would support a
vehicle emissions inspection program if it would help to improve the air quality in the
city.

Out of 500 respondents, 87.2% use a personal vehicle as their primary form of
transportation. When asked what they would do if they did not have their vehicle for a
day, 24.1% of the respondents opted to stay at home. Carpooling was the next popular
choice (20.2%), followed by taking the bus (19.0%) and then walking (16.6%). Other

33

respondents said they would take a taxi (8.4%) or use a bicycle (6.9%) if they did not
have their car. The remaining responses were found in the "other" category where 3.6%
of surveyed residents would borrow or use their second car and 1.3% would rent a vehicle
if they did not have their car for the day. These results indicate a high reliance on the
automobile, possibly because of the extreme weather conditions residents experience over
the long winter which can make alternative forms of transportation undesirable.

When the four hundred and thirty-six respondents who were personal vehicle
users in Prince George were asked if they would be willing to put their car through an
emission inspection once a year if it would improve the outdoor air quality here, 87.8%
said they would be willing to do so. An emission control program implemented in Prince
George could be one proactive strategy that significantly reduces the impacts of pollutants
from mobile sources. The implementation of such a program that has community support
could be an efficient method used to alleviate some of the current and future
transportation problems.

Sixty-four respondents did not use a personal vehicle to get around town. The
following distribution in Figure 2 displays the modes of transportation used instead of a
personal vehicle. Over half (52%) depended upon public transportation to get around
town. Another 19% of respondents walked as their primary form of transit with others
bicycling, carpooling or using a taxi to get around the city.

34

Percent of respondents

Carpool
10%

Taxi

4%

Other
1%

Bicycle

14%

Public Transportation
52%

19%

Figure 2. Percentage of respondents (n=64) utilizing various modes of transportation
other than a personal vehicle.

4.6

Public Participation and Education
The first topic in this section focused upon the respondent's willingness to

participate in five activities that could possibly improve the outdoor air quality in Prince
George. Secondly, respondents were asked to comment on what things they thought
could be done to improve public education on air quality issues. Support of these
measures could lead to campaigns to promote pollution-reduction activities in the city
while increasing public education as well.

The following table summarizes the responses to the first topic of the section,
public willingness to participate in pollution-reducing activities. A list of pollutionreducing activities was given to respondents and they commented on whether they were

35

"very willing," "somewhat willing" or "not willing" to participate in each activity (the
second to the last column indicated the percent of respondents who stated "don't know").

Table 9. Percent of survey respondents indicating their willingness to personally
participate in five activities that could possibly improve the outdoor air quality
in Prince George.

Activity
n=500
Stop backyard and lawn burning
Carpool
Walk
Bicycle
Use public transportation

VERY
WILLING

SOMEWHAT
WILLING

NOT
WILLING

68.9
54.6
51.8
45.4
29.7

20.5
33.1
32.2
24.0
36.6

10.2
11 .5
16.0
30.4
33.4

Don't
Know
0.4
0.4
0.0
0.2
0.2

TOTAL

=100
=100
=100
=100
=100

By far, most respondents were "very willing" to stop backyard and lawn burning
(68.9% ). Over half were also very willing to carpool, as well as to walk, if it would
improve the air quality in the city. The least popular activities from Table 9 were
bicycling and using public transportation. Approximately one-third of the people
surveyed said they were not willing to participate in those two activities. These results
are not surprising as many people commented on the impracticality of using the bus or a
bicycle as a means of transportation and criticized the city for not supporting these
activities better. Additionally, Prince George' s harsh winter climate could be a strong
deterrent to using these alternate forms of transportation.

It is important to note that using this information for management strategies has
limitations. There are many factors that can affect an individual's willingness to
participate in activities that could reduce air pollution. Babbie ( 1995) explains that

36

"social desirability" is a common problem in this type of research as respondents may
have a tendency to give the politically correct response to a question rather than answer it
truthfully. Social desirability describes an inherent bias in responses on the account of
human nature as people will answer a question through a filter of what will make them
look good. Everyone wants to look environmentally responsible, so when respondents
were asked if they were willing to participate in activities that could improve air quality,
what they said they were willing to do versus what they actually will do may differ.

The next topic in the survey was an open-ended question which focused on
perceptions of public education and what respondents thought could be done to improve
education on air quality issues. Over three-hundred and fifty suggestions were recorded
on how public education in the city could be improved. Most people (45.7%) suggested
an increase in media coverage and exposure (television, radio, and print) as well as more
advertising on billboards and bus stops. A regular, weekly feature in the local paper with
user friendly language and impartial, accurate reporting on air quality problems and
solutions was requested in addition to an air quality newsletter containing current
information on issues and alternatives. It was also suggested that local television stations
give daily reports on air quality along with the weather and that they encourage openhouse/call-in type programs with experts in the field present to discuss the issues.

The second most popular recommendation was to increase education in schools
(21.3% ). Respondents commented that more focus should be placed on activities that
families can do together to get involved in the issues. Next, 8.6% asked for more

37

education on individual contributions to air pollution and more information on
alternatives and preventative measures. For example, one respondent commented that
information on the impacts of backyard burning and alternatives to burning could be
distributed by the City Fire Department when approvals for burning are requested. About
six percent want public meetings, open houses, town halls, seminars and workshops to be
conducted at local schools, the college or the university. Some said that more
information on specific health effects as well as more research and surveys are needed to
increase awareness and keep people informed on the real consequences that result of poor
air quality in the city.

There was a strong sense of needing to get the public more involved in the
community if public education was to improve. One person commented that more
support and emphasis needs to be placed on events such as "Clean Air Day" to increase
participation. The development of an "Air Pollution Resource Unit" or an information
booth at the mall were recommended as impartial sources of information for citizens.
There were several respondents who said that they did not trust government or industry to
report all the facts so the creation of an independent source could alleviate this concern.

Other respondents (about ten percent) expressed the concern that public education
was not the solution to the air quality problems in Prince George. Most commented that
there was not a need for education because it "does not work, people do not care, and
nothing can be done." Others said that there was "plenty of education, we need more
action" and that "industry should be educated, its not up to the public." The rest of the

38

comments ranged in nature from one respondent who said that "more citizens need to be
motivated to take action against industrial polluters" to another who commented that
"Prince George has to live with industries, people will have to do more on their own."

The last question in the survey asked respondents if there was anything else they
would like to say about the air quality in the city. Two hundred and nineteen people
responded with a total of 264 comments. Again, comments varied greatly demonstrating
concerns from a wide variety of perspectives. Some common trends were:
•

54 respondents (20.5%) said air quality could be improved and to clean it up before it
ruins the city.

•

28 respondents ( 10.6%) said to improve the public transportation system.

•

24 respondents (9 .0%) said that it is bad, they are worried about future and their kids
and wished that there was no pollution.

•

20 respondents (7.6%) said there should be no more industry in the bowl and to cut it
back or fix it.

•

19 respondents (7.2%) felt that their health was being compromised by living here.

•

12 respondents (4.5%) said to stop breaking regulations and put in stricter controls.
These kinds of open ended survey questions and answers gave the public an

opportunity to express opinions they may have had concerning air quality issues that were
not addressed by the standardized survey questions. Such responses also give airshed
managers the opportunity to consider issues that were perhaps previously left
unexamined. There were many other unique comments in response to this question and
they can be found in Exhibit 11 of Appendix B.

39

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By analyzing and addressing the patterns of public response to these questions,
while considering individual arguments, airshed managers now have a framework that
they may use to help determine management strategies and a set of data to assist in the
incorporation of public sentiment into the Air Quality Management Plan. Briefly
highlighted are some of the more salient findings of the survey and the following
conclusions have been made:
•

65% of residents were not satisfied with the air quality in the city.

•

71% agreed or strongly agreed that the air quality affected their quality of life.

>1o- •

76% felt only "somewhat" informed on the issues.

+ • Three of the four largest perceived sources of air pollution in the city originated
from industrial sources.

•

76% of respondents had experienced poor air quality in their neighborhood.

•

13.8% of respondents had a woodstove on their property and 23.4% had a woodburning fireplace.

•

87.2% use a personal vehicle to get around town and of those respondents, 87.8%
would support a vehicle emissions inspection program.

•

To improve the outdoor air quality in the city, respondents were most willing to
stop backyard and lawn burning, to carpool and to walk. They were least willing
to bicycle and to use public transportation.

•

Almost half of the people surveyed stated that increasing media coverage in the
city would help improve public education on air quality issues.

These results suggest that the issue of air quality is important to people living in the
Prince George airshed. Some of the mixed results reported for neighborhoods and other

40

respondent characteristics suggests a further need to record and compare resident
perceptions of air quality issues. For example, surveys may be conducted annually in
conjunction with "Clean Air Day" events in the city. This "triangulation" of results from
different studies will be important in contributing to the continuing evaluation of resident
perceptions of air quality as emissions standards change and public awareness and
education increase. In addition, a continued effort to collaboratively address air quality
issues and concerns in the city should be encouraged and supported by the Prince George
Airshed Technical Management Committee and by the organizations that they represent.

From these conclusions, a number of recommendations can be made. The
recommendations listed below address the need for action with respect to industrial
activity, residential activity and public education.

•

Encourage Pollution Prevention Programs for current and future industry in
Prince George.
Survey respondents perceived industrial sources to be large contributors of

pollutants to the airshed. In addition, 69% of respondents who had experienced poor air
quality in their neighborhood complained of a strong, unpleasant odour which is also
caused by industrial sources. A focus should be placed on measures to reduce emissions
from industries currently operating in Prince George. One option is to replace "end of
pipe" permits with regulations and pollution prevention plans. "Pollution Prevention" is
a concept that means avoiding, eliminating and reducing pollution at the source rather
than treating or containing it after it has been created. It is the most effective and efficient

41

approach to environmental management and will become the fundamental authorization
for major industrial sites in B.C. (B.C. Environment, 1996). This concept highlights the
importance of a preventative approach to maintaining air quality which if taken, could
possibly ameliorate current and future industrial air pollution problems.

•

Voluntary actions to reduce the local effects of woodstove use.
Results from the survey indicate a much lower use of woodstoves, 11.2% (only 56

of the 69 woodstove owners use their stove) versus the provincial average of 38% and
considerably less than rural area figures of 77% (B.C. Environment, 1989). In that case,
any management actions to restrict woodstove use is unlikely. An emphasis should be
placed on voluntary actions, as opposed to regulatory measures, to reduce the local effects
of smoke caused by woodstoves and to reduce woodstove use during episodic periods.

•

A vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance program.

A possible movement towards addressing the contribution of vehicle emissions to
the airshed is the implementation of the lower mainland's AirCare program- a provincial
vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance program that requires all light duty
vehicles to pass an annual emissions inspection as a condition of licensing (Ministry of
Environment, Lands and Parks, 1995). Currently, there are no regulations on tailpipe
emissions in Prince George and serious reductions of carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide,
nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons and particulates could be made with an emissions control
program.

42

Since its introduction in 1992, the AirCare program has had the single largest
impact of any measure in reducing vehicle emissions in the lower mainland (Ministry of
Environment, Lands and Parks, 1995) and a 1994 Radian Corporation audit of the
program found it to be one of the most effective programs currently in operation
(Mennell, 1995). Although the proportion of pollutants contributed to the emissions
inventory from transportation is lower in Prince George than in the lower mainland, the
implementation of this program would definitely be beneficial from a reduction
standpoint. Almost 90% of the personal vehicle users in Prince George were supportive
of a yearly emission inspection program if it would improve the outdoor air quality. A
cost-benefit analysis for the extension of AirCare to the north needs to be conducted so
the implementation of this program can be fully considered.

•

Promote alternative forms of transportation.
An innovative approach will be necessary for a successful promotion of

alternative transportation. Only 19% of survey participants would be willing to use
public transportation if they did not have their vehicle for a day, indicating a high reliance
on automobile use in Prince George. In addition, the least popular activities that
respondents were willing to participate in were bicycling and using public transportation.
Approximately one-third of the people surveyed said they were not willing to participate
in those two activities with many additional respondents who replied that they were
willing to use them "if" improvements were made.

43

The finding that some respondents were unwilling to use public transportation
could be caused by the fact that the system currently present in Prince George is
inadequate in their opinion with many areas not serviced by bus lines. This criticism is
valid, but the city itself does not have the volume of users needed to expand the service
and currently, the public transportation system is a heavy financial burden on the resource
base. Respondents qualified their unwillingness to use a bicycle as an alternative form of
transportation to the city's lack of bike lanes and commented that overall Prince George
is not a "bike friendly" city. It is possible that in order to make any significant
improvements to air quality, the public will have to participate in reducing air pollution
by changing those behaviors that cause it. Further study should be done to identify an
effective means to increase the usage of both public transportation and bicycles as
alternative forms of transit.

•

Increase public awareness and promote education on air quality issues.
The public's awareness and level of education on environmental issues most

important to the local ecosystem must be examined. An uninformed individual will have
a difficult time participating in finding practical solutions to local problems because of a
lack of understanding of his or her own particular role in environmental problems and
solutions. In this study, 76% of the respondents felt only somewhat informed on air
quality issues. This finding is similar to a provincial study which found that 66.5% of the
800 people surveyed felt only somewhat informed on environmental issues (Viewpoints
Research, 1994). Another survey on public attitudes found that 75 percent said they
believe the province should be doing more to reduce air pollution (Ministry of

44

Environment, Lands and Parks, 1995). The combination of these results should inspire a
provincial initiative to educate the citizens of British Columbia and to increase awareness
of environmental issues through the use of media avenues since 46% suggested that more
media coverage and advertising would improve public education on these issues. The
public would also benefit from a weekly feature in the local newspapers highlighting
current air quality issues and identifying alternatives available to individuals to reduce
their contribution to pollution.

This study has helped gather information and identify relevant issues important to
the community. By directly asking the citizens, this survey has addressed the needs of the
community and has uncovered the unique concerns of Prince George residents. This
information then can be used by policy makers to develop plans whose implementation
would have public support and cooperation. Without such public intervention at the
community planning stage, officials would not be able to encourage the programs that the
community supported and any success requiring broad public partnership would be
unlikely. Through consultation and input from those affected, it is believed that a
stronger commitment towards approaching practical solutions will result.

Using survey results to understand public perceptions towards air quality in the
Prince George area will arm the Prince George Airshed Technical Management
Committee with the information it requires for policy development and implementation
of The Air Quality Management Plan. More importantly, however, this research has
given the public the opportunity to participate in a decision and policy making process

45

that will directly effect the environment in which they reside and their own personal
quality of life. This kind of empowerment can not only change the physical quality of life
for Prince George residents inhaling too much PM 10 or sulfur dioxide but can change the
perception these citizens have on how provincial government, when given unique
opportunities to combine forces with local government, research institutions and the
public, can collaboratively find solutions to local environmental problems.

46

6.0 REFERENCES

B.C. Environment (1989). Survey of Residential Woodstove Users in Smithers.
Environmental Protection, Smithers, B.C.
B.C. Environment ( 1996). An introduction to pollution prevention planning for major
industrial operations in British Columbia. ENV 509 864.0396.
Babbie, E. (1995). The Practice of Social Research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
Publishing Company. p. 206-210.
British Columbia Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (1992). Towards a
strategy for sustainability: A report to the citizens of British Columbia. Victoria,
B.C.
Commission on Resources and Environment (1995). Public Participation: The
provincial/and use strategy. QP 13894 Volume 3. pp. 153.
De Silva, L. and T. Stewart (1996). A Handbook to Prince George, B.C. De Silva and
Stewart Publishing.
de Vaus, D. A. (1991). Surveys in Social Research. Allen & Unwin, North Sidney,
Australia. 365pp.
Greater Vancouver Regional District (1994). GVRD Air Quality Management Plan; Lets
Clear the Air. Burnaby, BC.
Lavrakas, P. (1993). Telephone Survey Methods; Sampling, Selection and Supervision.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 181pp.
McEachen, T. (1996). Personal communication on population estimates for surrounding
communities. Regional District of Fraser-Fort George.
Mennell, M. (1995). Air Quality Planning in One of North America's Fastest Growing
Regions. Environmental Manager, Volume 1, Sept. 1995
Michalos, A. (1995). Aspects of the Quality of Life in Prince George. Faculty of
Management and Administration, UNBC. 29pp.
Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (1995). Clean Vehicles and Fuels for BC: A
Policy Paper. QP 13989-1 Victoria, BC
Pateman, K. (1996). Personal communication on city population estimates for different
sectors of the city. City of Prince George, Development Services Department.

47

Prince George Airshed Technical Management Committee (1996). Prince George Air
Quality Management Background Report. 44pp.
Prince George Region Development Corporation. (1994). Prince George Community
Profile. Prince George, B.C.
Sinclair, W. (1990). Controlling Pollution from Canadian Pulp and Paper
Manufacturers: A Federal Perspective. Environment Canada. Beauegard
Printers, Ltd.
Statistics Canada (1994a.). 1991 Census Technical Report, Occupation. Ottawa:
Industry, Science and Technology. 1991 Census Canada.
Statistics Canada (1994b.). Profile of Census Tracts in Kamloops, Kelowna and Prince
George; Part B. Ottawa: Industry, Science and Technology. 1991 Census
Canada.
Vedal, S. (1995). Health Effects of1nhalable Particles: Implicationsfor British
Columbia. Air Resources Branch, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks.
Victoria, BC.
Viewpoints Research (1994). Environmental Issues in B.C. Report on Quantitative
Research prepared for the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks.

48

APPENDIX A: Description of Air Pollutants
DESCRIPTION OF POLLUTANT

PM to

Fine particulate matter with a maximum
diameter of 10 microns or less.
1 micron = one millionth of a meter
2000 microns = the size of a raindrop

TRS

so2

"Total Reduced Sulphur" is a group of
sulphur compounds containing hydrogen
sulphide, dimethyl sulphide, dimethyl
disulphide and methyl mercaptan.

Sulphur dioxide is formed primarily by the
combustion of material containing sulphur.

COMMON SOURCES IN PRINCE GEORGE
Particulate matter varies in its chemical
composition and can contain toxic trace
metals such as lead, cadmium and nickel.
Industrial emissions, beehive burners, road
dust, wood burning, backyard burning,
forestry practices and wildfires are common
sources.

Released primarily as a by-product of the
pulping process.
Other sources include the processing of oil
and gas and catalytic converters in
automobiles.
Sources include the Husky refinery and the
pulpmills.

It is a colorless gas and can have a pungent
odour at high concentrations.

N02

03

Nitrogen oxides are formed from the
reaction between oxygen and atmospheric
nitrogen gas during high temperature
combustion.

Primary sources are from automobiles,
residential heating, industrial processes and
waste incineration.

"Ground level ozone" is formed from the
reaction of nitrogen oxides and volatile
organic compounds in the presence of
sunlight.

Nitrogen oxides and volatile organic
compounds cause the formation of ozone.

This detrimental type of ozone is sometimes
confused with the stratospheric ozone layer
which protects the earth from harmful
ultraviolet radiation.

HCHO

Formaldehyde is a by-product of wood
combustion.

Volatile organic compounds are released
from automobile combustion and occur
naturally in vegetation.

Major sources are beehive burners, vehicle
exhaust and natural vegetation.

49

APPENDIX B: Additional Survey Results

·;

/

PUBLIC SATISFACTION WITH AIR QUALITY
PUBLIC AWARENESS OF AIR QUALITY ISSUES

Exhibit 1. Over the past year, I have been satisfied with the outdoor air quality in Prince
George.
Response
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Percent

n=500
1.2
24.4
9.2
47.8
17.4

Exhibit 2. I think the outdoor air quality is getting better in Prince George.
Response
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Percent

n=500
1.6
25.2
19.8
42.0
11.4

Exhibit 3. I believe that the outdoor air quality in Prince George affects my quality of
life.
Response
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Percent

n=500
20.8
50.4
12.0
16.0
0.8

50

Exhibit 4. I think that my health has been negatively impacted as a result of the outdoor
air quality in the city.
Response
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Percent
n=500
12.6
26.8
21.4
36.2
3.0

Exhibit 5. I feel that I personally should make changes to improve air quality.
Response
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Percent
n=500
6.6
50.0
24.4
17.6
1.4

Exhibit 6. How informed do you feel overall about the outdoor air quality in Prince
George? n=500
12.0%
76.4%
11.2%

0 very informed

0 somewhat informed
0 not informed at all

Exhibit 7. The Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks issues warnings when the air
quality is poor. Do you remember how you heard about the latest one? n=500
16.2%
54.4%
5.8%
12.0%
6.8%
4.6%
0.2%

OTV
0 the radio
0 by word of mouth
0 the newspaper
0 you did not hear about it
0 can't remember
0 other ( 1 person sees it at work)

51

PERCEPTION OF SOURCES OF OUTDOOR AIR POLLUTION

Exhibit 8. Are there any other sources you would like to add? Number of respondents
labeling each additional source of air pollution as a small, medium or large
contributor to the airshed.
List of air pollution sources identified by
respondents:
n=29
1. Airport testing with fire crews (tires, oil)
2. Cigarette smoke
3. Smoke from bug control
4. Recreational vehicles
5. Dump burning
6. Chicken farm (ammonia smell in Blackburn)
7. Diesel fumes
8. Forest fires
9. Sewage treatment, H2S producer
10. Pavement production, cement
11. Spills at railroads

Small
1
1
1

1

2

Medium
1

Large
4

1

1

2
1

2

Don't
know
1

2

1
1
6

Exhibit 9. Can you describe the poor air quality in your neighborhood for me?
Description
n=430
it stinks
smoke from burning wood, garbage, leaves
hazy
particulates, road dust
residue over cars
smoky emissions from cars
spills (chlorine, turpentine)
oil refinery
bums eyes/nose
gas leak at BCR
can't describe it
clear cut across river
sewage plant odor
industrial

Percent of
Responses
69.2
7.7
6.3
5.8
3.0
2.8
1.9
1.0
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.2

52

FIREPLACE INSERT INVENTORY

Exhibit 10. Do you have a wood-burning fireplace insert? (n=36)
7.2%
92.8%

DYES
DNO

lOA. How often do you use it during the months of October to March? (n=36)

D once a week
D several times a week
D everyday
D never
D occasional use

25.0%
27.8%
5.6%
33.3%
8.3%

lOB.

Can you estimate how much wood you bum in a year?
Amount of wood
in cords
0.0
0.10
0.12
0.25
0.50
1.0
5.0
Don't know

Percent
n=36
33.3
2.8
2.8
5.6
13.9
11.1
2.8
27.8

lOC. Do you know approximately how old your insert is?
Years
2-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-30
Don't know

Percent
n=36
13.9
22.2
22.2
16.7
5.6
19.4

Average age of insert: 12.41 years

lOD. Do you use it as your main source of heat? (n=36)
13.9%
69.4%
16.7%

Dyes

D no
D sometimes

53

Exhibit 11. Is there anything else you would like to say? (n=99)
Responses

Number of
Respondents

Pulp mills should get penalized before public
No complaints- its good where I live, but don't like to come to town
Nothing we can do, its a trade-off
Promote more options and alternatives
Keep working on it
Feel healthier in other places- air is better there
Don't think we have a problem, its ok
Worse in other places
Road dust a problem, sweep sooner
Cars should be tested
We have bigger problems
Better in other places
Going to leave
Bad for business, tourism
Need better warning system, coverage why it happens
Want to see government and industry working together
Increase monitoring
Pulpmill is cheating and putting kerosene in lagoons
Need global education
Government not doing enough
Quicker reporting of problems
Hope it doesn't get any worse
Chicken farms stink
Get pulpmills to publish emissions
Don't discourage industry
Pollute at night
City vote on standards for pollution control and vote on more industry or not
Pulpmills getting bad rap
Have incentives, bonuses
Same as Vancouver, thought it would be better here
People are too used to it
"Prince George is the armpit of B.C."
"People have to remember that this community was built on forestry so some
compromises just have to be made."
"For an industrial city, I think PG has no real problems with air pollution."
"People live in the north because of the fresh air. We should take care to protect
that but industry and pollution are also vital for the community."
"In the beginning it used to bother me but now I am used to it."

8
7
7
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

54

"Hu.sky oil is the culprit for much of what the pulp mills are blamed for- they are
the worst polluters.
"How do you evaluate/estimate concentrations? Water quality and MDF are big
concerns. Why are the tax-payers paying for new water mains for pulp mills?
Beehive burners and wood smoke are not important, car emissions are much
worse. Peden Hill area is bad for the smell. Industry should be kept to the
perimeter of city. Sweep earlier in the spring for road dust."
"Government should stop backing down from toughening regulations- no backing
down on the beehive burners. Our health is more important than profits- millions
could be saved on health care and I'm mad about this. Fines should be higher for
environmental spills. Grant money should be going to research."
"I came from Mexico. PG is better. Seen pollution kill people and lots of dead
birds. They should be trying to clean things up here. In Mexico, they have a big
screen that displays what the air pollution monitors are reading in the various
areas."
"Would like to see environmentalists, government and industries get together and
solve the problems. Very concerned about children's future in town."
"Children at school shouldn't be doing PEon bad air days- keep them inside.
Schools need to teach and be more aware of poor air quality."

1
1

1

1

1
1

55