Commentary
Page 10
Street Roots • March 2 5 -3 1 ,2 0 1 6
In defense
of moss
I
How p lant research
laid bare Portland's
problem with pollution
BY STEPHYN QUIRKE
C O N T R IB U T IN G C O L U M N IS T
hey drink the water from your
gutters. They creep into your garden.
They whisper tales to the kale.
For some, mosses are just a guest we
never invited - an opportunity to break out
the latest in domestic chemical warfare,
from X-Moss to Moss-Out and Moss-B-Gone.
But mosses ar-e no one’s enemy. In fact,
we’re now learning that moss is an
exceptional indicator for toxic substances in
the air. And its accidental exposure to
industrial chemicals has allowed this soft,
green menace to push gentle waves through
Portland for the past month.
In December 2013, a U.S. Forest Service
study collected 346 samples of moss from
across the city, selecting random houses in
different geographic grids, and then
gathering moss from the nearest tree.
The original purpose of the study,
according to research ecologist Sarah Jovan,
was to test for a class of air pollutants that
come from the burning of fossil fuel and
wood stoves - polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons, or PAHs - and to see if tree
cover could absorb some of them before
they reached human lungs. Whether metals
might also be in the moss only came up as
an after-thought, and it was that decision
that sent the moss dancing up the walls.
In early February, data from the moss
study was finally made public. It showed
high levels of heavy metals outside Bullseye
Glass in Southeast Portland and Uroboros
Glass in North Portland. Both facilities had
public schools and homes nearby, and
follow-up air monitoring confirmed high
levels of cadmium and arsenic near Bullseye
Glass at roughly 50 and 150 times the levels
the state considers “safe.” Both substances
are known carcinogens and carry a range of
toxic effects.
By Feb. 12, the situation was being called
a public health emergency, and neighbors
were beginning to connect the known toxic
effects of metal pollution with health
problems they had already experienced.
William Preston, a 10-year-old who lives in
Southeast Portland, joined hundreds of
neighbors Feb. 9 at Cleveland High School,
where he stood in line with his mother to
ask health officials if the high levels of air
borne cadmium and arsenic could be related
B
i
7
is ¡1
1
to his development of an adult kidney
disease.
What followed was a meandering fog
emanating from Oregon Housing Authority
toxicologist David Farrer, who spoke for a
minute and a half on the nature of scientific
uncertainty, but provided no clear answer.
After William’s mother informed Farrer that
her child had already tested positive for high
levels of cadmium in his kidneys, and as he
was pressed with another set of direct
questions (this time yelled from the
audience), Farrer reluctantly acknowledged
that cadmium is a known kidney toxin, and
finally uttered the word, “yes.”
“It was hard for me as a mom to hear that
whole answer,” Shelley said. “It really just
felt like a brush off.
“There’s another girl in our complex with
the same disease,” she explained. “She’s
even younger than William. She’s been in
and out of the hospital. She’s even had a
kidney transplant. Is this a coincidence?”
“If there were more people who just kept
things people-based, and not money- and
bullshit-based, we’d be a lot safer,” she
concluded.
-¿¿ k l ■
m
Interpreting moss
The Department of Environmental
Quality has defended itself by claiming that
the moss study was a huge innovation - so
big, in fact, that they are struggling to keep
up with i t
But according to the U.S. Forest Service
website, the agency has known for decades
that moss is a good biological indicator for
air quality.
What was new about the Forest Service
study was that it analyzed hundreds of moss
samples all over the city, and then mapped
the results to show where different
pollutants were most concentrated. By
contrast, the normal operating procedure at
the DEQ is to use expensive and time-
consuming monitoring equipment that costs
$150,000 or more for a single monitor.
By starting instead with moss data,
researchers were able to produce a
snapshot of basic heavy metal and PAH
pollution all across the city, saving the more
expensive and precise tests for the places
that need it most. Since their preliminary
findings have been released, Jovan said they
See MOSS, page 11