Despite slow population growth, Greater Boston’s residents, on average, are "living larger," increasing pressure on environmental and energy resources.

• The number of households in the City of Boston is rising faster than the city’s population: the average number of people per household has declined from 2.37 in 1990 to 2.31 in 2000.
• Likewise, the region’s use of land, energy and water is disproportionate to population growth, driven by an expanding number of smaller households occupying larger homes, more vehicles and more vehicle miles driven per person, and a spatial mismatch between population and job centers.  The number of automobiles registered in the City of Boston, for example, increased by 38% between 1990 and 2005 while the population grew by just 3.9%.
• Similarly, the number of single-family homes with at least four bedrooms in Massachusetts increased 27% between 1990 and 2005 while the number of occupants per household fell slightly.  A 2006 Massachusetts Housing Partnership study of homes built between 1998 and 2003 in 108 Greater Boston communities found that the average lot size for a single-family home increased to 1.38 acres. Only 9% of new homes were built on lots of less than one-quarter acre, and 75% occupied more than one-half acre.  The average new single-family home now consumes about twice as much land as an existing home in the same city or town.
• While population increased by only about % from 1994 to 2004, total solid waste increased 30.3%.  Each Massachusetts resident now generates about 1.3 tons of solid waste annually.
• Boston residents and businesses recycle only about 12% of the solid waste they generate, well below the statewide recycling rate of 48%, and half the 23% average for Greater Boston communities (See Indicator 5.1.2).

Energy use, including electricity demand, continues to increase and with it emissions of carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse gases” that cause global climate change.

• Greater Boston communities (those generally within Route 128) account for one-quarter of New England’s total population and nearly one-quarter of its total electricity demand. Electricity demand in New England continues to rise, with two new records for regional demand of over 28,000 megawatts set on back-to-back days in August 2006.  ISO-New England projects that electricity demand in greater Boston will increase 1.1% annually over the next ten years.
• Massachusetts greenhouse gas emissions (measured as metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents) increased 9% from 1990-2003 or 0.7% annually.
• Boston is one of 21 cities in Massachusetts that have joined the Cities for Climate Protection campaign.  The 1990 carbon inventory prepared for this effort estimates that local energy use, transportation and waste disposal produced 9 million tons of CO2 emissions annually in Boston, or an average of 15.4 tons per person.
• The transportation sector accounts for a growing proportion of greenhouse gas emissions in Massachusetts (See Indicator 5.2.2), with carbon dioxide emissions from transportation sources rising 9% between 1990 and 2003.

There is growing concern in Boston and Massachusetts about global climate change and a new willingness to address greenhouse gas emissions.

• A five-year study on Climate’s Long-Term Impacts on Metro Boston (CLIMB), released in 2005, found that average temperatures in Boston could exceed 90 degrees 30 times per year, twice the current number.  The combination of sea level rise and a storm surge could cause flooding as far inland as Back Bay and Harvard Square.
• The Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment, released in 2006, similarly found that continued emissions of greenhouse gases could cause winters in the Northeast to warm by 8-12 degrees and summers by 6-14 degrees.  Rising winter temperatures would shift winter precipitation from snow to rain and could, by the end of the century, cur the length of the winter snow season in half.
• First the City of Boston and now the Commonwealth of Massachusetts under new Governor Deval Patrick have expanded their cabinet-level environmental agencies to also address energy issues.  Massachusetts now has an Executive Office of Environmental Affairs.
• The City of Boston procures 11.7% of its electricity load from renewable sources, making it the largest municipal purchaser in New England. The City has also installed solar panels on municipal buildings and is a participant in the Community Wind Collaborative.
  

Regional air pollution from industrial sources and power plants is declining, but local areas remain overexposed to harmful air pollutants and further improvements are hindered by pollution from motor vehicles.

• The Commonwealth of Massachusetts currently meets Federal standards for smog-related air pollutants, although there were still 20 days during the summer of 2005 when the state exceeded the standard for ozone.
• Since 1990, power plants and industrial sources have reduced emissions of smog precursors by two-thirds to three-quarters, but emissions of nitrogen oxides—which contribute to both smog and acid rain—from cars and other motor vehicles are now increasing.
• Mercury emissions have been reduced by about 70% statewide and by 87% in the areas with the highest levels of mercury deposition and, as a result, over the past five years mercury levels in Massachusetts’ fish have declined by 15-32%.
• While Massachusetts complies with the 1997 Federal standard for harmful particulates, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently tightened the daily standard and the Commonwealth is still evaluating whether it complies with the new limits.
• Even if area-wide standards are being met, researchers at Harvard University School of Public Health recently documented the existence of “hot spots” of unacceptably high levels of fine particulate pollution caused by local emission sources.
  

Water quality in Boston Harbor and the Charles River has improved and is projected to continue improving as measures are implemented to reduce remaining sources of runoff pollution.

• In April 2007, the EPA graded the health of the Charles River as a B+ for the third year in a row, based on the number of days the river met boating and swimming standards during the previous calendar year. For 2006, the Charles met boating standards 90% of the time and swimming standards 62% of the time (See Indicator 5.5.2).
• Water pollution testing at 11 Boston Harbor beaches found that safe levels for swimming were exceeded 10% of the time in 2005 (See Indicator 5.5.2).   But improvements are expected as a result of a recent lawsuit settlement under which the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) finalized plans to reduce “combined sewer overflows.”
• Further improvements in the water quality in the Charles River are expected as a result of agreements that the Conservation Law Foundation and Charles River Watershed Association reached with both the MWRA and Department of Conservation and Recreation to substantially reduce runoff pollution into the Charles River.

Health care and environmental professionals increasingly recognize that environmental factors can adversely affect the health of Boston residents.

• A 2005 study by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health found that 10% of all K-8 school children in the state had been diagnosed with asthma; in several Boston schools, more than 30% of the children have asthma.
• More than half of all adults in Boston report that they are overweight or obese and the Boston Public Health Commission has recognized that stemming this epidemic will require provision of environmentally healthy options and habits such as walking and good nutrition.
• Lead poisoning rates in Boston continue to fall, with only 2.2% of children tested citywide having elevated blood lead levels in 2005, down from 4.6% in 2001 (See Indicator 5.7.1).
  

The marine heritage of Boston and other coastal communities is increasingly threatened by pollution, development pressures and over-fishing.

• Cod and other species of ground fish continue to experience population declines due to over-fishing and poor resource management decisions.  Stocks of Atlantic cod, New England’s signature species, have fallen 25% since 2002 and are at only 10% of what scientists consider to be a healthy and sustainable level.
• The Marine Fish Conservation Network found that only 10 of the 36 fish stocks in New England waters were considered to be at healthy levels in 2004, down from13 healthy stocks in 2001.
• Ocean resources are also threatened by a growing number of proposals to locate energy and other projects offshore Massachusetts, as found by the state’s task force on ocean management.

Public spending on environmental protection and on environmental assets such as parks has declined steadily in recent years, although in fiscal year 2006 the state’s environmental budget received its first funding increase in five years.

• Even with the increased funding included in the fiscal year 2006 and 2007 budgets, the Massachusetts environmental budget in FY07 is still 17% lower than in FY01.
• Massachusetts spends only 0.8% of the state’s budget on environment, compared to a national average of 1.4%—down from a high of 1.05% in fiscal year 2000 (See Indicator 5.10.1).  Staffing levels at the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (which operates nearly half of the parks in the City of Boston, including the parks and recreation facilities formerly run by the Metropolitan District Commission) are down 25% from five years ago and 40% from 10 years ago.
• Massachusetts ranks 48th out of the 50 states in per capita spending on parks and recreation and last in spending as a percentage of income, according to a 2006 analysis by Governing Magazine.