Drafting a New Bill for 2027

Crafting a model ordinance for 2028

The argument: The legal and poorly regulated operation of gas leaf blowers grossly violates noise, air, and prohibitions, statutes, give numbers, and thus deprives our right to a clean healthful environment. definitions should be changed in tandem with a full ban on sale and use, to reflect the widely acknowledged and publicly declared harms of gas leaf blowers which self evidently should be banned, electric leaf blowers are also so changing the definitions will ensure proper regulation. This should take effect immediately

Facts to consider:

(1) Noise is a public health hazard not a subjective experience

(a) Environmental noise is a public health hazard as evidenced and declared by the EPA 50 years ago and amended by the ‘Quiet Communities Act of 2021’. Gas leaf blower noise is particularly relevant here given the extremes emitted in both decibels and low frequency noise (LFN). The adverse physiological and psychological affects of noise, specifically stress and annoyance, are both a producer of mental illness (e.g. anxiety, depression, PTSD, suicidal ideation), and a precursor to clinical disease (list them and cite). Environmental noise, specifically from leaf blowers, is not just a temporary nuisance, subject to opinion; it has insidious long terms effects on human functioning.

(b) Noise is unwanted and/or harmful sound.

This is the new, comprehensive definition of noise put forward by Fink and adopted by the International Commission on Biological Effects of Noise (ICBEN) in 2023. The definition makes precise that noise is not simply ‘unwanted sound’ (a subjective response) as the standard definition has it, rather it is unwanted sound that is ‘able to cause adverse auditory and non-auditory health effects’ (Fink). Wanted sound can also harm.

Standard, subjectively informed definitions—such as the Oahu edition of the state’s ‘Noise Reference Manual’, which defines noise as ‘unwanted sound’—ignore the actual health impacts of noise on all of us (while at the same time acknowledging them). A subjective definition negates scientific research, impairs government policy, and impedes enforcement.

(c) Under the Hawaii State Administrative Rules for ‘Community Noise Control’ is the general definition of noise, and noise pollution:

(i) '"Noise" means any sound that may produce adverse physiological or psychological effects or interfere with individual or group activities, including but not limited to communication, work, rest, recreation, or sleep’ (Title 11-46-1).

Thus: noise is a sound that ‘may’ (or may not) cause stress and annoyance in individuals, or is a (subjective) nuisance (subjectively determined by an enforcement officer) (Noise Ref Manual).

(ii) "Noise pollution" means noise emitted from any excessive noise source in excess of the maximum permissible sound levels’(11-46-4).

The maximum permissible daytime sound levels from 7am to 10pm for residential and multi family dwellings or businesses respectively are 55 and 60 dbA. What the sound levels specifically pertain to is up to the director. Gas leaf blowers can operate in excess of 100 decibels, it is not clear why the director permits this if the violation and harm caused is unjustified (is public harm ever justified?), other than the mistaken, hands-off assumption that leaf blower noise is subjectively determined. h (maybe put low frequency here)‘Adverse effects from sources of sound with low frequency components may occur at levels below 30 dB(A) [4]. Banks characteristics

(d) Under the Hawaii Revised Statutes ‘Noise Pollution’ means the same as ‘Excessive noise’ (§342F-1):

"Excessive noise" means the presence of sound as measured by standard testing devices . . . of a volume or in quantities and for durations which endangers human health, welfare or safety, animal life, or property or which unreasonably interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of life and property’.

Thus: excessive noise is sound that—only when objectively proven with an instrument that measures decibels— does endanger human health and (ought to) constitute a nuisance in the legal sense of the word.

‘Excessive noise’ is non subjective sound which exceeds the published daytime and nightime limits (or as the director permits). The threshold for sound to be considered ‘noise’ (i.e. harmful) is ≥55 dbA. Noise is by definition harmful sound, it’s a qualification on sound. Excessive noise then, is excessive harmful sound—not excessive decibels, as such. Sometimes excessive noise (harmful sound) is necessary (e.g. construction, agriculture), and would presumably require a permit to make sound that harms the public (noise). It would not make sense to institute a permit requirement for unnecessary noise (unnecessary, though non subjective, noise that is shown to produce ‘excessive harm’ to the public). Gas leaf blowers can operate in excess of 100 decibels, it is not clear why the director permits (without a permit) this unnecessary noise (harm). What matters is the harm itself, which begins at 55 dbA, not the decibel reading. This is where policy seems to contradict itself, or the public is rendered confused.

There are no limits at all on leaf blower decibels, so measuring decibels in the face of an ‘excessive noise’ complaint would be futile anyway. Similarly, volume, quantity, and duration is irrelevant. The ‘excessive’ noise of a leaf blower is legal 7 days a week, all day, non stop, including holidays (anywhere). This is likely why the public doesn’t complain. To make matters worse, leaf blowers are not stationary. By the time enforcement would arrive, because a leaf blower is operating outside of permissible hours (not because it is harming people with noise); it’s too late; the offender is gone.

The ‘source’ of the excessive noise matters, and it seems to be the case that gas leaf blowers are prima facie exempted from noise control because there is no determination made for the lawn care services industry. Further hampering regulation; leaf blowers are not stationary (§342F-1). They are small off-road engines (SORE). So they are like cars and trucks (internal combustion engines) only they move about in the community, on sidewalks and lawns and public spaces, museums, parks, at the grocery store, on school grounds, outside day care centers, libraries and businesses, rather than on public roads, although nonethless making excessive noise in conjunction with road noise. The SORE categorization inadvertently sanctions widespread, unregulated noise pollution. The daytime levels for road noise, according to the WHO, is only cite. (unregulated air pollution is thus also significantly worse (cite) than the regulated carbon emissions and PM 2.5’s of cars and trucks and other street legal transport—see below).

(d) inadequate, seemingly confused definitions of noise and their sources, have enabled unacceptable, unregulated noise, which forecloses enforcement and undermines the meaning of community (kaiāulu) by placing the burden of proof on the ‘complainer’. Noise from gasoline leaf blowers is not a subjective nuisance, it is an unwanted mental and physical injury, a chronic, criminal trespass on collective individual (public) health whether a person cares or not.

Noise must be recognised by the department of health as the public health hazard it is. Noise is not merely a ‘public health issue’ (a problem up for debate). There is no debate regarding the harm caused by gas leaf blower noise. The science is settled. Noise is a fundamental source of danger, harm, and loss to health—a hazard. The definitions around noise must be changed to reflect this awareness, in order to properly, and without delay, legislate a ban on the sale and use of harmful gasoline leaf blowers, and by the same token, mitigate unnecessary noise in our communities in keeping with publicly declared sustainability goals (?). This is the duty of the state health department as it pertains to our constitutional (environmental) right, and particularly the right of future generations (Article X1, section 9).

(4) A moral injustice: gas leaf blower emissions disproportionately harm children

' moral injustice’ deeply unfair, harmful, or unequal treatment that violates fundamental rights or basic human dignity.’ AI

its not just about how many negative environmental impacts count against gas leaf blowers in favor of a ban, rather there is an overriding moral imperative.

it is plainly wrong to allow chronic leaf blower pollution to harm children when the health impacts are well-evidenced by science, when nurses call for a ban (cite), when doctors .

—it about morality, moral initiative, moral justice. , a moral and ethical gas leaf blowers are bad, and theand their use is wrong

unethical—use on school grounds

(i) Time of use

With this in mind time of use for electric leaf blowers, should be meaningfully restricted. Children should not have to get ready for school, or do their homework in concert with leaf blower noise (unless the decibels are ≥55 dbA). .

(ii) No leaf blowers on any school grounds public or private

(iii) No leaf blowers within a mile radius of Day care centres, after school facilities, (unless the decibels are ≥55 dbA). .

(4) A social injustice: gas leaf blower emissions disproportionately harm workers

LFN is felt

Vibroacoustic disease a promising and long overdue area of research?

There is currently no research, that I could find, on the affects of exposure to LFN from gas leaf blowers with regard to vibroacoustic disease. As a source of environmental LFN (low frequency noise), attention needs to be paid to the risk of vibroacoustic disease, not just for leaf blower operators, who especially children (my own opinion)

‘Vibroacoustic disease (VAD) is a systemic, whole-body pathology caused by long-term, excessive exposure to low-frequency noise (LFN) and infrasound (frequencies below 500 Hz).

(2) Noise construed as a decibel problem alone is not sufficient to warrant a ban on the sale and use of gasoline leaf blowers

The argument here is to simply place decibel restrictions on gas leaf blowers or force local retailers to change their inventory?

Low frequency noise from gas leaf blowers harms a broad swath of public, not just the operator and bystander.

Noise exposure guidelines are unreliable https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10194210/.

(a) Low frequency noise (LFN)

Decibels are not the only harm to public health with regard to gas leaf blower noise.

The current ANSI standard for gas leaf blowers, ANSI/OPEI B175.2-2012 (R2019), uses A-weighted metrics (sound levels in decibels) which is inadequate for capturing the widespread harms caused by the distinctive low frequency C-weighted sound and vibration emitting at high levels over long distances from gas leaf blowers.

This is low attenuating sound that travels over an 800 ft radius in a single event and easily infiltrates glass doors, windows and, in particular, the sub-standard, single-wall construction so common in Hawaii. People are not protected inside their home, workplace, or school.

Thus gas leaf blower emissions are both heard (decibels) and felt (LFN). While perception of noise may well be subjective for people who are not deaf or hard of hearing; low frequency vibrations are objective, their affects involuntary, they happen to us regardless of perception, and as such, the ‘noise pollution’ is not a debatable nuisance, it doesn’t just pollute our listening environment, and violate our right to enjoy our property; it pollutes our bodies. So ‘pollution’ is, as it pertains to the affects of gas leaf blowers on human health: toxic battery. (cite) not a tort but a criminal offence.

How can LFN be regulated? By requiring the public to wear headphones? ()Incidental damage to ears and facial bones from ear plugs and headphones which are not effective that we have to pay for ourselves Is the state going to pay for them? This is environemtnal, not occupational, noise.These are not even effective.

the damage is still happening to our bodies and minds from the LFN, which is felt as much as heard

If there is no way to adequately regulate the unnecessary LFN coming out of these gas powered machines, then there is no justification for allowing these machines to operate in the community. An electric/battery leaf blower is just a leaf blower negligible LFN. Thus, a transition to electric is necessary.

Vibroacoustic disease a promising and long overdue area of research?

There is currently no research on the affects of exposure to LFN from gas leaf blowers with regard to vibroacoustic disease. As a source of environmental LFN (low frequency noise), attention needs to be paid to research the risk of vibroacoustic disease, not just for leaf blower operators, who especially children (my own opinion)

‘Vibroacoustic disease (VAD) is a systemic, whole-body pathology caused by long-term, excessive exposure to low-frequency noise (LFN) and infrasound (frequencies below 500 Hz).

Low frequency noise (LFN)’

Intermittent noise harms

is particularly distressing

As long as legislation by way of the Health department fails to get beyond the misconception vital scientific advancement — the bill that gives more power to the health department

The health department should be working with current science, directing its policies toin line with well-documented and widespread scientific consensus on the harms of gas leaf blowers

‘The inadequacy of currently established legislation regarding noise assessments is a powerful

hindrance to scientific advancement. VAD can never be fully recognized as an occupational

and environmental pathology unless the agent of disease - LFN - is acknowledged and properly

evaluated.

Decibels are only half the problem with gas leaf blower noise.

Realistically, the sale and use of ALL leaf blowers (gas and electric) should be banned because leaf blowers produce unnecessary, unwantedand harmful noise.

(3) Should we ban electric leaf blowers as well?

The case for 55 dbA

(1) The ANSI problem

A ban on gas leaf blowers requires meaningful regulation of electric ones.

The appeal to excessive decibels, which must be understood as direct, unwanted ‘auditory and non auditory harm’ (cite) is surely enough to warrant action on a ban on the sale and use of gasoline powered leaf blowers; there are quieter, more efficient alternatives such as electric/battery leaf blowers (cite). However, while gas leaf blowers can exceed 100 dbA at 50 feet from the source, these quieter alternatives can nonethless reach levels of 90 dbA; they are not necessarily safer. Electric/battery operated leaf blowers must also be regulated with regard to excessive decibels (at the bystander level) if they are to be the prescribed alternative to gas.

One reason that at least one of the last three bills failed was a rejected appeal to the ANSI standard for leaf blowers. The health department argues that ANSI B175.2-2012 (on which a ban on sale was riding) is outdated. More importantly, the standard, including the current fourth edition ANSI/OPEI B175.2-2012 (R2019), only applies to gas leaf blowers, not electric/battery ones (and not gasoline powered string trimmers, either). Thus, attempts to apply the standard inadvertently allow the continued use of the other gas powered lawn equipment that the bills proposed to regulate (string trimmers), and leaves electric/battery operated leaf blowers exempt from any proposed limits on decibels.

(ii) The ANSI standard is justified, but 65 dbA is still too much (unless time-of-use is significantly reduced?)

The purpose of ANSI/OPEI B175.2-2012 (R2019) is (1) ‘to establish manufacturer requirements to reduce the risk of injury associated with the use of gas leaf blowers (internal combustion). However, (2) ’This standard may also be used to measure bystander sound pressure levels at 15 meters (50 feet)’ (cite).

So while it’s true that ANSI/OPEI B175.2-2012 (R2019) concerns gasoline powered leaf blowers only as it pertains to the safety of the operator; it is also widely used as a standard methodology by leaf blower manufacturers for measuring the bystander sound pressure levels in dbA of electric/battery operated leaf blowers at 50 ft. Decibels are decibels. Thus, we find electric or battery leaf blowers on the market with ANSI standard decibel ratings, and ordinances around the nation requiring the standard at Category 1 (≤ 65 dBA at 50 feet) for electric/battery leaf blowers.

Nonetheless, 65 dbA exceeds the daytime residential standards of 55 dbA by ten decibels. 55 dbA is set as the threshold at which deleterious effects of noise exposure, are triggered.

Notably, the ANSI methodology is also used to test sound levels at 55 dbA. It is just the sticker cuts of at 65

(iii) Not just noise Electric leaf blowers: Air Pollution PM2s

decibels alone are not enough, But even in the face of a ban, electric leaf blowers produce air pollution, and fugitive dust in quantities and for durations

Electric leaf blowers still produce signifacant amounts of PM2s, restriction on property line ordinance is not enough, time of use must also be amended to (duration, quantity)

so a 15 minute cap on use is necessary (cite how long exposure to pms 2 takes

(3) Gas leaf blower emissions violate §342B-11 Prohibition.is an air pollutant

show that it is supposed to be

(5) Gas leaf blowers are legally sanctioned environmental polluters UNETHICAL treatment of the land and animals , abuse

§342B-11 Prohibition. No person, including any public body, shall engage in any activity [such as operating a leaf blower] which causes air pollution or causes or allows the emission of any regulated air pollutant without first securing approval in writing from the director. [L 1992, c 240, pt of §1]

this would conflict though, because they only have to get permission, when they have been banned

(i) Air pollution

‘"Air pollution" means the presence in the outdoor air of substances in quantities and for durations which may endanger human health or welfare, plant or animal life, or property or which may unreasonably interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life and property throughout the State and in such areas of the State as are affected thereby, but excludes all aspects of employer- employee relationships as to health and safety hazards’

Fetal harm and damage to children’s developing organ systems from air pollution is widely documented (cite)

what are the quantities and durations?
the case for time of use (how long does it take for exposure to PM2s to cause harm?

cause air pollution such as fugitive dust and debris

release regulated pollutants

(ii) Written approval is equivalent to getting a licence because it involves permission

This existing prohibition serves as the ground for a licence, since electric leaf blowers also ‘cause air pollution’ with fugitive dust and debris (fugitive dust does not include from combustion)

similarly, the PM2s harm

the definition for ‘air pollution’ should therefore be amended to state that ‘air pollution’ is unwanted toxins [in the the outdoor air] that harm

not just outdoor air, because they do in fact enter peoples homes at 200 mph

(6) Gas leaf blowers are legally sanctioned short-term climate polluters

international calls for ‘near‑term climate planning’ calls for reduction of black carbon

() If we want to make meaningful change,the decibel limit for ers electric leaf blo must be in line with published deceibel levels 55 dba

this does away with the ANSI standard, which may also be susceptible to change,

requires registration

() money spent on earplugs and headphones because some of us want manicured lawns

shall I send a bill to my neighbor

()Incidental damage to ears and facial bones from ear plugs and headphones which are not effective that we have to pay for ourselves

no regulation

Proposed Amendments

(i) Proposed amendment 1: leaf blower registration

The ANSI Category 1 standard (≤ 65 dBA at 50 feet) is a necessary and appropriate objective measure for the regulation of electric/battery powered leaf blowers, which do not produce the more pervasive low frequency vibrations of gas leaf blowers, but can nonetheless exceed 65 decibels, which is the the current industry standard level of comfort and safety. but bad, (check)

Problematically, the problem of checking stickers as proof of decibel output

65 dbA is 15 decibels over the established Hawaii state limits on decibel levels for residences and 10 decibels over multi-faimliy and business, it seems that a multi family would already be producing extra decibels, this is no reason to increase the allowance? hmmm

presumably, anything over 55 dbA, without a permit, is in violation of the statute. is an outdated number.

However, as evidence of the harms becomes the status quo, machinery now is closer to 55dbA which is the WHO level as well as the hawaii limits. So the decibel limit should 55 dbA. To go higher would be a contradiction, standards are likely change which would create further, unnecessary ordinance amendments. prepempting that the decibel limit should be 55 dbA.

the ANSI category one is the sticker proof. not all 65 decibel machines carry a sticker. although machinery is tested, using the ANSI procedure, paying for the certification is optional. There is no sticker for less. in line with a new ANSI bill ?

Licensing/registration, like the limited ANSI standard, can also be a necessary and objective measure for the regulation of electric/battery powered leaf blowers, which do not produce the more pervasive low frequency vibrations of gas leaf blowers, but can nonetheless exceed 65 decibels, which is the the current industry standard level of comfort and safety. (check) Licencing is used by other ordinances

/

In lieu of the sticker problem, all leaf blowers must be registered with the state health department.

Public Awareness

There have been gas leaf blower bans circulating legislation since at least 2010. 15 years is long enough to get the picture.

Following a ban on the sale and use of GLBs, a grace period of 90 days, in terms of enforcement and following a ban, which allows transition to electric should be established in conjunction with an inter-agency and utilities public awareness campaign of the harms of gasoline powered leaf blowers, as well as the opportunity to both retailers and government agencies and their subsidiaries access to trade-in, green incentive rebates and direct grants.

Enforcement: one way to manage compliance is to require simple registration of leaf blowers. This method of compliance, used by other cities with bans around the nation, would apply to commercial landscapers who are already required to have a licence. Information would be uploaded to a publicly accessed database for the purpose of reporting violations.

In the field, particularly for those authorized to cite a violator or confiscate a machine, decibel level apps for iPhone or Android are a simple, reliable verifying tool.

Is this ‘overregulation’? Given that the state constitution provides for a clean, healthy environment, and the use of electric leaf blowers at 65 dBA or less, provides for a cleaner, healthier environment, while nonethless (1) continuing to allow people to use leaf blowers; (2) providing business owners the opportunity for economic growth and community integrity; (3) providing manufacturers the opportunity for innovation; and providing all of us the opportunity to honour Hawaiian principles and policy making, then the logical conclusion is no. Given that excessive low frequency sound and excessive decibels harm public health, regardless of whether people care or not, and it is the duty of the health department to protect public health, then the conclusion is no. This is not overregulation. Enforcement is a service we pay for. As it stands there is no regulation.

(2) Unjust time-of-use (chronic exposure) Moral Injury

How many so-called ‘subjective’ complainers are those with pre-existing auditory and non auditory damage to their health caused by excessive poorly unregulated noise over a lifetime?

Fetal harm and damage to children’s developing organ systems from noise is widely documented (cite):

what do we mean by volume, quantities, and duration, , (which is also subject to the subjectivity and immediate experience of any enforcement officer) in terms of gas leaf blower noise?

quantities: many at once, one after the other, day after day

duration: all day, non stop, 7 days a week including holidays

decibels (volume): no regulation at all

Low frequency noise: no regulation at all

The so-called leaf blower ordinance applies to operation not noise output (thus the need for decibels in the electric leaf blower ordinance)

its not enough to say that time of use automatically regulates noise

its not enough to argue that if we simply adjust time of use, gas leaf blowers are allowed

There is no justification for allowing a gas leaf blower, with its publicly declared harms, to operate 7 days a week, non-stop, including holidays. As it stands, the only time a leaf blower operator is in violation is when most of us are in bed asleep. This is not regulation in any meaningful sense of the word. This is why the Health Department finds that complaints are few and far between (cite). The non-stop violence is legal. There is nothing we can do. In any given neighbourhood, on any given day, regardless of any ‘special’ significance, gas leaf blower crews go house to house, or work multiple acres, utilising multiple machines at once.

This doesn’t mean, however, that we simply need to amend time-of-use in lieu of a ban. The well-documented harms to health, environment, and climate is evidence enough.

Amendment: grounded in puʻuhonua

As used by other cities (model ordinances) around the nation:

Monday to Friday 9am to 5 pm (using one machine at a time per ANSI, no longer than 15 minutes violation verified by photo/video report to the health department code enforcement webpage concerning leaf blowers) (cite) this is to actual enforcement versus a police officers subjective view

Saturday 10 am to 4pm (no commercial landscapers, residents only on their own property).

No Sundays.

No federal, state, or local holidays.

(3) Unjust fines

There is no justification for fining a violater $50 or $100 when, in the same breath, justification for a ban states that high decibels cause hearing loss and psychological distress andb unburned fueoth l harms the environment and exacerbates the climate crisis. Hawaii is particularly vulnerable to the climate crisis. Operating, or paying someone to operate, a gasoline powered leaf blower is clearly an act of violence and trespass on people’s homes and places of business, etc., when we stock of the huge body of evidence against them. Operating a gas leaf blower, or paying someone to, is essentially an environmental crime with regard to biodiversity; and a massive contradiction to the state’s publicly declared climate emergency (cite) since gas leaf blowers contribute immediately and directly to ozone warming in the short term, or NOW.

With this in mind, (on top of a fine) a more effective punishment for violation would be substantial, environmentally conscious community service. (find a city). Perhaps a violator needs to give a presentation to our schoolchildren about the climate in keeping with bill (see bill).

Further, with relation to the deleterious effects on the public’s well-being, injuctive relief should be allowed in the case of persistent abusers. People should not have to make complaints over and over, or wait weeks or months for a response or action. The law is the law whether we live in the ‘country’ or downtown Honolulu. Enforcement is a service we pay for now.

If there are no reliable standards by which we can regulate gas leaf blower ‘noise’ and its harms to whole communities, then the cause of the noise must be banned.

Banning under the noise ordinance may not be enough

‘Generally, exposure to continuous noise is measured using the frequency dependent A-weighted decibel scale (dB[A]). However, using the C-weighted scale (dB[C]) or unweighted (sound pressure level) scale may be appropriate for noise sources with a large proportion of low-frequency components, very intense levels, and/or high intensity impulse noise’ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10194210/

(1) All three bills appeal to ‘quieter alternatives’, namely, electric. Clearly, the violent noise levels of a gas leaf blower have no bearing on air, water, and climate pollution. The appeal (as SB 365 states) should be to both quieter and cleaner alternatives. (Problematically, electric leaf blowers also pollute the air inside and outside with PM2’s, and thus harm public health, even if they are quieter).

Another cockeyed view fails to notice that the revised ANSI/OPEI B175.2-2012 (R2019) is a standard established to reduce the risk of injury to the operator (p. 8/70). What about the rest of us?

What this ANSI rating proves is that the machine has been tested to measure its bystander sound pressure levels at 50 feet.

‘the ANSI dBA standard at 50 feet does not adequately evaluate community impact or allow comparisons of gas-and battery-powered equipment sound. . . it underweights the contribution of low frequency sound, it does not provide information sufficient to evaluate how sound energy transmits over distance or on its related health risks’. (see https://sciforschenonline.org/journals/environmental-toxicological-studies/article-data/JETS-2-118/JETS-2-118.pdf).

‘the machine has undergone standardized testing to measure its bystander sound level at a distance of 50 feet.’ (in keeping with WHO) new ansi

65 decibels for the operator, thus the prevention of hearing injury

clearly ANSI rating has no bearing on community perception. Similarly, decibels do not always read out the same as the label in locus (cite)

Manufacturers are moving away from both ANSI and decibel ratings in favor of standards that measure air thrust (Newtons), perception-based quietness, and aerospace-derived sound technologies (shifting noise to near-ultrasonic frequencies) (CITE)

short of forcing new leaf blower operators to purchase form a small pool of manufacturers, ANSI and the decibel rating would be only means to

(2) The appeal to noise (quieter alternatives) is an oversimplification. While noise is subjective (in the mind); sound, which is felt (in the body), is not. (cite) Crucially, reducing decibels (dBA) does not reduce the ‘more severe and adverse health effects’ caused by the high levels of low frequency vibration coming out of gas leaf blowers (broadly dBC). Sound which is felt in addition to the debilitating noise heard in our collective heads

SB 365 argues that ‘gas-powered leaf blowers can cause hearing damage to users and bystanders with prolonged exposure’. However, low frequency sound can be heard and felt inside homes and buildings with windows and doors shut at 800 feet away. ‘[E]xtreme noise’ doesn’t just disproportionately affect leaf blower operators. Excessive decibels and low frequency sound disproportionately affects the sensory and cognitive development of children and the unborn (cite).

(3) Each of the three bills leaves distance (100ft) unamended. Currently, §342F-30.8 is at least 700 feet off in all directions.

The fact that here is no noise measurement rule regarding at all for any leaf blowers highlights the general necessity of an ordinance. Electric equipment must also be regulated with regard to decibels. But, the preoccupation with gas leaf blower ‘noise’ is a non-starter; it also seems likely that any appeal to air or water quality metrics (SB 365) will similarly fall short.

Noise meausrents concern individual leaf blowers, where the concern is with the equipment in general. Gas leaf blowers are indisputable toxic and harm people and the environment. The only solution is ban on both sale and use based on scientific evidence.

The urgent, wide-ranging and complex effects on health from low frequency sound is underestimated by these current bills.

ANSI Conclusion

If there are no reliable standards by which we can regulate gas leaf blower ‘noise’ and its harms to whole communities (ANSI/decibels serve to protect the operator) , then the cause of the noise must be banned. There are no regulations right now, other than time of use, which is another affront to communities.

Low frequency sound is more harmful than excessive decibels

Banning gasoline operated leaf blowers would eradicate the low frequency noise in communities . Electric leaf blowers do not produce

instead of electrifying fleets, use the money to electrify the two stroke equipment first because the four stroke truck s that transport this equipment are less polluting—its a high impact action

Time-of-use also harms public health.

There are no amendments to time-of-use propsed in the current bills. However, simply amending time of use is not practical on its face. The same arguments from the department of education will arise. Efficiency. Also, The harms caused by low frequency sound are immediate (check) unlike hearing damage which takes two hours

Both HB30 and HB470 HD2 state that gasoline-powered leaf blowers ‘operate at approximately ninety decibels, which can cause hearing damage after two hours of exposure’. SB 365 puts the range between 80-100 dBA. Yet unamended time-of-use (per §342f-30.8, Hawaii Revised Statutes) allows up to 11 hours a day, non stop, 7 days a week, including holidays. While a job may take only an hour, landscapers often do one street of houses on the same day. Let us not forget that even if it is operating one or two streets away (or anywhere in a valley), the low frequency noise of a gasoline powered leaf blower can still be heard and felt over 800 feet away. (cite) Further, while it may take two hours to lose hearing, it takes only five minutes of leaf blower noise to send people into sympathetic stress (fight or flight), especially if they have been subjected to chronic, long term exposure —which many of us have. Let us not forget the delayed health affects. (cite). As HB 30 and HB 470 rightly point out, the harmful stressors associated with noise ‘combine to detract from the quality of life for people and the environment’.* Why then are these unnecessary pieces of off-road equipment allowed to interfere, physically, physiologically, and mentally, with our health on a daily basis at such an excessively harmful rate?

One answer is cost.

The punishment does not fit the crime.

If, as HB 30 states, noise pollution from gas leaf blowers can cause hearing loss, why would a person caught using a banned leaf blower only be subject to a $100 fine? Is that all the community’s hearing and quality of life is worth? The fine is only consistent with the violation of a prohibition. But the prohibition is for the sake of human health. It is supposed to mean something. That is its community (justificatory and ethical) value.

Aside from noise pollution, gas leaf blowers harm the nervous system, disrupt fetal and child development, pollute air and water, reduce biodiversity, and directly warm the ozone in a short period of time. see the resources links

All told, the illegal operation of a gas leaf blower (were they banned) should be charged as both a toxic trespass on persons and an environmental crime. But let’s start with appropriate fines. In Canada, for example, fines top at $3,000 for individuals and $12,000 for business. Even so, we might also demand serious community service in the form of toxic clean-up, since landscaping companies often write off these expenses as part and parcel of conducting a business that harms the community. (cite)

What about four-stroke gasoline powered leaf blowers?

The definition of a gasoline powered leaf blower in each of these bills only extends to two-stroke gasoline engines, not four-stroke. Four stroke engines are equally harmful given the low frequency sound produced.

What about electric leaf blowers?

*It should be pointed out that electric or battery operated leaf blowers, while a vast improvement over gasoline, still blow harmful toxins (PM 2.5s) into the air, e.g., feces, . And, as mentioned, can still emit decibels at dangerous levels. This would seem to be a benefit to the regulation of all leaf blowers suggested in HB 470, however, regulation based on sound measurements are impractical and difficult to enforce (as pointed out in previous testimony cite). The solution is a full ban on use, as well as sale. The solution is also a reduction in the time-of-use of any leaf blower, since the noise of any leaf blower can instantly trigger stressors, given that many of us have lived with these unnecessary machines for years, day in and day out.

Fiscal implications of protecting human health?

The expense of replacing gasoline equipment with electric (in particular, public ground’s maintenance) along with costs related to enforcement of any ban, apparently costs more than the human health the public health department is appointed to protect.

Gasoline powered leaf blowers are super-polluters.

Gas leaf blower emissions do not simply pollute the air we breathe; they create immediate ozone warming and affect the climate faster than standard greenhouse gases, which are long term..

Why is there no ‘gas leaf blower initiative’ in the state initiatives and city plan given the widely acknowledged harms to humans, wildlife, biodiversity, air, water, and climate ?

The continued sale and use of gasoline operated leaf blowers is a contradiction to the State’s publicly declared climate initiatives, that is: ‘High-Impact Actions that will accelerate greenhouse gas  emission reductions’.

Incomprehensibly, a ban on the sale and use of gas leaf blowers (which emit more pollution than cars and trucks) is not considered in the city and county of Honolulu’s Climate Action Plan. According to the plan’s executive summary,

‘The City has already committed to fully transforming its own vehicle fleet to electric or renewable technology by 2035, and is supporting the transition to electric vehicles island-wide’.

Where the vehicles used to transport city landscape equipment would be electric; the toxic leaf leaf blowers they use to groom school grounds and public spaces would not. Even if the fleets are not electrified, black carbon producing leaf blowers out-pollute the four stroke vehicles used to carry them.

If '[r]educing black carbon is one of the fastest, most effective ways to slow climate change’‍ ‍and the goal of the Climate Action Plan is to ‘drastically reduce the emissions that cause climate change’; then it seems obvious that a ban on the sale and use of black carbon producing leaf blowers is both necessary and sufficient. This alone would have the immediate, strong, and far reaching effects the plan aims for, now.

Where the Climate Action Plan lays out a path to reduce long term carbon emissions, there is a shorter path to mitigation. A ban on gas leaf blowers would drastically accelerate Oahu’s clean energy future. There is nothing more directly damaging to communities, environment, climate, and public health than gas operated leaf blowers.

Claims of economic loss, budget restrictions, and machine inefficiency are unwarranted.

Whether a person cares or not, low frequency noise harms all of us.

Immediate ban

there have been multiple leaf blower ban bills since 3013. The public is aware that the nation is moving towards electrification. 89% want their governments to do something.

The ordinance to be amended

§342F-30.8  Leaf blowers; [string trimmers] weed whackers; restrictions.  (a)  In any urban land use district, as designated pursuant to section 205-2, it shall be unlawful for any person to operate a [two or four stroke gasoline powered] leaf blower or [string trimmer]weed whacker within a residential zone or within one hundred feet of a residential zone in the State, except between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on any day except Sunday or a state or federal holiday, and between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Sunday or any state or federal holiday; provided that government entities, and agents acting on behalf of government entities, may use weed whackers during the prohibited hours in the case of an emergency as defined in section 127A-2.

     (b)  Violators shall be fined $50 for the first violation, $100 for the second violation, $200 for the third violation, and $500 for each subsequent violation.

     (c)  Government entities, and agents acting on behalf of government entities, shall not be subject to this section as it applies to leaf blowers.

     (d)  Any county may adopt a rule or ordinance that places stricter limitations on the use of leaf blowers or weed whackers than are in this section.  In case of a conflict between the requirements or limitations of this section and any county rule or ordinance regarding the use of leaf blowers or weed whackers, the more restrictive requirements shall apply.

Definition string trimmer weed whacker, weed- eater

4 stroke

definition should also state small off-road engine (non stationary) (SORE) this must also be included in the def of ‘excessive noise source’

"Leaf blower"means any portable motorized landscape equipment used to blow
leaves dirt and other debris off sidewalks driveway lawns or other surfaces
"Leaf blower.Certified"means a leaf blower with a noise level reading of 65 dBA
or less measured at a distance of 50 feet by an independent laboratory er American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard B175 2, as certified by the
manufacturer,or an electric leaf blower with a noise level measured at 65 dBA or less
at a distance of 50 feet, as certified by the manufacturer (from Cupertino)

‘Sound Rating Certification. Leaf blower models shall be used that are category 1 rated by American National Standards Institute ("ANSI") or an outside laboratory (e.g., Underwriters Laboratory) that confirm manufacturers of leaf blower models produce a maximum sound rating of 65 dB(A) measured 50 feet from the noise source (ANSI standard B175.2).

The leaf blower bill applies to string trimmers as well, and it doesnt matter because it is not dependent on ANSI

to include string trimmers etc., it must be stated that other gasoline powered lawn equipment

Language of the bill

50 years ago the EPA declared noise a public health hazard. Lack of funding has forced local governments to classify noise as a ‘nuisance’ with the burden of proof on the ‘complainer’. Hence, enforcement has been difficult

Proposed Amendments

Time of use

As written, it is legal to operate any leaf blower in a residential zone, 5 days a week, 11 hours straight, and 10 hours straight on Sundays and holidays. Essentially amounting to 7 days a week non-stop.

Government entities and their agents are exempted in case of emergency, but limited to the use of ‘weed whackers’.

Understanding the interconnected nature of these risks is necessary to inform policy concerning leaf blowers’

No Exemptions

Commercial leaf blower operators, multi-parcel owners (adjoining parcels of land owned by the same owner and totaling two or more acres), city and county employees, and city and county contractors are not exempted.

Enforcement

An outright ban on the sale and use of gas leaf blowers. This is both necessary and sufficient to stop the chronic noise, debilitating pollution, and constant contamination of the ozone; all completely unnecessary and, as such, a contradiction to Hawaiian principles.

One way to prevent or deter violation is to require a leaf blower permit for the use of any leaf blower, given that electric leaf blowers can exceed 65 decibels and nonetheless pollute our homes and environment with PM2s. Obviously, with a ban, there should be no permit for gas leaf blowers, however, ‘permit’ for any leaf blower, guarantees enforcement

If an operator is in violation (on restricted time, the police can require to see their permit)

Property owners are ultimately responsible for compliance (why)

is it feasible to require a permit for leaf blowers? go here https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=is+it+feasible+to+require+a+permit+for+leaf+blowers&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

people ride the electric bus only to go home and breathe the fumes of gas leaf blowers billowing in their condo unit

A searchable database of permit holders (numbers) would be accessible to the public, just as the licence to operate a business is easily searchable.

Violations could be reported through an online complaint form or use HNL 311 to report an issue

Permits are obviously not a foolproof solution, however, they are a deterrent which is always be the best we can strive for.

Electric leaf blower noise (high decibels) is also a ‘nuisance’ and they nonetheless contaminate the air inside and outside homes, businesses and schools with high-speed PM2s.

(1) Registration and licence

Licence to use: All leaf blower operators (electric) will be required to register their equipment (thus ensuring ANSI and decibel compliance) and obtain a licence from the department of health

Outdated equipment (leaf blower conversion) shall be traded in for a rebate in order to aid transition. Rebates are made available through ‘special funds’ allocated through environmental management initiatives — ‘Gas Leaf Blower Initiative’ using monies collected from licences and appropriated through environmental management initiatives rather than state funds; grants similar to the cesspool conversion and compost reimbursement programs.

Licence to sell? Since place of purchase is required for a licence, retailers (include online ones) will be also accountable for prohibited equipment. local businesses will be required to register their products?? department of commerce

Licence searchable on database where there is also a reporting application

since ANSI does not extend to electric leaf blowers, the decibel rating must be used instead

(2) Public awareness 89%

(3)Community enforcement

(4) Restricted time-of-use (of electric leaf blowers) upheld by local law enforcement