Slightly off topic but I found it surprising that the most polluted US cities are in Florida and the Midwest. No cities in CA or TX make the top 10.

From CNN/Money best places:

Most Polluted

At least for air pollution, Sacramento is one of the worst offenders for ozone because of our geography (valley), number of vehicles, and the hot summer climate.

I'll bet Melvindale, MI (small hamlet just outside of Detroit) would rank pretty high for poor air quality. It is located adjacent to several industrial complexes, and downwind of many more. The air was often yellowy-green. Everyday there it seemed as though I could feel the cancer cells growing with each breath. That was about 15 years ago. Hopefully things have improved since then.

I cannot believe that El Paso TX didn't make this list. . that place is just disgusting imo. Gross, brown air everywhere - can barely breathe.

I got very polluted in Philadelphia.

The odor was as sickening as the sight.

I can't belive L.A. didn't make it either. I am chocking to death here with all that thick smog. Even worse, we're about to get a taste of summer's first heat wave tomorrow. Talk about nasty environment.

I think that while "pollution controls" have succeeded in making the L.A. pollution less visible, it is no less toxic than it was 30 years go, and perhaps even worse.

POLLUTED -- another great synonym! ^

why do you say this? my friend's mom is an expert on the LA environment (used to be very high up in the EPA) and she tells me that the pollution situation is much better (on all counts) today than it was in 1970.

i lived there through the worst of it. i visit there frequently, and the burning eyes, throat and respiratory devices, as well as the other gross human manifestations of it are proof enough for me. i only wish i could be happily selfdeluded about it.

That's not saying much. And this is from someone who lived in the LA metro area until 1971. Air pollution there in the 1950's and 1960's was beyond awful. The truth is, it's not so easy to stay ahead of the curve; although cars (for example) emit far less pollution than they did 40-50 years ago, there's a LOT more of them now than then!

Incidentally, I've seen OTHER statistics that show that several California metro areas DO rank up there with the worst air-polluted cities in the US.

A notable exception, however, is San Francisco, which actually has some of the cleanest air in the country. I believe it's because there's a stiff wind off the open ocean, and the pollution blows inland! (This is coming from someone who lives just two blocks from the ocean, and whose air is always clean and fresh and cool.... ^ )

At least the major California cities are proactive about trying to cut down pollution in the present and the future. It'd be a lot worse if local and state legislation wasn't so strict. An example of the opposite is Houston. I think the worst large city for air pollution, now surpassing LA. Why anyone would purposely choose to move there is beyond me for reasons far more than pollution.

This only proves you shouldnt believe what you read

Valrico? Valrico cant be classified as a city, its not even a town it has no downtown and up until recently consisted of a post office and small fire-station. The article didnt say what " the pollution" consisted of but the entire area was and is still mostly cow pasture and strawberry fields. Now its becoming part of Brandon which in turn has become a bedroom community/suburb of Tampa.
Unless the pollution is a measurement of "bovine gas" the classification is beyond ridiculous. Lakeland I can understand to certain extent (though to say that, even that town is more polluted than any of the major CA cites is just plain B.S.) because of the phosphate mining industry and the low lying terrain and high summer temps but even there, no visible haze like one can see in San Francisco..

mike

I didn't see Gary, IN on the list. Surely it has to be up there. Foul place is all respects.