In recent years, several U.S. states have enacted legislation restricting the use of air pollution data collected by community members using low-cost sensors. This trend has raised concerns about the ability of residents to hold polluters accountable amid a declining federal air monitoring network.

Over the past two years, lawmakers in Louisiana, Kentucky, and Ohio have passed laws barring regulators from taking enforcement action based on air quality data unless it originates from Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-approved monitors, which often cost tens of thousands of dollars. Similar bills have been proposed multiple times in West Virginia but have repeatedly failed. Industry representatives have opposed versions of the legislation that would permit use of community-collected data if it met manufacturer standards, arguing such measures weaken efforts to restrict citizen monitoring.

The chemical industry has been a significant force behind these restrictions. In West Virginia, for example, officials from chemical company Chemours and the West Virginia Manufacturers Association criticized compromise legislation as undermining the goals of proposed regulations. In Kentucky, industry groups including the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the American Petroleum Institute, Chemours, and Dow Chemical actively lobbied for a law requiring “scientifically defensible” methods for air quality data used in enforcement.

The restrictions come at a time when the nation’s public air monitoring network is diminishing. Federal funding for air quality monitoring has dropped by more than 35% over the past two decades after adjusting for inflation. During that same period, the number of government air monitors has nearly halved. As of 2025, approximately 60% of U.S. counties lack any public air monitor. Aging infrastructure and difficulties obtaining replacement parts further hamper remaining facilities.

Government monitors frequently fail to detect many harmful pollutants. An analysis of 100 major industrial polluters in Kentucky, Louisiana, Ohio, and West Virginia found that in 71 cases, the primary chemical released is not measured by any state government monitor. In Louisiana’s oil, gas, and petrochemical hubs, monitoring stations are often situated far from pollution sources and do not test for some of the most hazardous compounds.

Community groups have sought to fill these gaps using low-cost sensors. The Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) planned to install 27 monitors in pollution hotspots with a $500,000 federal grant but was only able to deploy monitors in four communities before the grant was rescinded under the Trump administration. The group’s executive director described the loss as a major setback.

Local residents express frustration over the lack of accessible and reliable monitoring data. Donna Ballinger, who lives near a steel plant in Middletown, Ohio, uses a sensor outside her home to track pollution she says causes respiratory irritation and raises fears of cancer. However, the new Ohio budget provision, which restricts the use of community-collected data for enforcement, prompted her to join a lawsuit challenging the law.

In Louisiana’s industrial corridor between Baton Rouge and New Orleans, resident Reonda Victor struggles with the absence of comprehensive monitoring near her home, where air pollution contributes to some of the highest cancer risks in the country. With multiple family members diagnosed with breast cancer despite no known genetic predisposition, Victor expressed a desire for better air quality data to help understand potential environmental causes.

Industry representatives maintain that data from uncalibrated, low-cost monitors may be unreliable and fear it could lead to misinformation or unwarranted regulatory actions. Chemours spokesperson Jess Loizeaux emphasized that enforcement decisions should rely on verified data from trained regulators. Ohio Chamber of Commerce legal counsel Tony Long compared unverified monitors to uncalibrated speed guns, underscoring business concerns about data accuracy.

The debate highlights a growing tension between the chemical industry’s interests, regulatory agencies, and communities seeking greater transparency on local air quality amid a shrinking public monitoring infrastructure.