Graffiti is a form of litter and many times the paint spray bottles are left behind and the toxic paint leaks into our groundwater. It is unsightly and lowers property values just the same as litter. Graffiti is a crime as well as littering and as much as People complain about graffiti, they should be complaining more about the cost of garbage instead as it cost the taxpayer even more money.
Environmental Effects of Graffiti
- The aerosol sprays used destroy the earths ozone layer, containing CFC’s.
- Many Aerosol paints are oil based increasing our addiction to oil
- Runoffs can carry chemicals to waterways and groundwater systems.
- Unsightly to many people
- Increases Vandalism in areas
Fumes damage the air and effect the Lungs- High VOC
- City of San Jose, CA spent approximately $2 million in 2006 fighting graffiti.
Pittsburgh, PA (population just over 300,000) spends around $350,000 annually for graffiti clean up.7- - Omaha, NE spends about $100,000 a year on graffiti removal (population just over 400,000).
- In 2006, the Tennessee Department of Transportation spent more than $240,000 on removing graffiti along its roads and bridges.
- Denver, CO and Milwaukee, WI, with similar populations-just over 550,000-each spend about $1 million annually
- In Houston, TX (population just over 2 million), the city earmarked $2.2 million for cleanup of existing graffiti in 2006.
- Chicago, IL budgeted $6.5 million in 2006 for graffiti removal and Graffiti Blasters, the city’s removal program (population a little over 2.8 million).
- Las Vegas, NV with a population of about 1.7 million spends more than $3 million each year cleaning up graffiti.
- Springdale (AR) paid more than $15,000 in 2007 to remove graffiti around the city. Graffiti appeared on buildings, bridges, drainage ditches, signs, traffic boxes, streets and sidewalks. The reported incidents of graffiti climbed to 454 in 2007, compared with 220 in 2006.
- Seattle Public Utilities spent about $1 million last year for graffiti enforcement, removal, education and outreach, while King County Metro Transit spent $734,000 last year to rid buses, tunnels, park and rides and bus shelters of graffiti.
In Los Angeles
- CalTrans spent $2.7m cleaning up graffiti along the city’s freeways.-Amount of graffiti (7,622,234 square feet)
- The Los Angeles Office of Community Beautification estimates that it spends more than $7 million annually for graffiti abatement and cleanup costs.
- Graffiti Removal cost LA County $30 Million (2007) Caltrans spent
- MTA’s ”bomb’ painted on the concrete walls of the LA River cost $3.7 Million to remove due to the environmental hazards to the watershed.
- $30, 661 spent on surveillance cameras in San Fernando Tunnel that the city spent $36,000 on graffiti removal
Source
Good brief and this enter helped me alot in my college assignement. Thank you seeking your information.
It is a shame how much it does cost to get rid of all of that graffiti. I have noticed though that in some cities where they pain a mural or something onto a wall then it isnt touched by graffiti. It isnt always going to work but it is worth a shot to see if you can at least prevent more cleanings.
I like the green information but the costs quoted for clean-up don’t tell the whole story. What the tax payer is really paying for can be quite scary and clean-up can be more viscious for the environment than the a couple coats of spraypaint and a marker — never forget the marker.
A more balanced view would be to also consider what’s actually cleaning up the paint, not to mention an entire multi-billion dollar — per major city all over the police state world — industry that exists because of graffiti. There’s a reason not everything is buffed all at once. And if tax payers knew just how much garbage they taxed for in the guise of clean up — such as surveillance gear, expensive proprietary ARCGIS remote sensing database software (when they can get open source), labor, asinine wasting of our tax payers dim for court and nonviolent incarceration costs… and it just goes on and on — they’d spit.
But you’re right… graffers need better products to help the environment too… and they are starting: see eye-writer, laser, etc..
i get what ur saying about graffiti being costly for clean up and law related issues and can give negative image i agree but im not buying the whole environment harm. the paint used to make that graffiti is only a small drop compared to how much was used to paint that building.also, i bet the company that produces paint and spray paint does waay more pollution and harm then a graffiti artiest. also, not many graffiti pieces are done next to a water source and it almost never drips on the ground. In addition, you say littering which again is nothing. people throw more drink bottles and trash out there car on a daily bases then cans on the ground used t0 make a graffiti piece. furthermore, cans arent just thrown on the ground a lot of time there is probably paint still in the can to be used again or thrown away to not leave a trace. the chemicals used to take graffiti off the walls is stronger and more harmful then paint is..
“Sdffa” your exactly right on that comment… This article is a complete negative spin on graffiti…this article might as well be out of the UN’s “Agenda 21” handbook… Graffiti art was created by the youth out of political frustration.. You should be pointing the finger at mayor vigarossa of L.A & these other corrupt politicians who steal twice as much $ each year.. More. Remember gov.”gray davis’…who was letting toxic waste being dumped in our oceans.. Ur articles a waste of time & lack of shear knowledge of a culture!