They’re easy to hate: gas-powered leaf blowers spew pollution into the air, deafen people trying to work from home, and pose a health hazard for workers who use them. But they can be hard to get rid of.

This week, after much debate and delay, Montgomery County lawmakers voted 10 to 1 to pass legislation banning gas-powered leaf blowers, following the lead of D.C., which passed a similar ban in 2018. The District’s leaf blower ban went into effect in 2022, though enforcement has been spotty.

Montgomery County’s new ban will be phased in over the next two years. Starting July 1, 2024, the sale of new gas-powered leaf blowers will be outlawed. A year later, starting July 1, 2025, it will be illegal to use gas-powered leaf blowers in the county. The legislation also applies to gas-powered leaf vacuums.

In a statement, County Executive Marc Elrich applauded the passage of the bill, and vowed to sign it into law.

“Transitioning away from gas-powered leaf blowers is beneficial for our communities by reducing noise pollution and protecting workers. I want to thank the many residents who advocated tirelessly for this legislation,” Elrich said.

Leaf blowers aren’t just noisy — they also produce a surprisingly high amount of air pollution and planet-warming greenhouse gasses. One study in 2011 found that a consumer-grade leaf blower emitted far more pollution than a giant, 6,200-lb. Ford F-150 SVT Raptor. A half hour of yard work, the testing found, produced the same amount of hydrocarbon emissions as driving from Alaska to Texas in an F-150.

Leaf blower emissions contain carbon dioxide, contributing to climate change, as well as high levels of cancer-causing compounds such as benzene, and the chemicals that form smog.

Two jurisdictions within the county have already passed bans on leaf blowers — Chevy Chase Village and the Town of Chevy Chase.

Montgomery County residents started lobbying for the ban in early 2021, launching an online petition and website. Legislation was introduced in June, 2022, at the request of County Executive Marc Elrich, but it did not get a hearing or a vote that year. After a hours-long work session on the bill in March this year, lawmakers voted to table the legislation.

At-large Council member Gabe Albornoz cast the only vote against the bill this week. During debate ahead of the vote, he acknowledged leaf blowers are annoying and cause pollution.

“It is undeniable that these products are a nuisance. They have ruined many a Zoom,” Albornoz said.

But a ban, he said, would put a heavy financial burden on the landscaping industry, many of whose workers are Latino immigrants.

“We are going to disproportionately impact our immigrant community in a way that deeply concerns me,”Albornoz said.

The legislation does include a rebate program to help residents and businesses purchase new electric leaf blowers, the details of which have yet to be hashed out. But Albornoz said the rebate will not come close to covering the cost of replacing a leaf blower.

Council member Natali Fani-González (District 6), also said she was concerned about immigrant landscape workers, but said leaf blower ban will improve their lives.

“Change and transitions are always very hard,” said Fani-González, who voted in favor of the ban. “But I’m doing this because the people affected by the gas leaf blowers are the immigrant community. They are the ones who their health is getting impacted.”

A racial equity and social justice impact statement prepared by county staff reflected both of these concerns — the health of Latino workers, and the impact on landscaping businesses, many of which are owned by Latinos. But the analysis found that the legislation would bring more benefit than harm.

According to the analysis, the legislation will “narrow racial and social disparities in the County as its overall benefits to Latinx employees in the local landscaping sector and to County residents exceed its costs to local landscape business owners, who are disproportionately Latinx.” In addition, the costs to businesses would be defrayed by the rebate program, the analysis noted. Plus, landscaping businesses would likely pass on the costs associated with the ban to homeowners and business owners, who are disproportionately white.

This story was updated to add comment from