Literature DB >> 19392676

Uncertainty and variability in health-related damages from coal-fired power plants in the United States.

Jonathan I Levy1, Lisa K Baxter, Joel Schwartz.   

Abstract

The health-related damages associated with emissions from coal-fired power plants can vary greatly across facilities as a function of plant, site, and population characteristics, but the degree of variability and the contributing factors have not been formally evaluated. In this study, we modeled the monetized damages associated with 407 coal-fired power plants in the United States, focusing on premature mortality from fine particulate matter (PM(2.5)). We applied a reduced-form chemistry-transport model accounting for primary PM(2.5) emissions and the influence of sulfur dioxide (SO(2)) and nitrogen oxide (NO(x)) emissions on secondary particulate formation. Outputs were linked with a concentration-response function for PM(2.5)-related mortality that incorporated nonlinearities and model uncertainty. We valued mortality with a value of statistical life approach, characterizing and propagating uncertainties in all model elements. At the median of the plant-specific uncertainty distributions, damages across plants ranged from $30,000 to $500,000 per ton of PM(2.5), $6,000 to $50,000 per ton of SO(2), $500 to $15,000 per ton of NO(x), and $0.02 to $1.57 per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated. Variability in damages per ton of emissions was almost entirely explained by population exposure per unit emissions (intake fraction), which itself was related to atmospheric conditions and the population size at various distances from the power plant. Variability in damages per kilowatt-hour was highly correlated with SO(2) emissions, related to fuel and control technology characteristics, but was also correlated with atmospheric conditions and population size at various distances. Our findings emphasize that control strategies that consider variability in damages across facilities would yield more efficient outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19392676     DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01227.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  19 in total

1.  Expanding the scope of environmental risk assessment to better include differential vulnerability and susceptibility.

Authors:  Joel Schwartz; David Bellinger; Thomas Glass
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2011-10-20       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Expanding the scope of risk assessment: methods of studying differential vulnerability and susceptibility.

Authors:  Joel Schwartz; David Bellinger; Thomas Glass
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2011-10-20       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Regional variations in the health, environmental, and climate benefits of wind and solar generation.

Authors:  Kyle Siler-Evans; Inês Lima Azevedo; M Granger Morgan; Jay Apt
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Retirements of Coal and Oil Power Plants in California: Association With Reduced Preterm Birth Among Populations Nearby.

Authors:  Joan A Casey; Deborah Karasek; Elizabeth L Ogburn; Dana E Goin; Kristina Dang; Paula A Braveman; Rachel Morello-Frosch
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Characterizing population exposure to coal emissions sources in the United States using the HyADS model.

Authors:  Lucas R F Henneman; Christine Choirat; Cesunica Ivey; Kevin Cummiskey; Corwin M Zigler
Journal:  Atmos Environ (1994)       Date:  2019-02-02       Impact factor: 4.798

6.  Accountability Assessment of Health Improvements in the United States Associated with Reduced Coal Emissions Between 2005 and 2012.

Authors:  Lucas R F Henneman; Christine Choirat; And Corwin M Zigler
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 4.822

7.  Comparison of gaseous and particulate emissions from a pilot-scale combustor using three varieties of coal.

Authors:  Tiffany L B Yelverton; Angelina T Brashear; David G Nash; James E Brown; Carl F Singer; Peter H Kariher; Jeffrey V Ryan
Journal:  Fuel (Lond)       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 6.609

8.  The influence of location, source, and emission type in estimates of the human health benefits of reducing a ton of air pollution.

Authors:  Neal Fann; Charles M Fulcher; Bryan J Hubbell
Journal:  Air Qual Atmos Health       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 3.763

9.  Disparities in Distribution of Particulate Matter Emissions from US Coal-Fired Power Plants by Race and Poverty Status After Accounting for Reductions in Operations Between 2015 and 2017.

Authors:  Jennifer Richmond-Bryant; Ihab Mikati; Adam F Benson; Thomas J Luben; Jason D Sacks
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2020-03-19       Impact factor: 9.308

10.  Evaluation of the public health impacts of traffic congestion: a health risk assessment.

Authors:  Jonathan I Levy; Jonathan J Buonocore; Katherine von Stackelberg
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 5.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.