Literature DB >> 25454245

Traffic-related air pollution and health co-benefits of alternative transport in Adelaide, South Australia.

Ting Xia1, Monika Nitschke2, Ying Zhang3, Pushan Shah4, Shona Crabb1, Alana Hansen1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Motor vehicle emissions contribute nearly a quarter of the world's energy-related greenhouse gases and cause non-negligible air pollution, primarily in urban areas. Changing people's travel behaviour towards alternative transport is an efficient approach to mitigate harmful environmental impacts caused by a large number of vehicles. Such a strategy also provides an opportunity to gain health co-benefits of improved air quality and enhanced physical activities. This study aimed at quantifying co-benefit effects of alternative transport use in Adelaide, South Australia.
METHOD: We made projections for a business-as-usual scenario for 2030 with alternative transport scenarios. Separate models including air pollution models and comparative risk assessment health models were developed to link alternative transport scenarios with possible environmental and health benefits.
RESULTS: In the study region with an estimated population of 1.4 million in 2030, by shifting 40% of vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT) by passenger vehicles to alternative transport, annual average urban PM2.5 would decline by approximately 0.4μg/m(3) compared to business-as-usual, resulting in net health benefits of an estimated 13deaths/year prevented and 118 disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) prevented per year due to improved air quality. Further health benefits would be obtained from improved physical fitness through active transport (508deaths/year prevented, 6569DALYs/year prevented), and changes in traffic injuries (21 deaths and, 960 DALYs prevented).
CONCLUSION: Although uncertainties remain, our findings suggest that significant environmental and health benefits are possible if alternative transport replaces even a relatively small portion of car trips. The results may provide assistance to various government organisations and relevant service providers and promote collaboration in policy-making, city planning and infrastructure establishment.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Active transport; Air pollution; Health impact assessment; Physical activity; Public transport; Traffic injury

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25454245     DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2014.10.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Int        ISSN: 0160-4120            Impact factor:   9.621


  24 in total

1.  Health impact metrics for air pollution management strategies.

Authors:  Sheena E Martenies; Donele Wilkins; Stuart A Batterman
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 9.621

2.  Projections of hepatitis A virus infection associated with flood events by 2020 and 2030 in Anhui Province, China.

Authors:  Lu Gao; Ying Zhang; Guoyong Ding; Qiyong Liu; Changke Wang; Baofa Jiang
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2016-05-12       Impact factor: 3.787

3.  Climate Change, Physical Activity and Sport: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Paquito Bernard; Guillaume Chevance; Celia Kingsbury; Aurélie Baillot; Ahmed-Jérôme Romain; Virginie Molinier; Tegwen Gadais; Kelsey N Dancause
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  Spatiotemporal characteristics of PM2.5 and PM10 at urban and corresponding background sites in 23 cities in China.

Authors:  Lizhong Xu; Stuart Batterman; Fang Chen; Jiabing Li; Xuefen Zhong; Yongjie Feng; Qinghua Rao; Feng Chen
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 7.963

5.  Socio-demographic predictors of health and environmental co-benefit behaviours for climate change mitigation in urban China.

Authors:  Emily Ying Yang Chan; Susan Shuxin Wang; Janice Ying-En Ho; Zhe Huang; Sida Liu; Chunlan Guo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Obesity-related health impacts of fuel excise taxation- an evidence review and cost-effectiveness study.

Authors:  V Brown; M Moodie; L Cobiac; A M Mantilla Herrera; R Carter
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 3.295

7.  Perceptions of Health Co-Benefits in Relation to Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions: A Survey among Urban Residents in Three Chinese Cities.

Authors:  Jinghong Gao; Guozhang Xu; Wenjun Ma; Yong Zhang; Alistair Woodward; Sotiris Vardoulakis; Sari Kovats; Paul Wilkinson; Tianfeng He; Hualiang Lin; Tao Liu; Shaohua Gu; Jun Wang; Jing Li; Jun Yang; Xiaobo Liu; Jing Li; Haixia Wu; Qiyong Liu
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  Smartphone Apps for Measuring Human Health and Climate Change Co-Benefits: A Comparison and Quality Rating of Available Apps.

Authors:  Rachel K Sullivan; Samantha Marsh; Jakob Halvarsson; Michelle Holdsworth; Wilma Waterlander; Maartje P Poelman; Jennifer Ann Salmond; Hayley Christian; Lenny Sc Koh; Janet E Cade; John C Spence; Alistair Woodward; Ralph Maddison
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 4.773

9.  Rapid Assessment of Environmental Health Impacts for Policy Support: The Example of Road Transport in New Zealand.

Authors:  David Briggs; Kylie Mason; Barry Borman
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  A shift from motorised travel to active transport: What are the potential health gains for an Australian city?

Authors:  Belen Zapata-Diomedi; Luke D Knibbs; Robert S Ware; Kristiann C Heesch; Marko Tainio; James Woodcock; J Lennert Veerman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-11       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.