| Literature DB >> 27801878 |
Kim N Dirks1, Judith Y T Wang2,3, Amirul Khan4, Christopher Rushton5.
Abstract
Walking School Buses (WSBs) provide a safe alternative to being driven to school. Children benefit from the contribution the exercise provides towards their daily exercise target, it gives children practical experience with respect to road safety and it helps to relieve traffic congestion around the entrance to their school. Walking routes are designed largely based in road safety considerations, catchment need and the availability of parent support. However, little attention is given to the air pollution exposure experienced by children during their journey to school, despite the commuting microenvironment being an important contributor to a child's daily air pollution exposure. This study aims to quantify the air pollution exposure experienced by children walking to school and those being driven by car. A school was chosen in Bradford, UK. Three adult participants carried out the journey to and from school, each carrying a P-Trak ultrafine particle (UFP) count monitor. One participant travelled the journey to school by car while the other two walked, each on opposite sides of the road for the majority of the journey. Data collection was carried out over a period of two weeks, for a total of five journeys to school in the morning and five on the way home at the end of the school day. Results of the study suggest that car commuters experience lower levels of air pollution dose due to lower exposure and reduced commute times. The largest reductions in exposure for pedestrians can be achieved by avoiding close proximity to traffic queuing up at intersections, and, where possible, walking on the side of the road opposite the traffic, especially during the morning commuting period. Major intersections should also be avoided as they were associated with peak exposures. Steps to ensure that the phasing of lights is optimised to minimise pedestrian waiting time would also help reduce exposure. If possible, busy roads should be avoided altogether. By the careful design of WSB routes, taking into account air pollution, children will be able to experience the benefits that walking to school brings while minimizing their air pollution exposure during their commute to and from school.Entities:
Keywords: children; exposure; pedestrian; school; traffic; ultrafine particles
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27801878 PMCID: PMC5129274 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph13111064
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Map depicting the route to school in the morning. (a) The journey to school begins in the bottom left-hand corner (the house) and finishes in the top right-hand corner (the school). The green markers represent the route for the walkers while the red markers are those for the car commuter. The detour at the end of the journey for the car commuter is for parking the car; (b) The beginning of the route (red is the car, green is the North Walker and blue is the South Walker; (c) The intersection. (d) The final segment of the journey close to the school.
Descriptive statistics of ultrafine particle concentrations. N is the number of 10 s observations, UFP is the ultrafine particle count and STDEV is the standard deviation.
| Date | Time | South Walker | North Walker | Car Commuter | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (dd/mm/yy) | (AM/PM) | Mean UFP (cts/cm3) | STDEV UFP (cts/cm3) | N | Mean UFP (cts/cm3) | STDEV UFP (cts/cm3) | N | Mean UFP (cts/cm3) | STDEV UFP (cts/cm3) | N |
| 10/11/2015 | AM | 14,600 | 14,000 | 120 | 17,500 | 20,500 | 120 | 11,300 | 12,100 | 108 |
| 11/11/2015 | AM | 13,400 | 17,800 | 120 | 15,700 | 17,000 | 120 | 3700 | 1300 | 78 |
| 12/11/2015 | AM | 25,200 | 25,000 | 120 | 28,500 | 27,800 | 120 | 11,800 | 2300 | 84 |
| 16/11/2015 | AM | 12,200 | 16,800 | 120 | 11,400 | 10,900 | 120 | 9000 | 10,000 | 54 |
| 17/11/2015 | AM | 23,000 | 31,700 | 120 | 27,400 | 33,800 | 120 | 7300 | 4300 | 54 |
| 10/11/2015 | PM | 11,500 | 11,700 | 120 | 11,300 | 10,100 | 120 | 6900 | 2400 | 84 |
| 11/11/2015 | PM | 10,700 | 14,900 | 120 | 9700 | 13,100 | 120 | 6800 | 2600 | 66 |
| 12/11/2015 | PM | 9900 | 12,900 | 120 | 8500 | 11,600 | 120 | 7800 | 14,600 | 84 |
| 16/11/2015 | PM | 7000 | 9500 | 120 | 7400 | 8900 | 120 | 5500 | 5000 | 84 |
| 19/11/2015 | PM | 26,200 | 37,400 | 120 | 22,000 | 24,600 | 120 | 17,600 | 9400 | 72 |
Figure 2Box plots of the log-transformed UFP concentrations for each commute in the field campaign by commuter; (a) Morning commutes; (b) Afternoon commutes.
Figure 3Route average UFP comparison between modes and routes. The error bars are the standard errors of the mean (SEM) for the five commutes in each category.
Figure 4Example of UFP exposure for a commute (a) 17 November 2015 morning and (b) 12 November 2015 afternoon for the two walking routes and the car commuter. Note the peak in concentration that occurs shortly after 8:25 a.m. for the pedestrians when they reach a partially enclosed stretch of road and the shorter duration of the commutes for the car commuter.
Figure 5Mean UFP concentration by road segment for walkers: (a) Morning commute, (b) Afternoon commute. The error bars are the standard errors of the mean (SEM) for the five commutes in each category.
Figure 6Mean UFP concentration for the Moorhead Road segment. The error bars are the standard errors of the mean (SEM) for the five commutes in each category.