Literature DB >> 30339492

Air quality and health benefits from potential coal power plant closures in Texas.

Brian Strasert1, Su Chen Teh1, Daniel S Cohan1.   

Abstract

As power production from renewable energy and natural gas grows, closures of some coal-fired power plants in Texas become increasingly likely. In this study, the potential effects of such closures on air quality and human health were analyzed by linking a regional photochemical model with a health impacts assessment tool. The impacts varied significantly across 13 of the state's largest coal-fired power plants, sometimes by more than an order of magnitude, even after normalizing by generation. While some power plants had negligible impacts on concentrations at important monitors, average impacts up to 0.5 parts per billion (ppb) and 0.2 µg/m3 and maximum impacts up to 3.3 ppb and 0.9 µg/m3 were seen for ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5), respectively. Individual power plants impacted average visibility by up to 0.25 deciviews in Class I Areas. Health impacts arose mostly from PM2.5 and were an order of magnitude higher for plants that lack scrubbers for SO2. Rankings of health impacts were largely consistent across the base model results and two reduced form models. Carbon dioxide emissions were relatively uniform, ranging from 1.00 to 1.26 short tons/MWh, and can be monetized based on a social cost of carbon. Despite all of these unpaid externalities, estimated direct costs of each power plant exceeded wholesale power prices in 2016. Implications: While their CO2 emission rates are fairly similar, sharply different NOx and SO2 emission rates and spatial factors cause coal-fired power plants to vary by an order of magnitude in their impacts on ozone, particulate matter, and associated health and visibility outcomes. On a monetized basis, the air pollution health impacts often exceed the value of the electricity generated and are of similar magnitude to climate impacts. This suggests that both air pollution and climate should be considered if externalities are used to inform decision making about power-plant dispatch and retirement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30339492     DOI: 10.1080/10962247.2018.1537984

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc        ISSN: 1096-2247            Impact factor:   2.235


  4 in total

Review 1.  Drivers of anthropogenic air emissions in Nigeria - A review.

Authors:  Oyetunji O Okedere; Francis B Elehinafe; Seun Oyelami; Augustine O Ayeni
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2021-03-08

2.  Impact of Air Pollution on Residents' Medical Expenses: A Study Based on the Survey Data of 122 Cities in China.

Authors:  Huan Liu; Tiantian Hu; Meng Wang
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2021-12-20

3.  Diverse Pathways for Power Sector Decarbonization in Texas Yield Health Cobenefits but Fail to Alleviate Air Pollution Exposure Inequities.

Authors:  Qian Luo; Brenna Copeland; Fernando Garcia-Menendez; Jeremiah X Johnson
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2022-09-07       Impact factor: 11.357

4.  Comparisons of simple and complex methods for quantifying exposure to individual point source air pollution emissions.

Authors:  Lucas R F Henneman; Irene C Dedoussi; Joan A Casey; Christine Choirat; Steven R H Barrett; Corwin M Zigler
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 5.563

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.