The importance of population susceptibility for air pollution risk assessment: a case study of power plants near Washington, DC.

Abstract

In evaluating risks from air pollution, health impact assessments often focus on the magnitude of the impacts without explicitly considering the distribution of impacts across subpopulations. In this study, we constructed a model to estimate the magnitude and distribution of health benefits associated with emission controls at five older power plants in the Washington, DC, area. We used the CALPUFF atmospheric dispersion model to determine the primary and secondary fine-particulate-matter (< 2.5 micro m in aerodynamic diameter) concentration reductions associated with the hypothetical application of "Best Available Control Technology" to the selected power plants. We combined these concentration reductions with concentration-response functions for mortality and selected morbidity outcomes, using a conventional approach as well as considering susceptible subpopulations. Incorporating susceptibility had a minimal effect on total benefits, with central estimates of approximately 240 fewer premature deaths, 60 fewer cardiovascular hospital admissions (CHA), and 160 fewer pediatric asthma emergency room visits (ERV) per year. However, because individuals with lower education appear to have both higher background mortality rates and higher relative risks for air-pollution-related mortality, stratifying by educational attainment implies that 51% of the mortality benefits accrue among the 25% of the population with less than high school education. Similarly, diabetics and African Americans bear disproportionate shares of the CHA and ERV benefits, respectively. Although our ability to characterize subpopulations is constrained by the available information, our analysis demonstrates that incorporation of susceptibility information significantly affects demographic and geographic patterns of health benefits and enhances our understanding of individuals likely to benefit from emission controls.

A Preliminary Study on Indoor Air Quality for the Development of Risk Assessment Methods for Central Nervous System Disturbances

“…The present study assessed the health risk resulting from fine dust exposure as the risk of ERV due to manifestation of pediatric asthma. The UR used for the ERV from fine dust exposure was 0.01% or 1% per unit increase (µg/m 3 ), which was the result reported by Levy et al (2002).…”

Perspectives in Household Air Pollution Research: Who Will Benefit from Interventions?

“…Several investigators have hypothesized that those individuals who are more susceptible to the adverse effects of air pollution exposure may also be the groups that benefit most from efforts to reduce air pollution levels (e.g., traffic reduction plans, industrial facility closings, indoor air filter interventions) [47,48], yet this question has largely been ignored in the cookstove field. Valid assessments of the true exposureresponse relationships among various subpopulations are necessary to inform a more accurate estimate of the global burden of disease attributed to cookstove smoke, an identified research gap needed to convince governments and policy makers to enact interventions [49].…”

“…Evidence regarding who benefits from improved air quality is limited and inconsistent. It is not known whether larger predicted benefits among certain subpopulations are due to differences in greater relative improvements associated with air pollution reductions (i.e., different exposure-response functions experienced by the subgroups) or differences in absolute improvements because of poorer baseline health status, which may be independent of air pollution [47]. Figure 1 is a simplistic example of the problem that may arise if investigators do not take into account that only a segment of their study population is able to experience a health benefit resulting from a cookstove intervention.…”

SO2, NO2 and BTEX Concentrations in Educational and Industrial Areas: Field Measurements in Kuwait

“…Besides affecting human health, air pollution can also damage property, plants and crops (Seinfeld, 1986). Although these types of damage cause high, directly measureable costs, they are not comparable to the costs associated with human health (Brunekreef and Holgate, 2002;Levy et al, 2002). Monitoring the potential health effects of any urban air pollutant requires many complementary measurements.…”