Health and air quality benefits of policies to reduce coal-fired power plant emissions: A case study in North Carolina

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 48, Issue 17, 2014, Pages 10019-10027

  Li, Ya Ru ^a   Gibson, Jacqueline Macdonald ^a  

^a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AIR QUALITY; COAL FUELED FURNACES; FIRE TUBE BOILERS; FOSSIL FUEL POWER PLANTS; LAW ENFORCEMENT; MINING; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK PERCEPTION; SULFUR DIOXIDE;

AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT; EMISSIONS REDUCTION; FINE PARTICULATES; POLLUTANT EMISSION; PREMATURE DEATH; SULFATE CONCENTRATIONS; TREND ANALYSIS;

COAL;

AIR POLLUTANTS; AIR POLLUTION; BAYES THEOREM; COAL; ENTROPY; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; HEALTH; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NORTH CAROLINA; PARTICULATE MATTER; POWER PLANTS; SULFATES; SULFUR DIOXIDE;

EID: 84906871591     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: 15205851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/es501358a     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Bachmann, J. Will the circle be unbroken: A history of the US national ambient air quality standards J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2007, 57 (6) 652-697
2. Chestnut, L. G.; Mills, D. M. A fresh look at the benefits and costs of the US Acid Rain Program J. Environ. Manage. 2005, 77 (3) 252-266
3. Hubbell, B. J.; Crume, R. V.; Evarts, D. M.; Cohen, J. M. Policy Monitor: Regulation and Progress under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 2010, 4 (1) 122-138
4. Kruse, E. Case Comments: North Carolina v. Environmental Protection Agency Harvard Environ. Law Rev. 2009, 33 (1) 283-296
5. N.C. DENR (Department of Environment and Natural Resources). Clean Air Legislation: Clean Smokestacks Act. http://www.ncair.org/news/leg/ (accessed December 1, 2013).
6. Hoppock, D.; Adair, S. K.; Murray, B.; Tarr, J. Benifits of Early State Action in Environmental Regulation of Electric Utilities: North Carolinas Clean Smokestacks Act; Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University: Durham, NC, 2012.
7. Ross, W. G. The North Carolina Clean Smokestacks Act N. C. Med. J. 2011, 72 (2) 128-131
8. Maryland Department of the Environment. The Maryland Healthy Air Act. http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/Air/Pages/MD-HAA.aspx (accessed December 14, 2013).
9. 2.5 and ozone air quality trends Air Qual. Atmos. Health 2013, 6 (1) 1-11
10. U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Regulatory ImpactAnalysis for the Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce InterstateTransport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone in 27 States; Correctionof SIP Approvals for 22 States. http://www.epa.gov/crossstaterule/pdfs/FinalRIA.pdf (accessed September 27, 2013).
11. Blanchard, C. L.; Hidy, G. M.; Tanenbaum, S.; Edgerton, E. S.; Hartsell, B. E. The Southeastern Aerosol Research and Characterization (SEARCH) study: Temporal trends in gas and PM concentrations and composition, 1999-2010 J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2013, 63 (3) 247-259
12. Blanchard, C. L.; Tanenbaum, S.; Hidy, G. M. Source attribution of air pollutant concentrations and trends in the Southeastern Aerosol Research and Characterization (SEARCH) Network Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47 (23) 13536-13545
13. 2 emission trends in the United States from the early 1990s through 2010 Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2012, 12 (21) 10353-10365
14. Malm, W. C.; Schichtel, B. A.; Ames, R. B.; Gebhart, K. A. A 10-year spatial and temporal trend of sulfate across the United States J. Geophys. Res., Atmos. 2002, 107, D22
15. Caiazzo, F.; Ashok, A.; Waitz, I. A.; Yim, S. H. L.; Barrett, S. R. H. Air pollution and early deaths in the United States. Part I: Quantifying the impact of major sectors in 2005 Atmos. Environ. 2013, 79, 198-208
16. Fann, N.; Fulcher, C. M.; Baker, K. The recent and future health burden of air pollution apportioned across U.S. sectors Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47 (8) 3580-3589
17. U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). IntegratedScienceAssessment for Particulate Matter (Final Report). http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/ recordisplay.cfm?deid=216546 (accessed December 20, 2014).
18. Helfenstein, U. The use of transfer function models, intervention analysis and related time series methods in epidemiology Int. J. Epidemiol. 1991, 20 (3) 808-815
19. Christakos, G. Modern Spatiotemporal Geostatistics; Oxford University Press: Oxford; New York, 2000.
20. Christakos, G. A Bayesian maximum-entropy view to the spatial estimation problem Math. Geol. 1990, 22 (7) 763-777
21. WHO (World Health Organization). Health Impact Assessment(HIA). http://www.who.int/hia/en/ (accessed June 19, 2013).
22. U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). CHIEF (Clearinghousefor Inventories & Emissions Factors). Emission Inventories. http://www.epa.gov/ ttn/chief/eiinformation.html (accessed November 5, 2012).
23. U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Air MarketsProgram Data (AMPD). http://ampd.epa.gov/ampd/ (accessed November 21, 2013).
24. U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). AQS (Air QualitySystem). Yearly Raw Data Files Retrieved From AQS. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/ detaildata/downloadaqsdata.htm (accessed March 9, 2012).
25. Federal Land Manager Environmental Database (FED) Database Query Wizard. http://views.cira.colostate.edu/fed/QueryWizard/Default.aspx (accessed October 28, 2012).
26. U.S. HHS (Department of Health & Human Services). HRSA(Health Resources and Services Administration). Trend Analysis andInterpretation. http://mchb.hrsa.gov/publications/ (accessed.
27. Chow, G. C. Tests of equality between sets of coefficients in two linear regressions Econometrica 1960, 28 (3) 591-605
28. Christakos, G. Temporal GIS: Advanced Functions for Field-Based Applications; Springer: Berlin; New York, 2001.
29. 2.5 explained by on road mobile and stationary sources Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48 (3) 1736-1744
30. 2.5 yearly average concentration across the contiguous United States J. Exposure Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2012, 22 (5) 496-501
31. Serre, M. L.; Bogaert, P.; Christakos, G. BMElib: The Bayesian Maximum Entropy Software for Space/Time Geostatistics, and Temporal GIS Data Integration, 2.0b; 2001.
32. WHO (World Health Organization). Quantifying environmentalhealth impacts: Practical Guidance for Assessment of Disease Burdenat National and Local Levels. http://www.who.int/quantifying-ehimpacts/national/en/ (accessed June 19, 2012).
33. Dockery, D. W.; Pope, C. A.; Xu, X.; Spengler, J. D.; Ware, J. H.; Fay, M. E.; Ferris, B. G.; Speizer, F. E. An association between air pollution and mortality in six U.S. cities N. Eng. J. Med. 1993, 329 (24) 1753-1759
34. Pope, C. A.; Thun, M. J.; Namboodiri, M. M.; Dockery, D. W.; Evans, J. S.; Speizer, F. E.; Heath, C. W. Particulate air pollution as a predictor of mortality in a prospective study of US adults Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 1995, 151 (3) 669-674
35. Krewski, D. B.; Burnett, R. T.; Goldberg, M. S.; Hoover, K.; Siemiatycki, J.; Jerrett, M.; Abrahamowicz, M.; White, W. H. Reanalysis of the Harvard Six Cities Study and the American Cancer Society Study of Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality; HEI (Health Effects Institute): Cambridge, MA, 2000.
36. Pope, C. A.; Burnett, R. T.; Thun, M. J.; Calle, E. E.; Krewski, D.; Ito, K.; Thurston, G. D. Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2002, 287 (9) 1132-1141
37. Krewski, D. J.; M.; Burnett; R. T.; Ma; R.; Hughes; E.; Shi; Y.; Turner; M. C.; Pope; III, CA;; Thurston, G.; Calle, E. E.; Thun, M. J. Extended Follow-Up and Spatial Analysis of the American Cancer Society Study Linking Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality; HEI (Health Effects Institute): Boston, MA, 2009.
38. Lepeule, J.; Laden, F.; Dockery, D.; Schwartz, J. Chronic exposure to fine particles and mortality: An extended follow-up of the Harvard Six Cities Study from 1974 to 2009 Environ. Health Perspect 2012, 120 (7) 965-970
39. CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). Wide-rangingOnline Data for Epidemiologic Research (WONDER). http://wonder.cdc.gov/ (accessed March 10, 2014).
40. Trijonis, J. C.; Malm, W. C.; Pitchford, M.; White, W. H.; Charlson, R.; Husar, R. Acidic Deposition: State of Science and Technology: Report 24 Visibility: Existing and Historical Conditions-Causes and Effects; NAPAP (National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program): Washington, DC, 1990.
41. U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Guidance forEstimating Natural Visibility Conditions Under the Regional Haze Rule. http://www.epa.gov/ ttn/caaa/t1/meta/m30624.html (accessed December 20, 2013).
42. 2.5 sulfate harmful? Environ. Health Perspect 2012, 120 (12) A454
43. 2.5 sulfate harmful? Schwartz and Lepeule Respond Environ. Health Perspect 2012, 120 (12) A454-A455
44. U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). The ParticlePollution Report: Current Understanding of Air Quality and Emissionsthrough 2003. http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/aqtrnd04/pm.html (accessed December 26, 2013).
45. Wagstrom, K. M.; Pandis, S. N. Source-receptor relationships for fine particulate matter concentrations in the Eastern United States Atmos. Environ. 2011, 45 (2) 347-356