MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Application of Different Concentration-Response Functions to Estimate the Societal Benefits of Reducing PM2.5 and NOx Emissions

2018· article· en· W2990635649 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amanda J. Pappin, Burak Yasar Oztaner, Lauren Pinault, Scott Weichenthal, Phil Blagden, Markey Johnson, Rick Burnett, Shunliu Zhao, Amir Hakami, Matt Turner, Shannon L. Capps, Daven K. Henze, Peter Percell, Jaroslav Resler, Jesse O. Bash, Sergey L. Napelenok, Kathleen M. Fahey, R. W. Pinder, Armistead G. Russell, Athanasios Nenes, Jaemeen Baek, Greg Carmichael, Charles O. Stanier, Adrian Sandu, Tianfeng Chai

Bibliographic record

VenueISEE Conference Abstracts · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaStatistics CanadaCarleton UniversityMcGill UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCMAQAir quality indexParticulatesEnvironmental scienceNOxAir pollutionPollutantHealth impact assessmentPublic healthMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: We assess the societal benefits of reducing air pollutant emissions that contribute to ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5), ozone (O3), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) exposure and public health impacts. Recent evidence suggests that nonlinear, multi-pollutant concentration-response (C-R) models are more appropriate than traditional, linear forms used in epidemiology. We examine the implications of alternate C-R models in an emissions reduction framework.Methods: We integrate C-R models for non-accidental mortality due to PM2.5, O3, and NO2 into the Community Multiscale Air Quality Model (CMAQ). This sophisticated atmospheric model and its adjoint tool allow us to trace public health impacts back to sources of pollutant emissions. We compare the monetized public health benefits of reducing emissions from sources across Central Canada at a 12 km resolution for July 2010. We apply C-R models (single or multipollutant and linear or nonlinear) derived from the 2001 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC).Results: Our preliminary results indicate significant and widespread benefits of PM2.5 and NOx (NO + NO2) emissions control, particularly in major urban areas of Central Canada. We find benefits ranging from $400,000-800,000 per ton of reduction in PM2.5 from sources in Toronto, while NOx control for the same location entails benefits of $2,000-200,000/ton depending on the choice of C-R model. Nonlinear models consistently produce larger benefit estimates than their linear counterparts. We estimate coefficients of variation based solely on the choice of C-R model to be 0.4-0.6 for PM2.5 and 0.6-1.6 for NOx.Conclusions: Our results show that the public health benefits of emission reductions are highly sensitive to C-R specification, and that traditional C-R models may significantly underestimate the benefits of air pollution controls. Further research is needed to determine the most appropriate C-R model to support public policy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score0.833

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISEE Conference AbstractsSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207