MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Air quality in Canadian port cities after regulation of low-sulphur marine fuel in the North American Emissions Control Area

2021· article· en· W3164194543 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Angelos T. Anastasopolos, Uwayemi M. Sofowote, Philip K. Hopke, Mathieu Rouleau, Tim Shin, Aman Dheri, Hui Peng, Ryan Kulka, Mark D. Gibson, Paul-Michel Farah, Navin Sundar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Science of The Total Environment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMaritime Transport Emissions and Efficiency
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMinistry of EnvironmentDalhousie UniversityHealth Canada
FundersHealth CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsAir quality indexEnvironmental scienceFuel oilParticulatesScrubberAir pollutionPollutantNOxCriteria air contaminantsPollutionDiesel fuelEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental protectionAir pollutantsMeteorologyWaste managementGeographyChemistryEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large marine vessels have historically used high-sulphur (S) residual fuel oil (RFO), with substantial airborne releases of sulphur dioxide (SO₂) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) enriched in vanadium (V), nickel (Ni) and other air pollutants. To address marine shipping air pollution, Canada and the United States have jointly implemented a North American Emissions Control Area (NA ECA) within which ships are regulated to use lower-sulphur marine fuel or equivalent SO2 scrubbers (i.e., 3.5% maximum fuel S reduced to 1% S in 2012 and 0.1% S in 2015). To investigate the effects of these regulations on local air quality, we examined changes in air pollutant (SO₂, PM2.5, NO₂, O₃), and related PM2.5 components (V, Ni, sulphate) concentrations over 2010–2016 at the Canadian port cities of Halifax, Vancouver, Victoria, Montreal, and Quebec City. SO2 concentrations showed large statistically significant decreases at all sites (−28% to −83% mean hourly change), with the largest improvements in the coastal cities when the 0.1% fuel S regulation took effect. Statistically significant PM2.5 but smaller fractional reductions were also observed (−7% to −37% mean hourly change), reflecting the importance of non-marine PM sources. RFO marker species V and Ni in PM2.5 dramatically declined following regulation implementation, consistent with decreased RFO use likely indicating the switch to low-S distillate fuel oil rather than exhaust scrubbers for initial compliance. Significant changes in other pollutants with non-marine sources (NO2, O3) were not contemporaneous with the regulatory timeline. The large SO2 improvements in the port cities have reduced 1-h concentrations to <30 ppb, comparable to Canadian urban locations with few local SO2 sources and likely reducing health risks to susceptible populations such as asthmatics and the elderly. Our findings indicate that the implementation of the NA ECA improved air quality at Canadian port cities immediately following the requirement for lower-S fuel. These air quality improvements suggest that large-scale international benefits can result from implementation of the 2020 global low-S marine fuel regulations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations70
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Science of The Total EnvironmentSame topicMaritime Transport Emissions and EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207