The burden of premature mortality from coal-fired power plants in India is high and inequitable
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Prior mortality estimates of air pollution from coal-fired power plants in India use PM2.5 exposure-response functions from settings that may not be representative, and do not include other potentially harmful effects of these plants, such as fly ash pollution and heavy freshwater consumption. We use a national, district level dataset to assess the impact of coal-fired power plants on all-cause mortality (15–69 years) in 2014. We compare districts with coal-fired power plants (total capacity >1000 MW) to districts without a coal-fired power plant, estimating the effect of these power plants on all-cause mortality within districts that have these plants. Out of 597 districts in India in 2014, 60 districts had a coal-fired power plant. When compared to districts without a coal-fired power plant, districts with a coal-fired power plant (>1000 MW) had higher rates of age-standardized mortality in both women (0.38, 95% CI: −0.14–0.90) and men (0.55, −0.17–1.27). Similarly, these districts had higher rates of conditional probability of premature death in both women (2.22, −0.13–4.56) and men (2.12, −0.54–4.77). The point estimates for total excess deaths were 19 320 for women and 27 727 for men. In affected districts, the proportion of premature adult deaths attributable to coal-fired power plants was 5.8% (−0.3%–11.9%) in women and 4.3% (−1.1%–9.6%) in men. We estimate that ∼47 000 premature adult deaths can be attributed to large coal-fired power plants in India in 2014. These deaths are concentrated in the ∼10% of districts that have the nation’s power plants, where they are associated with 1 out of 20 premature adult deaths. Effective regulation of emissions from these plants, coupled with a phaseout of coal-fired power plants, can help decrease this burden of inequitable and premature adult mortality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".