Analysis of air pollution mortality in terms of life expectancy changes : relation between time series, intervention, and cohort studies.

Disponible sur internet : http://www.ehjournal.net/content/5/1/

Les méthodes de quantification économique des coûts sanitaires de la pollution atmosphérique : application à l’Ile-de-France

Cet article passe en revue les méthodes de quantification économique des coûts sanitaires de la pollution atmosphérique. Ces méthodes sont appliquées à l’Ile-de-France, à partir de l’étude épidémiologique ERPURS sur les effets aiguës de la pollution sur la santé, et d’autres études internationales. La plus grande partie des coûts est imputable aux effets chroniques des particules sur la mortalité.This pape reviews the methods that can be used for evaluating the costs of health damages due to air pollution. The methods are applied to the region of Greater Paris. The epidemiology is based on ERPURS, a major recent study of aute health effects in Paris, as well as international studies. The costs are dominated by the chronic effects of particles on mortality

How to determine life expectancy change of air pollution mortality: a time series study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Information on life expectancy (LE) change is of great concern for policy makers, as evidenced by discussions of the "harvesting" (or "mortality displacement") issue, i.e. how large an LE loss corresponds to the mortality results of time series (TS) studies. Whereas loss of LE attributable to chronic air pollution exposure can be determined from cohort studies, using life table methods, conventional TS studies have identified only deaths due to acute exposure, during the immediate past (typically the preceding one to five days), and they provide no information about the LE loss per death.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We show how to obtain information on population-average LE loss by extending the observation window (largest "lag") of TS to include a sufficient number of "impact coefficients" for past exposures ("lags"). We test several methods for determining these coefficients. Once all of the coefficients have been determined, the LE change is calculated as time integral of the relative risk change after a permanent step change in exposure.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The method is illustrated with results for daily data of non-accidental mortality from Hong Kong for 1985 - 2005, regressed against PM₁₀and SO₂with observation windows up to 5 years. The majority of the coefficients is statistically significant. The magnitude of the SO₂coefficients is comparable to those for PM₁₀. But a window of 5 years is not sufficient and the results for LE change are only a lower bound; it is consistent with what is implied by other studies of long term impacts.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A TS analysis can determine the LE loss, but if the observation window is shorter than the relevant exposures one obtains only a lower bound.</p

Renewable Energy in the Context of Sustainable Development

Historically, economic development has been strongly correlated with increasing energy use and growth of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Renewable energy (RE) can help decouple that correlation, contributing to sustainable development (SD). In addition, RE offers the opportunity to improve access to modern energy services for the poorest members of society, which is crucial for the achievement of any single of the eight Millennium Development Goals. Theoretical concepts of SD can provide useful frameworks to assess the interactions between SD and RE. SD addresses concerns about relationships between human society and nature. Traditionally, SD has been framed in the three-pillar model—Economy, Ecology, and Society—allowing a schematic categorization of development goals, with the three pillars being interdependent and mutually reinforcing. Within another conceptual framework, SD can be oriented along a continuum between the two paradigms of weak sustainability and strong sustainability. The two paradigms differ in assumptions about the substitutability of natural and human-made capital. RE can contribute to the development goals of the three-pillar model and can be assessed in terms of both weak and strong SD, since RE utilization is defined as sustaining natural capital as long as its resource use does not reduce the potential for future harvest. The relationship between RE and SD can be viewed as a hierarchy of goals and constraints that involve both global and regional or local considerations. Though the exact contribution of RE to SD has to be evaluated in a country specifi c context, RE offers the opportunity to contribute to a number of important SD goals: (1) social and economic development; (2) energy access; (3) energy security; (4) climate change mitigation and the reduction of environmental and health impacts. The mitigation of dangerous anthropogenic climate change is seen as one strong driving force behind the increased use of RE worldwide. The chapter provides an overview of the scientific literature on the relationship between these four SD goals and RE and, at times, fossil and nuclear energy technologies. The assessments are based on different methodological tools, including bottom-up indicators derived from attributional lifecycle assessments (LCA) or energy statistics, dynamic integrated modelling approaches, and qualitative analyses. Countries at different levels of development have different incentives and socioeconomic SD goals to advance RE. The creation of employment opportunities and actively promoting structural change in the economy are seen, especially in industrialized countries, as goals that support the promotion of RE. However, the associated costs are a major factor determining the desirability of RE to meet increasing energy demand and concerns have been voiced that increased energy prices might endanger industrializing countries’ development prospects; this underlines the need for a concomitant discussion about the details of an international burden-sharing regime. Still, decentralized grids based on RE have expanded and already improved energy access in developing countries. Under favorable conditions, cost savings in comparison to non-RE use exist, in particular in remote areas and in poor rural areas lacking centralized energy access. In addition, non-electrical RE technologies offer opportunities for modernization of energy services, for example, using solar energy for water heating and crop drying, biofuels for transportation, biogas and modern biomass for heating, cooling, cooking and lighting, and wind for water pumping. RE deployment can contribute to energy security by diversifying energy sources and diminishing dependence on a limited number of suppliers, therefore reducing the economy’s vulnerability to price volatility. Many developing countries specifically link energy access and security issues to include stability and reliability of local supply in their definition of energy security. Supporting the SD goal to mitigate environmental impacts from energy systems, RE technologies can provide important benefits compared to fossil fuels, in particular regarding GHG emissions. Maximizing these benefits often depends on the specific technology, management, and site characteristics associated with each RE project, especially with respect to land use change (LUC) impacts. Lifecycle assessments for electricity generation indicate that GHG emissions from RE technologies are, in general, considerably lower than those associated with fossil fuel options, and in a range of conditions, less than fossil fuels employing carbon capture and storage (CCS). The maximum estimate for concentrating solar power (CSP), geothermal, hydropower, ocean and wind energy is less than or equal to 100 g CO2eq/kWh, and median values for all RE range from 4 to 46 g CO2eq/kWh. The GHG balances of bioenergy production, however, have considerable uncertainties, mostly related to land management and LUC. Excluding LUC, most bioenergy systems reduce GHG emissions compared to fossil-fueled systems and can lead to avoided GHG emissions from residues and wastes in landfill disposals and co-products; the combination of bioenergy with CCS may provide for further reductions. For transport fuels, some first-generation biofuels result in relatively modest GHG mitigation potential, while most next-generation biofuels could provide greater climate benefits. To optimize benefits from bioenergy production, it is critical to reduce uncertainties and to consider ways to mitigate the risk of bioenergy-induced LUC. RE technologies can also offer benefits with respect to air pollution and health. Non-combustion-based RE power generation technologies have the potential to significantly reduce local and regional air pollution and lower associated health impacts compared to fossil-based power generation. Impacts on water and biodiversity, however, depend on local conditions. In areas where water scarcity is already a concern, non-thermal RE technologies or thermal RE technologies using dry cooling can provide energy services without additional stress on water resources. Conventional water-cooled thermal power plants may be especially vulnerable to conditions of water scarcity and climate change. Hydropower and some bioenergy systems are dependent on water availability, and can either increase competition or mitigate water scarcity. RE specific impacts on biodiversity may be positive or negative; the degree of these impacts will be determined by site-specific conditions. Accident risks of RE technologies are not negligible, but the technologies’ often decentralized structure strongly limits the potential for disastrous consequences in terms of fatalities. However, dams associated with some hydropower projects may create a specific risk depending on site-specific factors. The scenario literature that describes global mitigation pathways for RE deployment can provide some insights into associated SD implications. Putting an upper limit on future GHG emissions results in welfare losses (usually measured as gross domestic product or consumption foregone), disregarding the costs of climate change impacts. These welfare losses are based on assumptions about the availability and costs of mitigation technologies and increase when the availability of technological alternatives for constraining GHGs, for example, RE technologies, is limited. Scenario analyses show that developing countries are likely to see most of the expansion of RE production. Increasing energy access is not necessarily beneficial for all aspects of SD, as a shift to modern energy away from, for example, traditional biomass could simply be a shift to fossil fuels. In general, available scenario analyses highlight the role of policies and finance for increased energy access, even though forced shifts to RE that would provide access to modern energy services could negatively affect household budgets. To the extent that RE deployment in mitigation scenarios contributes to diversifying the energy portfolio, it has the potential to enhance energy security by making the energy system less susceptible to (sudden) energy supply disruption. In scenarios, this role of RE will vary with the energy form. With appropriate carbon mitigation policies in place, electricity generation can be relatively easily decarbonized through RE sources that have the potential to replace concentrated and increasingly scarce fossil fuels in the building and industry sectors. By contrast, the demand for liquid fuels in the transport sector remains inelastic if no technological breakthrough can be achieved. Therefore oil and related energy security concerns are likely to continue to play a role in the future global energy system; as compared to today these will be seen more prominently in developing countries. In order to take account of environmental and health impacts from energy systems, several models have included explicit representation of these, such as sulphate pollution. Some scenario results show that climate policy can help drive improvements in local air pollution (i.e., particulate matter), but air pollution reduction policies alone do not necessarily drive reductions in GHG emissions. Another implication of some potential energy trajectories is the possible diversion of land to support biofuel production. Scenario results have pointed at the possibility that climate policy could drive widespread deforestation if not accompanied by other policy measures, with land use being shifted to bioenergy crops with possibly adverse SD implications, including GHG emissions. 712 Renewable Energy in the Context of Sustainable Development Chapter 9 The integration of RE policies and measures in SD strategies at various levels can help overcome existing barriers and create opportunities for RE deployment in line with meeting SD goals. In the context of SD, barriers continue to impede RE deployment. Besides market-related and economic barriers, those barriers intrinsically linked to societal and personal values and norms will fundamentally affect the perception and acceptance of RE technologies and related deployment impacts by individuals, groups and societies. Dedicated communication efforts are therefore a crucial component of any transformation strategy and local SD initiatives can play an important role in this context. At international and national levels, strategies should include: the removal of mechanisms that are perceived to work against SD; mechanisms for SD that internalize environmental and social externalities; and RE strategies that support low-carbon, green and sustainable development including leapfrogging. The assessment has shown that RE can contribute to SD to varying degrees; more interdisciplinary research is needed to close existing knowledge gaps. While benefi ts with respect to reduced environmental and health impacts may appear more clear-cut, the exact contribution to, for example, social and economic development is more ambiguous. In order to improve the knowledge regarding the interrelations between SD and RE and to fi nd answers to the question of an effective, economically effi cient and socially acceptable transformation of the energy system, a much closer integration of insights from social, natural and economic sciences (e.g., through risk analysis approaches), refl ecting the different (especially intertemporal, spatial and intra-generational) dimensions of sustainability, is required. So far, the knowledge base is often limited to very narrow views from specifi c branches of research, which do not fully account for the complexity of the issue

Estimation of incidence and social cost of colon cancer due to nitrate in drinking water in the EU: a tentative cost-benefit assessment

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Presently, health costs associated with nitrate in drinking water are uncertain and not quantified. This limits proper evaluation of current policies and measures for solving or preventing nitrate pollution of drinking water resources. The cost for society associated with nitrate is also relevant for integrated assessment of EU nitrogen policies taking a perspective of welfare optimization. The overarching question is at which nitrogen mitigation level the social cost of measures, including their consequence for availability of food and energy, matches the social benefit of these measures for human health and biodiversity.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Epidemiological studies suggest colon cancer to be possibly associated with nitrate in drinking water. In this study risk increase for colon cancer is based on a case-control study for Iowa, which is extrapolated to assess the social cost for 11 EU member states by using data on cancer incidence, nitrogen leaching and drinking water supply in the EU. Health costs are provisionally compared with nitrate mitigation costs and social benefits of fertilizer use.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For above median meat consumption the risk of colon cancer doubles when exposed to drinking water exceeding 25 mg/L of nitrate (NO₃) for more than ten years. We estimate the associated increase of incidence of colon cancer from nitrate contamination of groundwater based drinking water in EU11 at 3%. This corresponds to a population-averaged health loss of 2.9 euro per capita or 0.7 euro per kg of nitrate-N leaching from fertilizer.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our cost estimates indicate that current measures to prevent exceedance of 50 mg/L NO₃are probably beneficial for society and that a stricter nitrate limit and additional measures may be justified. The present assessment of social cost is uncertain because it considers only one type of cancer, it is based on one epidemiological study in Iowa, and involves various assumptions regarding exposure. Our results highlight the need for improved epidemiological studies.</p

Analyse coût-bénéfice du contrôle de la pollution : nécessité, méthodologie et exemples.

12 pages Editions : Ministère des Finances - Pari

Air pollution mortality : harvesting and loss of life expectancy

6 page