Integrating Air Quality and Public Health Benefits in U.S. Decarbonization Strategies

Quantifying air quality co-benefits to industrial decarbonization: the local Air Emissions Tracking Atlas

Introduction

Many decarbonization technologies have the added co-benefit of reducing short-lived climate pollutants, such as particulate matter (PM), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and sulfur dioxide (SO2), creating a unique opportunity for identifying strategies that promote both climate change solutions and opportunities for air quality improvement. However, stakeholders and decision-makers may struggle to quantify how these co-benefits will impact public health for the communities most affected by industrial air pollution.

Methods

To address this problem, the LOCal Air Emissions Tracking Atlas (LOCAETA) fills a data availability and analysis gap by providing estimated air quality benefits from industrial decarbonization options, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS). These co-benefits are calculated using an algorithm that connects disparate datasets that separately report greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants at U.S. industrial facilities.

Results

Version 1.0 of LOCAETA displays the estimated primary PM2.5 emission reduction co-benefits from additional pretreatment equipment for CCS on industrial and power facilities across the state of Louisiana, as well as the potential for VOC and NH3 generation. The emission reductions are presented in the tool alongside facility pollutant emissions information and relevant air quality, environmental, demographic, and public health datasets, such as air toxics cancer risk, satellite and in situ pollutant measurements, and population vulnerability metrics.

Discussion

LOCAETA enables regulators, policymakers, environmental justice communities, and industrial and commercial users to compare and contrast quantifiable public health benefits due to air quality impacts from various climate change mitigation strategies using a free and publicly-available tool. Additional pollutant reductions can be calculated using the same methodology and will be available in future versions of the tool.

Health and equity implications of individual adaptation to air pollution in a changing climate

Future climate change can cause more days with poor air quality. This could trigger more alerts telling people to stay inside to protect themselves, with potential consequences for health and health equity. Here, we study the change in US air quality alerts over this century due to fine particulate matter (PM2.5), who they may affect, and how they may respond. We find air quality alerts increase by over 1 mo per year in the eastern United States by 2100 and quadruple on average. They predominantly affect areas with high Black populations and leakier homes, exacerbating existing inequalities and impacting those less able to adapt. Reducing emissions can offer significant annual health benefits ($5,400 per person) by mitigating the effect of climate change on air pollution and its associated risks of early death. Relying on people to adapt, instead, would require them to stay inside, with doors and windows closed, for an extra 142 d per year, at an average cost of $11,000 per person. It appears likelier, however, that people will achieve minimal protection without policy to increase adaptation rates. Boosting adaptation can offer net benefits, even alongside deep emission cuts. New adaptation policies could, for example: reduce adaptation costs; reduce infiltration and improve indoor air quality; increase awareness of alerts and adaptation; and provide measures for those working or living outdoors. Reducing emissions, conversely, lowers everyone's need to adapt, and protects those who cannot adapt. Equitably protecting human health from air pollution under climate change requires both mitigation and adaptation.

Effects on child and adolescent health of climate change mitigation policies: A systematic review of modelling studies

There is a growing body of modelling evidence that demonstrates the potential for immediate and substantial benefits to adult health from greenhouse gas mitigation actions, but the effects on the health of younger age groups is largely unknown. We conducted a systematic review to identify the available published evidence of the modelled effects on child and adolescent health (≤18 years of age) of greenhouse gas mitigation. We searched six databases of peer-reviewed studies published between January 1, 1990 and July 27, 2022, screened 27,282 original papers and included 23 eligible papers. All included studies were set in high- and middle-income countries; and all studies modelled the effects of interventions that could mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. Most of the available evidence suggests positive benefits for child and adolescent respiratory health from greenhouse gas mitigation actions that simultaneously reduce air pollution (specifically PM2.5 and nitrogen dioxide). We found scant evidence on child and adolescent health from regions more vulnerable to climate change, or on mitigation interventions that could affect exposures other than air pollution.

Impacts of net zero policies on air quality in a metropolitan area of the United Kingdom: Towards world health organization air quality guidelines

Climate change and air pollution are closely interlinked since carbon dioxide and air pollutants are co-emitted from fossil fuel combustion. Net Zero (NZ) policies aiming to reduce carbon emissions will likely bring co-benefits in air quality and associated health. However, it is unknown whether regional NZ policies alone will be sufficient to reduce air pollutant levels to meet the latest 2021 World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines. Here, we carried out high resolution air quality modelling for in the West Midlands region, a typical metropolitan area in the UK, to quantify the effects of different NZ policies on air quality. Results show that NZ policies will significantly improve air quality in the West Midlands, with up to 6 μg m-3 (21%) reduction in annual mean NO2 (mostly through the electrification of vehicle fleet, EV) and up to 1.4 μg m-3 (12%) reduction in annual mean PM2.5 projected for 2030 relative to levels under a "business as usual" (BAU) scenario. Under BAU, 2030 PM2.5 concentrations in most wards would be below 10 μg m-3 whilst under the Net Zero scenario, those in all wards would be below 10 μg m-3. This means that the ward averages in the West Midlands would meet the UK PM2.5 of 10 μg m-3target a decade early under the Net Zero scenario. However, no ward-level-averaged annual mean PM2.concentrations meet the 2021 WHO Air Quality guideline level of 5 μg m-3 under any scenario. Similarly for NO2 only 18 wards (8% of the region's population) are predicted to have NO2 concentrations below the 2021 WHO guideline level (10 μg m-3). Decarbonisation policies linked to Net Zero deliver substantial regional air quality benefits, but are not in isolation sufficient to deliver clean air with air pollutant levels low enough to meet the 2021 WHO guidelines.

Air quality related equity implications of U.S. decarbonization policy

Climate policies that target greenhouse gas emissions can improve air quality by reducing co-emitted air pollutant emissions. However, the extent to which climate policy could contribute to the targets of reducing existing pollution disparities across different populations remains largely unknown. We quantify potential air pollution exposure reductions under U.S. federal carbon policy, considering implications of resulting health benefits for exposure disparities across U.S. racial/ethnic groups. We focus on policy cases that achieve reductions of 40-60% in 2030 economy-wide carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, when compared with 2005 emissions. The 50% CO2 reduction policy case reduces average fine particulate matter (PM2.5) exposure across racial/ethnic groups, with greatest benefit for non-Hispanic Black (-0.44 μg/m3) and white populations (-0.37 μg/m3). The average exposure disparity for racial/ethnic minorities rises from 12.4% to 13.1%. Applying an optimization approach to multiple emissions reduction scenarios, we find that no alternate combination of reductions from different CO2 sources would substantially mitigate exposure disparities. Results suggest that CO2-based strategies for this range of reductions are insufficient for fully mitigating PM2.5 exposure disparities between white and racial/ethnic minority populations; addressing disparities may require larger-scale structural changes.

Nuclear power generation phase-outs redistribute US air quality and climate-related mortality risk

We explore how nuclear shut-downs in the United States could affect air pollution, climate and health with existing and alternative grid infrastructure. We develop a dispatch model to estimate emissions of CO2, NO x and SO2 from each electricity-generating unit, feeding these emissions into a chemical transport model to calculate effects on ground-level ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Our scenario of removing nuclear power results in compensation by coal, gas and oil, resulting in increases in PM2.5 and ozone that lead to an extra 5,200 annual mortalities. Changes in CO2 emissions lead to an order of magnitude higher mortalities throughout the twenty-first century, incurring US$11-180 billion of damages from 1 year of emissions. A scenario exploring simultaneous closures of nuclear and coal plants redistributes health impacts and a scenario with increased penetration of renewables reduces health impacts. Inequities in exposure to pollution are persistent across all scenarios-Black or African American people are exposed to the highest relative levels of pollution.

Economy-wide evaluation of CO2 and air quality impacts of electrification in the United States

Adopting electric end-use technologies instead of fossil-fueled alternatives, known as electrification, is an important economy-wide decarbonization strategy that also reduces criteria pollutant emissions and improves air quality. In this study, we evaluate CO₂ and air quality co-benefits of electrification scenarios by linking a detailed energy systems model and a full-form photochemical air quality model in the United States. We find that electrification can substantially lower CO₂ and improve air quality and that decarbonization policy can amplify these trends, which yield immediate and localized benefits. In particular, transport electrification can improve ozone and fine particulate matter (PM_2.5), though the magnitude of changes varies regionally. However, growing activity from non-energy-related PM_2.5 sources-such as fugitive dust and agricultural emissions-can offset electrification benefits, suggesting that additional measures beyond CO₂ policy and electrification are needed to meet air quality goals. We illustrate how commonly used marginal emissions approaches systematically underestimate reductions from electrification.

Decarbonization will lead to more equitable air quality in California

Air quality associated public health co-benefit may emerge from climate and energy policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, the distribution of these co-benefits has not been carefully studied, despite the opportunity to tailor mitigation efforts so they achieve maximum benefits within socially and economically disadvantaged communities (DACs). Here, we quantify such health co-benefits from different long-term, low-carbon scenarios in California and their distribution in the context of social vulnerability. The magnitude and distribution of health benefits, including within impacted communities, is found to varies among scenarios which reduce economy wide GHG emissions by 80% in 2050 depending on the technology- and fuel-switching decisions in individual end-use sectors. The building electrification focused decarbonization strategy achieves ~15% greater total health benefits than the truck electrification focused strategy which uses renewable fuels to meet building demands. Conversely, the enhanced electrification of the truck sector is shown to benefit DACs more effectively. Such tradeoffs highlight the importance of considering environmental justice implications in the development of climate mitigation planning.

Air quality is found to be more equitable through two salient decarbonization pathways for California in 2050 with the relative justice of decarbonization scenarios quantified at the neighborhood level and the tradeoffs between pathways evaluated.

Nationwide and Regional PM2.5-Related Air Quality Health Benefits From the Removal of Energy-Related Emissions in the United States

Clean energy policy can provide substantial health benefits through improved air quality. As ambitious clean energy proposals are increasingly considered and adopted across the United States (US), quantifying the benefits of removal of such large air pollution emissions sources is crucial to understanding potential societal impacts of such policy. In this study, we estimate health benefits resulting from the elimination of emissions of fine particulate matter (PM_2.5), sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides from the electric power, transportation, building, and industrial sectors in the contiguous US. We use EPA's CO-Benefits Risk Assessment screening tool to estimate health benefits resulting from the removal of PM_2.5-related emissions from these energy-related sectors. We find that nationwide efforts to eliminate energy-related emissions could prevent 53,200 (95% CI: 46,900-59,400) premature deaths each year and provide $608 billion ($537-$678 billion) in benefits from avoided PM_2.5-related illness and death. We also find that an average of 69% (range: 32%-95%) of the health benefits from emissions removal remain in the emitting region. Our study provides an indication of the potential scale and distribution of public health benefits that could result from ambitious regional and nationwide clean energy and climate mitigation policy.

Health Benefits from Renewable Electricity Sources: A Review

Energy generation has had several negative health impacts over the last few decades, mainly due to air pollution. One of the ways to decrease such impacts is to increase energy generation through renewable energy sources (RESs). These sources have important health co-benefits that need to be taken into consideration. This topic has been included in the literature, but research is scattered. The goal of this article is to show the status of the literature on this topic. We performed a systematic literature review on the health co-benefits of RES use, depicting the state of the art of this literature, some common findings, limitations, and lines for future research. It is clear from our analysis that this literature remains scarce. We found 28 studies fitting the inclusion criteria. Results can be summed as follows: (1) wind and solar power are the most studied RES sources; (2) most studies are for the United States and developing countries are largely understudied; and (3) health benefit results vary widely according to site-specific conditions. Overall, the existing studies show significant health co-benefits from RES use, which are important to consider when performing cost–benefit analysis for energy projects. This is particularly relevant for policy-makers and energy investors.