ABATEMENT HEALTH BENEFITS 2011 CMAS Conference Amanda Pappin, Amir - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1

SOURCE ATTRIBUTION OF AIR POLLUTION ABATEMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

2011 CMAS Conference

October 26, 2011

Amanda Pappin, Amir Hakami

Carleton University

OPTIMAL CONTROL STRATEGY DESIGN

What are the impacts of specific emission sources on:

• Climate change (GHGs)?
• Air quality and human health (criteria pollutants)?
• Sensitivity questions by nature
• Backward (adjoint) sensitivity modeling can provide an answer

if health benefit assessment tools are integrated with air quality modeling

2

3

PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

• Backgr

groun und Estimating health benefits Adjoint sensitivity analysis

• Results

ults Health benefit sensitivities

• Potential

ential policy licy applications plications

BACKGROUND

HEALTH BENEFITS IN CANADA

Air Qua uality lity Benef nefits its Assess essment ment Tool l (AQBA QBAT) T)

• Criteria Air Contaminants:

PM2.5, O3, NO2, SO2, CO

• Monetary valuation of health

endpoints to allow for benefit-cost analysis → dollar benefits

5

(Modified from Health Canada, 2008)

ADJOINT SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Es Estimating timating the e impa pacts cts of indiv dividu idual l sourc urces es on huma man n health alth

Backwar ard d (Adjoint) joint) Ana nalysi ysis

Sensitivity:

𝜀𝑧𝑘 𝜀𝑦1,𝑂

• Sensitivity of a small number of outputs with respect to a

large number of inputs

• Receptor-based but differentiates between source impacts

Δxi=1,N Δyj

6

MAKING USE OF ADJOINT SENSITIVITIES

Sens nsiti itivi vity y of what? at?

• Mortality in Canada (integrated across receptors)

Sens nsiti itivi vity y to what? at?

• Anthropogenic NOX emissions at each location

AQBAT Sensitivity:

∆$ ∆𝐷

CMAQ-Adjoint Sensitivity:

∆𝐷 ∆𝐹

→ Combined ned Sensitivit itivity: y:

∆$ ∆𝑭

7

ADJOINT TERMS

8

Adjoint

• int cost

t funct nction: ion:

𝐾 = 𝑁𝑝𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑚𝑗𝑢𝑧 = 𝑁 𝐾 = 𝑁0𝑗,𝑘 ∙ 𝑄𝑃𝑄𝑗,𝑘 ∙ 𝛾𝑃3∆𝐷𝑃3𝑗,𝑘 + 𝛾𝑂𝑃2∆𝐷𝑂𝑃2𝑗,𝑘

𝑂 𝑗,𝑘=1

Adjoint

• int forcing

cing term rm:

∆𝑁 ∆𝐷 ≈ 𝜀𝐾 𝜀𝐷 = 𝑁0 ∙ 𝑄𝑃𝑄 ∙ 𝛾 𝛾𝑃3 = 8.39 ∙ 10−4 𝑞𝑞𝑐−1 1-hr maximum 𝛾𝑂𝑃2 = 7.48 ∙ 10−4 𝑞𝑞𝑐−1 24-hr average VSL VSL = $5.5M (2007 CAD) D)

MODELING CASE

9

Contin ntinental ntal domain

• main
• 36 km resolution
• 13 vertical layers
• Gas-phase CMAQ-Adjoint
• July-September 2007 modeling

period (90 days)

SENSITIVITY RESULTS

DAILY HEALTH BENEFITS: O3

11

MAX = $33.8 .8 M/DAY, MONTREAL

DAILY HEALTH BENEFITS: NO2

12

MAX = $32.5 .5 M/DAY, TORONT0

TOTAL DAILY HEALTH BENEFITS

13

MAX: $41. 1.7M/D 7M/DAY, MONTREAL ATLANTA & HOUSTON = $1.1M/DAY, LOS ANGELES = $0.6M/DAY

VARIABILITY IN HEALTH BENEFITS

14

MAX = $42M/day, MONTREAL MAX = $245M/day, TORONTO MAX = $105M/day, MONTREAL MAX = $275M/day, MONTREAL

DAILY UNIT REDUCTION HEALTH BENEFITS

15

MAX: $3,400/D 00/DAY, MONTREAL TORONTO = $1,100/DAY, OTTAWA = $1,500/DAY

EFFECT OF AVERAGING PERIOD

in terms of sign

1-hr Maximu imum m O3 24 24-hr Average rage O3

POLICY APPLICATIONS

• 1. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

Wh What at are e the e health alth benef enefits its of the e Toront

• nto
• subway syst

stem em?

• Annual vehicle reduction (@ 11,000 miles/vehicle-yr):

→ 302,000

• NOX emissions reduction

→ 2,000 tonnes/yr (2007)

• $1,100 benefit/day per 1 tonne NOX reduction in Toronto

$800M benefit/ it/yr yr compared ared to with thout

• ut the subway syst

stem em

18

• 2. PERSONAL VEHICLES

Wh What at is the e health alth cost st associat sociated d with th perso sonal nal vehicles ehicles in major jor Canadi nadian n citie ies? s?

• 1 tonne NOX/yr ≈ 110 vehicles (2007)
• Toron
• nto:
• : $3,800

,800/yr yr per vehic icle le

• Otta

tawa: : $5,000/yr yr per vehicle cle

• Montreal:

treal: $11,0 ,000/ 0/yr yr per vehicle le

19

• 3. CAP-AND-TRADE

Wh What at is the e Benef nefit it-to to-Permit rmit Cost st ratio tio for r a Canadian nadian power er plant ant opera perating ting unde der r NOX cap-and nd-trade trade?

NOX permit price in the U.S. (2009) ≈ $2,000/tonne NOX/yr Nanticoke Generating Station, Ontario → 2,760 MW coal-fired power plant → 38,000 tonnes NOX/yr emitted → $1,100 benefit/day per tonne NOX Health alth be bene nefits its are 200 times mes the cost t of emissions issions permits! mits!

20

CONCLUDING REMARKS

• He

Healt lth h benefits nefits are e vastly stly under dervalue alued d in current rrent regulat gulator

• ry

y frame ameworks rks

• Inter

erco conti ntine nental ntal trans anspo port t does es not t tell l the e whole

• le stor
• ry
• There

ere is benefit nefit to be seen en from

• m Canadian

nadian pollution llution contr ntrol

• The

e sour urce ce-spec specif ificit icity of adjoi joint nt modelin

• deling

g mak akes es it very y rele levant nt to policy licy decisi cision

• n-mak

makin ing

21

22

FUT FUTURE URE RES ESEA EARCH CH

• Sectoral analysis of health benefits
• Taking advantage of temporal variability in health

benefit sensitivities

22

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

Ackn knowled wledgeme gements: nts: Stan n Jud udek ek Health Canada Fun undi ding: ng: National Science and Engineering Research Council