International journal of environmental research and public health
-
Int J Environ Res Public Health · Jul 2018
ReviewWhat Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis.
In October 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered the level of the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm (annual 4th highest daily maximum 8-h concentration, averaged over three years). The EPA estimated a 2025 annual national non-California net benefit of $1.5 to $4.5 billion (2011$, 7% discount rate) for a 0.070 ppm standard, and a -$1.0 to $14 billion net benefit for an alternative 0.065 ppm standard. The purpose of this work is to present a combined toxicological and economic assessment of the EPA's benefit-cost analysis of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. ⋯ We also considered the strengths and weaknesses of the EPA's cost estimates (e.g., marginal abatement costs), as well as estimates completed by other authors, and provided our own alternative cost estimate. Based on our alternative benefits and cost calculations, we estimated an alternative net benefit of between -$0.3 and $1.8 billion for a 0.070 ppm standard (2011 $, 7% discount rate) and between -$23 and -$17 billion for a 0.065 ppm standard. This work demonstrates that alternative reasonable assumptions can generate very difference cost and benefits estimates that may impact how policy makers view the outcomes of a major rule.
-
Int J Environ Res Public Health · Jul 2018
ReviewClimate Change Impacts on Disaster and Emergency Medicine Focusing on Mitigation Disruptive Effects: an International Perspective.
In recent decades, climate change has been responsible for an increase in the average temperature of the troposphere and of the oceans, with consequences on the frequency and intensity of many extreme weather phenomena. Climate change’s effects on natural disasters can be expected to induce a rise in humanitarian crises. In addition, it will surely impact the population’s long-term general health, especially among the most fragile. ⋯ These risks include the geographic redistribution of infectious (particularly zoonotic) diseases, an increase in cardiac and respiratory illnesses, as well as a host of other health hazards. Some of these risks have been detailed for most developed countries as well as for some developing countries. Using these existing risk assessments as a template, organizational innovations as well as implementation strategies should be proposed to mitigate the disruptive effects of these health risks on emergency departments and by extension, reduce the negative impact of climate change on the populations they serve.