An Analysis of Costs and Health Co-Benefits for a U.S. Power Plant Carbon Standard

Current evidence of the economic value of One Health initiatives: A systematic literature review

Funding and financing for One Health initiatives at country level remain challenging as investments commonly require demonstrated evidence of economic value or returns. The objectives of this review were to i) identify, critically analyse and summarise quantitative evidence of the net economic value of One Health initiatives; ii) document methodologies commonly used in the scientific literature; and iii) describe common challenges and any evidence gaps. Scientific databases were searched for published literature following the PRISMA guidelines and an online survey and workshop with subject matter experts were used to identify relevant grey literature. Studies were included if they reported on quantitative costs and benefits (monetary and non-monetary) and were measured across at least two sectors. Relevant publications were analysed and plotted against the six action tracks of the Quadripartite One Health Joint Plan of Action to help classify the initiatives. Ninety-seven studies were included. Eighty studies involved only two sectors and 78 reported a positive economic value or return. Of those studies that reported a positive return, 49 did not compare with a sectoral counterfactual, 28 studies demonstrated an added value of using a cross-sectoral approach, and 6 studies demonstrated an added value of One Health communication, collaboration, coordination, and capacity building. Included studies most frequently related to endemic zoonotic, neglected tropical and vector-borne diseases, followed by health of the environment and food safety. However, diversity in economic analysis methodology between studies included resulted in difficulty to compare or combine findings. While there is a growing body of evidence of the value of One Health initiatives, a substantial part of the evidence still focuses on "traditional" One Health topics, particularly zoonoses. Developing a standardised and practical approach for One Health economic evaluation will facilitate assessment of the added value and gather evidence for One Health to be invested in and endorsed by multiple sectors.

Impact of Global Climate Change on Pulmonary Health: Susceptible and Vulnerable Populations

As fossil fuel combustion continues to power the global economy, the rate of climate change is accelerating, causing severe respiratory health impacts and large disparities in the degree of human suffering. Hotter and drier climates lead to longer and more severe wildland fire seasons, impairing air quality around the globe. Hotter temperatures lead to higher amounts of ozone and particles, causing the exacerbation of chronic respiratory diseases and premature mortality. Longer pollen seasons and higher pollen concentrations provoke allergic airway diseases. In arid regions, accelerated land degradation and desertification are promoting dust pollution and impairing food production and nutritional content that are essential to respiratory health. Extreme weather events and flooding impede healthcare delivery and can lead to poor indoor air quality due to mold overgrowth. Climate and human activities that harm the environment and ecosystem may also affect the emergence and spread of viral infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and associated morbidity and mortality exacerbated by air pollution. Children and elderly individuals are more susceptible to the adverse health effects of climate change. Geographical and socioeconomic circumstances, together with a decreased capacity to adapt, collectively increase vulnerability to the adverse effects of climate change. Successful mitigation of anthropogenic climate change is dependent on the commitment of energy-intensive nations to manage greenhouse gas emissions, as well as societal support and response to aggravating factors. In this review, we focus on the respiratory health impacts of global climate change, with an emphasis on susceptible and vulnerable populations and low- and middle-income countries.

Environmental justice and power plant emissions in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative states

Policies to reduce greenhouse gases associated with electricity generation have been a major focus of public policy in the United States, but their implications for achieving environmental justice among historically overburdened communities inappropriately remains a marginal issue. In this study we address research gaps in historical and current ambient air emissions burdens in environmental justice communities from power plants participating in the Regional Greenhouse Gases Initiative (RGGI), the country's first market-based power sector emissions reduction program. We find that in RGGI states the percentage of people of color that live within 0-6.2 miles from power plants is up to 23.5 percent higher than the percent of the white population that lives within those same distance bands, and the percentage of people living in poverty that live within 0-5 miles from power plants is up to 15.3 percent higher than the percent of the population not living in poverty within those same distance bands. More importantly, the transition from coal to natural gas underway before RGGI formally started resulted in large increases in both the number of electric-generating units burning natural gas and total net generation from natural gas in environmental justice communities hosting electric-generating units, compared to other communities. Our findings indicate that power sector carbon mitigation policies' focusing on aggregate emissions reductions have largely benefitted non-environmental justice communities and have not redressed the fundamental problem of disparities in pollutant burdens between EJ and non-EJ communities. These must be directly addressed in climate change and carbon emissions mitigation policy.

Emissions and Health Implications of Pennsylvania's Entry into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is a cap-and-trade system targeting CO₂ emissions from the electricity sector in the northeastern United States. As a major power producer and carbon emitter, Pennsylvania plans to join RGGI in 2022, which will affect both the carbon market (i.e., RGGI) and the regional electricity market (i.e., PJM). Combining a PJM power system model with a reduced-form model of CO₂ emissions abatement from RGGI states that are not in PJM, we find the annual average emissions from power plants in Pennsylvania can be reduced by 40%, 79%, 68%, and 76% for CO₂, SO₂, NO_x, and PM_2.5, respectively, during 2022-2030. Then, based on a range of source-specific marginal damage estimates, we find the cumulative monetized health cobenefits to be 17.7 to 40.8 billion USD. However, the reduced emissions and health damages in Pennsylvania are slightly offset by increases in the other states in PJM that do not participate in RGGI. Our study hence highlights the potential cross-state leakage issue that warrants careful consideration in the policy design and implementation process.

How will air quality effects on human health, crops and ecosystems change in the future?

Future air quality will be driven by changes in air pollutant emissions, but also changes in climate. Here, we review the recent literature on future air quality scenarios and projected changes in effects on human health, crops and ecosystems. While there is overlap in the scenarios and models used for future projections of air quality and climate effects on human health and crops, similar efforts have not been widely conducted for ecosystems. Few studies have conducted joint assessments across more than one sector. Improvements in future air quality effects on human health are seen in emission reduction scenarios that are more ambitious than current legislation. Larger impacts result from changing particulate matter (PM) abundances than ozone burdens. Future global health burdens are dominated by changes in the Asian region. Expected future reductions in ozone outside of Asia will allow for increased crop production. Reductions in PM, although associated with much higher uncertainty, could offset some of this benefit. The responses of ecosystems to air pollution and climate change are long-term, complex, and interactive, and vary widely across biomes and over space and time. Air quality and climate policy should be linked or at least considered holistically, and managed as a multi-media problem. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Air quality, past present and future'.

Optimizing Emissions Reductions from the U.S. Power Sector for Climate and Health Benefits

Improved air quality and human health are often discussed as "co-benefits" of mitigating climate change, yet they are rarely considered when designing or implementing climate policies. We analyze the implications of integrating health and climate when determining the best locations for replacing power plants with new wind, solar, or natural gas to meet a CO₂ reduction target in the United States. We employ a capacity expansion model with integrated assessment of climate and health damages, comparing portfolios optimized for benefits to climate alone or both health and climate. The model estimates county-level health damages and accounts for uncertainty by using a range of air quality models (AP3, EASIUR, and InMAP) and concentration-response functions (American Cancer Society and Harvard Six Cities). We find that reducing CO₂ by 30% yields $21-68 billion in annual health benefits, with an additional $9-36 billion possible when co-optimizing for climate and health benefits. Additional benefits accrue from prioritizing emissions reductions in counties with high population exposure. Total health benefits equal or exceed climate benefits across a wide range of modeling assumptions. Our results demonstrate the value of considering health in climate policy design and the need for interstate cooperation to achieve additional health benefits equitably.

Health benefits and control costs of tightening particulate matter emissions standards for coal power plants - The case of Northeast Brazil

Exposure to ambient particulate matter (PM) caused an estimated 4.2 million deaths worldwide in 2015. However, PM emission standards for power plants vary widely. To explore if the current levels of these standards are sufficiently stringent in a simple cost-benefit framework, we compared the health benefits (avoided monetized health costs) with the control costs of tightening PM emission standards for coal-fired power plants in Northeast (NE) Brazil, where ambient PM concentrations are below World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. We considered three Brazilian PM₁₀ (PM_x refers to PM with a diameter under x micrometers) emission standards and a stricter U.S. EPA standard for recent power plants. Our integrated methodology simulates hourly electricity grid dispatch from utility-scale power plants, disperses the resulting PM_2.5, and estimates selected human health impacts from PM_2.5 exposure using the latest integrated exposure-response model. Since the emissions inventories required to model secondary PM are not available in our study area, we modeled only primary PM so our benefit estimates are conservative. We found that tightening existing PM₁₀ emission standards yields health benefits that are over 60 times greater than emissions control costs in all the scenarios we considered. The monetary value of avoided hospital admissions alone is at least four times as large as the corresponding control costs. These results provide strong arguments for considering tightening PM emission standards for coal-fired power plants worldwide, including in regions that meet WHO guidelines and in developing countries.

The Synergy in the Economic Production System: An Empirical Study with Chinese Industry

Due to the difference in pollutants discharged, along with heterogeneous abatement technology, the structural and model design of the economic production system needs to consider these differences. This study first proposes a network slacks-based model (SBM) to address the inefficiency of the production system after considering pollutant abatement technology heterogeneity for different kinds of pollutant. Then, we employ the model to study the inefficiency of the Chinese industrial production system, analyzing the inefficiency in the stages of economic production and pollutant treatment. Furthermore, the regional distribution of inefficiencies concerning SO2 (NOx) generation (emission) are discussed and compared. The results show that only the joint reduction of NOx in two sub-stages simultaneously is feasible, and the synergistic pollutant reductions seems limited.

A global perspective on coal-fired power plants and burden of lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Exposure to ambient particulate matter generated from coal-fired power plants induces long-term health consequences. However, epidemiologic studies have not yet focused on attributing these health burdens specifically to energy consumption, impeding targeted intervention policies. We hypothesize that the generating capacity of coal-fired power plants may be associated with lung cancer incidence at the national level.

METHODS

Age- and sex-adjusted lung cancer incidence from every country with electrical plants using coal as primary energy supply were followed from 2000 to 2016. We applied a Poisson regression longitudinal model, fitted using generalized estimating equations, to estimate the association between lung cancer incidence and per capita coal capacity, adjusting for various behavioral and demographic determinants and lag periods.

RESULTS

The average coal capacity increased by 1.43 times from 16.01 gigawatts (GW) (2000~2004) to 22.82 GW (2010~2016). With 1 kW (KW) increase of coal capacity per person in a country, the relative risk of lung cancer increases by a factor of 59% (95% CI = 7.0%~ 135%) among males and 85% (95% CI = 22%~ 182%) among females. Based on the model, we estimate a total of 1.37 (range = 1.34 ~ 1.40) million standardized incident cases from lung cancer will be associated with coal-fired power plants in 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

These analyses suggest an association between lung cancer incidence and increased reliance on coal for energy generation. Such data may be helpful in addressing a key policy question about the externality costs and estimates of the global disease burden from preventable lung cancer attributable to coal-fired power plants at the national level.

Climate Change Mitigation, Air Pollution, and Environmental Justice in California

Climate change mitigation policies can have significant co-benefits for air quality, including benefits to disadvantaged communities experiencing substantial air pollution. However, the effects of these mitigation policies have rarely been evaluated with respect to their influence on disadvantaged communities. Here we assess the air pollution and environmental justice implications of California's cap-and-trade mitigation program through analysis of (1) the sources of air pollution in disadvantaged communities, (2) emissions-reduction offset usage under the cap-and-trade program, and (3) the relationship between reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reductions in co-pollutant emissions. Our analysis suggests that the cap-and-trade program has limited impacts, including limited disproportionate impacts, on air quality in disadvantaged communities. The sources of most air pollution in these communities have not been subject to the cap-and-trade program, and the use of emissions-reduction offsets is only marginally higher in disadvantaged communities than in other communities. Furthermore, reductions in greenhouse gas emissions imply smaller proportional reductions in co-pollutant emissions. While climate policies lead to important air quality co-benefits in some contexts, especially through reduced coal usage, targeted air quality policies and regulations may be more effective for reducing air pollution in disadvantaged communities in California and throughout the state.

Air-quality-related health impacts from climate change and from adaptation of cooling demand for buildings in the eastern United States: An interdisciplinary modeling study

BACKGROUND

Climate change negatively impacts human health through heat stress and exposure to worsened air pollution, amongst other pathways. Indoor use of air conditioning can be an effective strategy to reduce heat exposure. However, increased air conditioning use increases emissions of air pollutants from power plants, in turn worsening air quality and human health impacts. We used an interdisciplinary linked model system to quantify the impacts of heat-driven adaptation through building cooling demand on air-quality-related health outcomes in a representative mid-century climate scenario.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We used a modeling system that included downscaling historical and future climate data with the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model, simulating building electricity demand using the Regional Building Energy Simulation System (RBESS), simulating power sector production and emissions using MyPower, simulating ambient air quality using the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model, and calculating the incidence of adverse health outcomes using the Environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP). We performed simulations for a representative present-day climate scenario and 2 representative mid-century climate scenarios, with and without exacerbated power sector emissions from adaptation in building energy use. We find that by mid-century, climate change alone can increase fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations by 58.6% (2.50 μg/m3) and ozone (O3) by 14.9% (8.06 parts per billion by volume [ppbv]) for the month of July. A larger change is found when comparing the present day to the combined impact of climate change and increased building energy use, where PM2.5 increases 61.1% (2.60 μg/m3) and O3 increases 15.9% (8.64 ppbv). Therefore, 3.8% of the total increase in PM2.5 and 6.7% of the total increase in O3 is attributable to adaptive behavior (extra air conditioning use). Health impacts assessment finds that for a mid-century climate change scenario (with adaptation), annual PM2.5-related adult mortality increases by 13,547 deaths (14 concentration-response functions with mean incidence range of 1,320 to 26,481, approximately US$126 billion cost) and annual O3-related adult mortality increases by 3,514 deaths (3 functions with mean incidence range of 2,175 to 4,920, approximately US$32.5 billion cost), calculated as a 3-month summer estimate based on July modeling. Air conditioning adaptation accounts for 654 (range of 87 to 1,245) of the PM2.5-related deaths (approximately US$6 billion cost, a 4.8% increase above climate change impacts alone) and 315 (range of 198 to 438) of the O3-related deaths (approximately US$3 billion cost, an 8.7% increase above climate change impacts alone). Limitations of this study include modeling only a single month, based on 1 model-year of future climate simulations. As a result, we do not project the future, but rather describe the potential damages from interactions arising between climate, energy use, and air quality.

CONCLUSIONS

This study examines the contribution of future air-pollution-related health damages that are caused by the power sector through heat-driven air conditioning adaptation in buildings. Results show that without intervention, approximately 5%-9% of exacerbated air-pollution-related mortality will be due to increases in power sector emissions from heat-driven building electricity demand. This analysis highlights the need for cleaner energy sources, energy efficiency, and energy conservation to meet our growing dependence on building cooling systems and simultaneously mitigate climate change.

POLICY INSIGHTS FROM THE EMF 32 STUDY ON U.S. CARBON TAX SCENARIOS

The Stanford Energy Modeling Forum exercise 32 (EMF 32) used 11 different models to assess emissions, energy, and economic outcomes from a plausible range of economy-wide carbon price policies to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the United States. Here we discuss the most policy-relevant results of the study, mindful of the strengths and weaknesses of current models. Across all models, carbon prices lead to significant reductions in CO2 emissions and conventional pollutants, with the vast majority of the reductions occurring in the electricity sector. Importantly, emissions reductions do not significantly depend on the rebate or tax cut used to return revenues to the economy. Expected economic costs, as modeled by either GDP or welfare, are modest, but vary across models. These costs are offset by benefits from avoided climate damages and health benefits from reductions in conventional air pollution. Using revenues to reduce preexisting capital or labor taxes reduces costs in most models relative to lump-sum rebates, but the size of the cost reductions varies significantly. Devoting at least some revenue to household rebates can significantly reduce adverse impacts on low income households. Carbon prices at $25/ton or even lower levels cause significant shifts away from coal as an energy source with responses of other energy sources highly dependent upon technology cost assumptions. Beyond 2030, we conclude that model uncertainties are too large to make quantitative results useful for near-term policy design. We close by describing recommendations for policymakers on interacting with model results in the future.

Electric sector policy, technological change, and U.S. emissions reductions goals: Results from the EMF 32 model intercomparison project

The Energy Modeling Forum (EMF) 32 study compares a range of coordinated scenarios to explore implications of U.S. climate policy options and technological change on the electric power sector. Harmonized policy scenarios (including mass-based emissions limits and various power-sector-only carbon tax trajectories) across 16 models provide comparative assessments of potential impacts on electric sector investment and generation outcomes, emissions reductions, and economic implications. This paper compares results across these policy alternatives, including a variety of technological and natural gas price assumptions, and summarizes robust findings and areas of disagreement across participating models. Under a wide range of policy, technology, and market assumptions, model results suggest that future coal generation will decline relative to current levels while generation from natural gas, wind, and solar will increase, though the pace and extent of these changes vary by policy scenario, technological assumptions, region, and model. Climate policies can amplify trends already under way and make them less susceptible to future market changes. The model results provide useful insights to a range of stakeholders, but future research focused on intersectoral linkages in emission reductions (e.g., the role of electrification), effects of energy storage, and better coverage of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) can improve insights even further.