Search

The GuLF STUDY, initiated by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, is investigating the health effects among workers involved in the oil spill response and clean-up (OSRC) after the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) explosion in April 2010 in the Gulf of Mexico. Clean-up included in situ burning of oil on the water surface and flaring of gas and oil captured near the seabed and brought to the surface. We estimated emissions of PM2.5 and related pollutants resulting from these activities, as well as from engines of vessels working on the OSRC. PM2.5 emissions ranged from 30 to 1.33e6 kg per day and were generally uniform over time for the flares but highly episodic for the in situ burns. Hourly emissions from each source on every burn/flare day were used as inputs to the AERMOD model to develop average and maximum concentrations for 1-, 12-, and 24-h time periods. The highest predicted 24-h average concentrations sometimes exceeded 5000 µg m-3 in the first 500 m downwind of flaring and reached 71 µg m-3 within a kilometer of some in situ burns. Beyond 40 km from the DWH site, plumes appeared to be well mixed, and the predicted 24-h average concentrations from the flares and in situ burns were similar, usually below 10 µg m-3. Structured averaging of model output gave potential PM2.5 exposure estimates for OSRC workers located in various areas across the Gulf. Workers located nearest the wellhead (hot zone/source workers) were estimated to have a potential maximum 12-h exposure of 97 µg m-3 over the 2-month flaring period. The potential maximum 12-h exposure for workers who participated in in situ burns was estimated at 10 µg m-3 over the ~3-month burn period. The results suggest that burning of oil and gas during the DWH clean-up may have resulted in PM2.5 concentrations substantially above the U.S. National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PM2.5 (24-h average = 35 µg m-3). These results are being used to investigate possible adverse health effects in the GuLF STUDY epidemiologic analysis of PM2.5 exposures., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Occupational Hygiene Society.)

Higher levels of nearby traffic increase exposure to air pollution and adversely affect health outcomes. Populations with lower socio-economic status (SES) are particularly vulnerable to stressors like air pollution. We investigated cumulative exposures and risks from traffic and from MNRiskS-modeled air pollution in multiple source categories across demographic groups. Exposures and risks, especially from on-road sources, were higher than the mean for minorities and low SES populations and lower than the mean for white and high SES populations. Owning multiple vehicles and driving alone were linked to lower household exposures and risks. Those not owning a vehicle and walking or using transit had higher household exposures and risks. These results confirm for our study location that populations on the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum and minorities are disproportionately exposed to traffic and air pollution and at higher risk for adverse health outcomes. A major source of disparities appears to be the transportation infrastructure. Those outside the urban core had lower risks but drove more, while those living nearer the urban core tended to drive less but had higher exposures and risks from on-road sources. We suggest policy considerations for addressing these inequities.

Three modeling systems were used to estimate human health risks from air pollution: two versions of MNRiskS (for Minnesota Risk Screening), and the USEPA National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA). MNRiskS is a unique cumulative risk modeling system used to assess risks from multiple air toxics, sources, and pathways on a local to a state-wide scale. In addition, ambient outdoor air monitoring data were available for estimation of risks and comparison with the modeled estimates of air concentrations. Highest air concentrations and estimated risks were generally found in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area and lowest risks in undeveloped rural areas. Emissions from mobile and area (nonpoint) sources created greater estimated risks than emissions from point sources. Highest cancer risks were via ingestion pathway exposures to dioxins and related compounds. Diesel particles, acrolein, and formaldehyde created the highest estimated inhalation health impacts. Model-estimated air concentrations were generally highest for NATA and lowest for the AERMOD version of MNRiskS. This validation study showed reasonable agreement between available measurements and model predictions, although results varied among pollutants, and predictions were often lower than measurements. The results increased confidence in identifying pollutants, pathways, geographic areas, sources, and receptors of potential concern, and thus provide a basis for informing pollution reduction strategies and focusing efforts on specific pollutants (diesel particles, acrolein, and formaldehyde), geographic areas (urban centers), and source categories (nonpoint sources). The results heighten concerns about risks from food chain exposures to dioxins and PAHs. Risk estimates were sensitive to variations in methodologies for treating emissions, dispersion, deposition, exposure, and toxicity., (© 2011 Society for Risk Analysis.)

In 2008, the statute authorizing the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to issue air permits was amended to include a unique requirement to analyze and consider "cumulative levels and effects of past and current environmental pollution from all sources on the environment and residents of the geographic area within which the facility's emissions are likely to be deposited." Data describing the Statute Area suggest it is challenged by environmental and socioeconomic concerns, i.e., concerns which are often described by the phrase 'environmental equity'. With input from diverse stakeholders, the MPCA developed a methodology for implementing a cumulative levels and effects analysis when issuing air permits in the designated geographic area. A Process Document was created defining explicit steps a project proposer must complete in the analysis. An accompanying Reference Document compiles all available environmental health data relevant to the Statute Area that could be identified. The final cumulative levels and effects methodology is organized by health endpoint and identifies hazard, exposure and health indices that require further evaluation. The resulting assessment is summarized and presented to decision makers for consideration in the regulatory permitting process. We present a description of the methodology followed by a case study summary of the first air permit processed through the "cumulative levels and effects analysis".

BACKGROUND: During the 2010 Deepwater Horizon (DWH) disaster, in-situ burning and flaring were conducted to remove oil from the water. Workers near combustion sites were potentially exposed to burning-related fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Exposure to PM2.5 has been linked to increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), but no study has examined the relationship among oil spill workers. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between estimated PM2.5 from burning/flaring of oil/gas and CHD risk among the DWH oil spill workers. METHODS: We included workers who participated in response and cleanup activities on the water during the DWH disaster (N = 9091). PM2.5 exposures were estimated using a job-exposure matrix that linked modelled PM2.5 concentrations to detailed DWH spill work histories provided by participants. We ascertained CHD events as the first self-reported physician-diagnosed CHD or a fatal CHD event that occurred after each workers last day of burning exposure. We estimated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) for the associations between categories of average or cumulative daily maximum PM2.5 exposure (versus a referent category of water workers not near controlled burning) and subsequent CHD. We assessed exposure-response trends by examining continuous exposure parameters in models. RESULTS: We observed increased CHD hazard among workers with higher levels of average daily maximum exposure (low vs. referent: HR = 1.26, 95% CI: 0.93, 1.70; high vs. referent: HR = 2.11, 95% CI: 1.08, 4.12; per 10 μg/m3 increase: HR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.19). We also observed suggestively elevated HRs among workers with higher cumulative daily maximum exposure (low vs. referent: HR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.68, 2.08; medium vs. referent: HR = 1.38, 95% CI: 0.88, 2.16; high vs. referent: HR = 1.44, 95% CI: 0.96, 2.14; per 100 μg/m3-d increase: HR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among oil spill workers, exposure to PM2.5 from flaring/burning of oil/gas was associated with increased risk of CHD.

Three modeling systems were used to estimate human health risks from air pollution: two versions of MNRiskS (for Minnesota Risk Screening), and the USEPA National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA). MNRiskS is a unique cumulative risk modeling system used to assess risks from multiple air toxics, sources, and pathways on a local to a state-wide scale. In addition, ambient outdoor air monitoring data were available for estimation of risks and comparison with the modeled estimates of air concentrations. Highest air concentrations and estimated risks were generally found in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area and lowest risks in undeveloped rural areas. Emissions from mobile and area (nonpoint) sources created greater estimated risks than emissions from point sources. Highest cancer risks were via ingestion pathway exposures to dioxins and related compounds. Diesel particles, acrolein, and formaldehyde created the highest estimated inhalation health impacts. Model-estimated air concentrations were generally highest for NATA and lowest for the AERMOD version of MNRiskS. This validation study showed reasonable agreement between available measurements and model predictions, although results varied among pollutants, and predictions were often lower than measurements. The results increased confidence in identifying pollutants, pathways, geographic areas, sources, and receptors of potential concern, and thus provide a basis for informing pollution reduction strategies and focusing efforts on specific pollutants (diesel particles, acrolein, and formaldehyde), geographic areas (urban centers), and source categories (nonpoint sources). The results heighten concerns about risks from food chain exposures to dioxins and PAHs. Risk estimates were sensitive to variations in methodologies for treating emissions, dispersion, deposition, exposure, and toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regulatory agencies are frequently called upon to assess the potential for significant environmental impacts from air pollution emissions. These assessments often entail air dispersion modeling to estimate air concentrations that can be compared with standards or health benchmarks. Some air pollutants can also impact human health through pathways in media besides air. Risk assessment models are available that consider pollutant deposition, movement, uptake, and other processes on land and water and in biota, but they are typically effort-intensive. A screening-level assessment of potential multipathway effects would be useful. We developed multipathway screening factors (MPSFs) that can be applied to inhalation risk estimates to give screening estimates of risks via ingestion pathways. The MPSFs were generated using a generic multipathway risk assessment, consisting of air dispersion and deposition modeling followed by risk modeling for 42 persistent, bioaccumulative air pollutants. MPSFs are defined as the ratio of ingestion risks to inhalation risks. We report here the results of a sensitivity analysis that evaluates the effects on the MPSF ratio of varying inputs to the air dispersion and deposition modeling analysis. Model input parameters were systematically varied and multipathway risks recalculated. From the sensitivity analysis results, reasonable upper-bound values for the ratio of ingestion risks to inhalation risks for each pollutant were selected. The particle size distribution and the method of calculating particle deposition had the most disproportionate effect on inhalation versus ingestion risks and the greatest effect on MPSFs. Risk calculations are often done at the points of maximum air concentration and maximum deposition. In this study, the MPSFs were usually highest at the location of the maximum inhalation risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Air concentrations of nine volatile organic compounds were measured over 48-h periods at 23 locations in three communities in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area. Concentrations at the same times and locations were modeled using a standard regulatory air dispersion model (ISCST3). The goal of the study was to evaluate model performance by comparing predictions with measurements using linear regression and estimates of bias. The modeling, done with mobile and area source emissions resolved to the census tract level and characterized as model area sources, represents an improvement over large-scale airtoxics modeling analyses done to date. Despite the resolved spatial scale, the model did not fully capture the spatial resolution in concentrations in an area with a sharp gradient in emissions. In a census tract with a major highway at one end of the tract (i.e., uneven distribution of emissions within the tract), model predictions at the opposite end of the tract overestimated measured concentrations. This shortcoming was seen for pollutants emitted mainly by mobile sources (benzene, ethyl benzene, toluene, and xylenes). We suggest that major highways would be better characterized as line sources. The model also failed to fully capture the temporal variability in concentrations, which was expected since the emissions inventory comprised annual average values. Based on our evaluation metrics, model performance was best for pollutants emitted mainly from mobile sources and poorest for pollutants emitted mainly from area sources. Important sources of error appeared to be the source characterization (especially location) and emissions quantification. We expect that enhancements in the emissions inventory would give the greatest improvement in results. As anticipated for a Gaussian plume model, performance was dramatically better when [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While a number of studies have looked at the relationship between outdoor and indoor particulate levels based on daily (24 h) average concentrations, little is known about the within-day variability of indoor and outdoor PM levels. It has been hypothesized that brief airborne particle excursions on a time scale of a few minutes to several hours might be of health significance. This article reports variability in measurements of daily (24 h) average PM[sub 2.5] concentrations and short-term (15 min average) PM[sub 2.5] concentrations in outdoor and indoor microenvironments. Daily average PM[sub 2.5] concentrations were measured using gravimetry, while measurements of 15 min average PM[sub 2.5] mass concentrations were made using a light scattering photometer whose readings were normalized using the gravimetric measurements. The measurements were made in 3 urban residential neighborhoods in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area over 3 seasons: spring, summer, and fall of 1999. Outdoor measurements were made at a central monitoring site in each of the 3 communities, and indoor measurements were made in 9-10 residences (with nonsmoking occupants) in each community. Residential participants completed a baseline questionnaire to determine smoking status, sociodemographics, and housing characteristics. Outdoor PM[sub 2.5] concentrations across the MinneapolisSt. Paul metropolitan area appear to be spatially homogeneous on a 24 h time scale as well as on a 15 min time scale. Shortterm average outdoor PM[sub 2.5] concentrations can vary by as much as an order of magnitude within a day. The frequency distribution of outdoor 15 min averages can be described by a trimodal lognormal distribution, with the 3 modes having geometric means of 1.1 µg/m³ (GSD = 2.1), 6.7 µg/m³(GSD-1.6), and 20.8 µg/m³ (GSD = 1.3). There is much greater variability in the within-day 15 min indoor concentrations than outdoor concentrations (as much as &sim... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Air toxics emission inventories play an important role in air quality regulatory activities. Recently, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff compiled a comprehensive air toxics emission inventory for 1996. While acquiring data on the mass of emissions is a necessary first step, equally important is developing information on the potential toxicity of the emitted pollutants. To account for the toxicity of the pollutants in the emission inventory, inhalation health benchmarks for acute effects, chronic effects, and cancer were used to weight the mass of emissions. The 1996 Minnesota emissions inventory results were ranked by mass of emissions and by an index comprised of emissions divided by health benchmarks. The results show that six of eight pollutants ranked highest by toxicity were also the pollutants of concern indicated in environmental monitoring data and modeling data. Monitoring data and modeling results did not show high impacts of the other two pollutants that were identified by the toxicity-based emission ranking method. The biggest limitation in this method is the lack of health benchmark values for many pollutants. Despite uncertainties and limited information, this analysis provides useful information for further targeting pollutants and source categories for control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Explores the concentrations of air toxics in the state of Minnesota. Data on organic compounds monitored by collection at various sites; List of pollutants with excessive benchmarks found at various sites; Evaluation of cancer risk and noncancer hazards of air pollutants; Consideration of air pollutants as a public health concern.

Accurate estimation of human exposures to volatile organic compounds (VOCs) is a key element of strategies designed to protect public health from the adverse effects of hazardous air pollutants. The focus here is on examining the capability of three different exposure metrics (outdoor community concentrations, indoor residential concentrations, and a simple time-weighted model) to estimate observed personal exposures to 14 VOCs. The analysis is based on 2-day average concentrations of individual VOCs measured concurrently in outdoor (0) air in three urban neighborhoods, indoor (I) air in participant's residences, and personal (P) air near the breathing zone of 71 healthy, nonsmoking adults. A median of four matched P-l-0 samples was collected for each study participant in Minneapolis/St Paul over three seasons (spring, summer, and fall) in 1999 using charcoal-based passive air samplers (3M model 3500 organic vapor monitors). Results show a clear pattern for the 14 VOCs, with P > I > 0 concentrations. lntra-individual variability typically spanned at least an order of magnitude, and inter-individual variability spanned 2 or more orders of magnitude for each of the 14 VOCs. Although both 0 and I concentrations generally underestimated personal exposures, I concentrations provided a substantially better estimate of measured P concentrations. Mean squared error (MSE) as well as correlation measures were used to assess estimator performance at the subject-specific level, and hierarchical, mixed effects models were used to estimate the bias and variance components of MSE by tertile of personal exposure. Bias and variance both tended to increase in the upper third of the P exposure distribution for 0 versus P and I versus P. A simple time-weighted model incorporating measured concentrations in both outdoor community air and indoor residential air provided no improvement over I concentration alone for the estimation of P exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]