Search

This study introduces a spatial layout framework for the multi-objective optimization of low-impact development (LID) measures at an urban watershed scale, targeting the mitigation of urban flooding and water pollution exacerbated by urbanization. The framework, tailored for the Dahongmen area within Beijing's Liangshui River Watershed, integrates the storm water management model (SWMM) with the nondominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II). It optimizes LID deployment by balancing annual costs, volume capture ratio of rainfall, runoff pollution control rate, and the reduction in heat island potential (HIPR). High-resolution comprehensive runoff and land use data calibrate the model, ensuring the realism of the optimization approach. The selection of optimal solutions from the Pareto front is guided by weights determined through both the entropy weight method and subjective weight method, employing the TOPSIS method. The research highlights the positive, nonlinear correlation between cost and environmental benefits, particularly in reducing heat island effects, offering vital decision-making insights. It also identifies a critical weight range in specific decision-making scenarios, providing a scientific basis for rational weight assignment in practical engineering. This study exemplifies the benefits of comprehensive multi-objective optimization, with expectations of markedly improving the efficacy of large-scale LID implementations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Open-system electronic cigarette (EC) product features, such as battery capacity, maximum output wattage, and so forth, are major components that drive product costs and may influence use patterns. Moreover, continued innovation and monitoring of product features and prices will provide critical information for designing appropriate taxation policies and product regulations., Objective: This study will examine how product features are associated with the prices of devices sold in web-based vape shops., Methods: We draw samples from 5 popular, US-based, web-based vape shops from April to August 2022 to examine starter kits, device-only products, and e-liquid container-only products. We implemented a linear regression model with a store-fixed effect to examine the association between device attributes and prices., Results: EC starter kits or devices vary significantly by type, with mod prices being much higher than pod and vape pen prices. The prices of mod starter kits were even lower than those of mod devices, suggesting that mod starter kits are discounted in web-based vape shops. The price of mod kits, mod device-only products, and pod kits increased as the battery capacity and output wattage increased. For vape pens, the price was positively associated with the volume size of the e-liquid container. On the other hand, the price of pod kits was positively associated with the number of containers., Conclusions: A unit-based specific tax, therefore, will impose a higher tax burden on lower-priced devices such as vape pens or pod systems and a lower tax burden on mod devices. A volume- or capacity-based specific tax on devices will impose a higher tax burden on vape pens with a larger container size. Meanwhile, ad valorem taxes pegged to wholesale or retail prices would apply evenly across device types, meaning those with advanced features such as higher battery capacities and output wattage would face higher rates. Therefore, policy makers could manipulate tax rates by device type to discourage the use of certain device products., (©Yanyun He, Qian Yang, Yousef Alish, Shaoying Ma, Zefeng Qiu, Jian Chen, Theodore Wagener, Ce Shang. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 09.05.2024.)

Background: Prior studies have demonstrated that the e-cigarette market contains a large number of brands. Identifying these existing e-cigarette brands is a key element of market surveillance, which will further assist in policy making and compliance checks., Objective: To facilitate the surveillance of the diverse product landscape in the e-cigarette market, we constructed a semantic database of e-cigarette brands that have appeared in the US market as of 2020-2022., Methods: In order to build the brand database, we searched and compiled e-cigarette brands from a comprehensive list of retail channels and sources, including (1) e-liquid and disposable brands sold in web-based stores, (2) e-cigarette brands sold in brick-and-mortar stores and collected by the Nielsen Retail Scanner Data, (3) e-cigarette brands compiled by Wikipedia, (4) self-reported e-cigarette brands from the 2020 International Tobacco Control Four-Country Smoking and Vaping (ITC 4CV) US survey, and (5) e-cigarette brands on Twitter. We also estimated the top 5 e-cigarette brands by sales volume in brick-and-mortar stores, by the frequency and variety of offerings in web-based shops, and by the frequency of self-reported brands from the 2020 ITC 4CV US survey., Results: As of 2020-2022, a total of 912 e-cigarette brands have been sold by various retail channels. During 2020-2022, the top 5 brands are JUUL, vuse, njoy, blu, and logic in brick-and-mortar stores; blu, king, monster, twist, and air factory for e-liquids in web-based stores; hyde, pod mesh, suorin, vaporlax, and xtra for disposables sold in web-based stores; and smok, aspire, vaporesso, innokin, and eleaf based on self-reported survey data., Conclusions: As the US Food and Drug Administration enforces the premarket tobacco market authorization, many e-cigarette brands may become illegal in the US market. In this context, how e-cigarette brands evolve and consolidate in different retail channels will be critical for understanding the regulatory impacts on product availability. Our semantic database of e-cigarette brands can serve as a useful tool to monitor product and marketplace development, conduct compliance checks, assess manufacturers' marketing behaviors, and identify regulatory impacts., (©Shaoying Ma, Aadeeba Kaareen, Hojin Park, Yanyun He, Shuning Jiang, Zefeng Qiu, Zidian Xie, Dongmei Li, Jian Chen, Richard J O’Connor, Geoffrey T Fong, Ce Shang. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 28.02.2024.)