Population exposure to coal was reduced through various actions taken on individual coal EGUs across the study period, including reduced operations, emissions controls (“scrubbers”; control technologies identified by the following labels in the AMPD data set: Dry Lime FGD, Dry Sorbent Injection, Dual Alkali, Fluidized Bed Limestone Injection, Magnesium Oxide, Sodium Based, Wet Lime FGD, Wet Limestone, and Other), and retirements. Using PWE from HyADS and data from EPA AMPD, we calculated PWE contributed by operational facilities and PWE avoided through each of these three interventions. We used dates of unit retirements and scrubber installations listed in the AMPD data set to designate each unit’s operational or emissions control status. Additionally, we employ each unit’s annual heat input—also available in the AMPD data set—to characterize units as operating at high capacity (annual heat input above each unit’s median annual heat input reported in operational years from 1999 to 2020) or low capacity (annual heat input below median heat input). This characterization of high vs. low operational capacity allows for the quantification of exposure avoided by reduced operations. Using this information, we characterize each unit into one of six categories: a) operating at high capacity without a scrubber, b) operating at low capacity without a scrubber, c) operating at high capacity with a scrubber, d) operating at low capacity with a scrubber, e) retired without previously installing a scrubber, and f) retired after operating with a scrubber. These six operational/control categories led to seven contributed and avoided exposure designations that could be calculated using modeled PWE across subsets of years for each unit (Table 1). We calculated each quantity listed in Table 1 for each unit in years that met the corresponding criteria and presented the sum of each exposure class across units. We did not include the years of scrubber installation or retirement in the PWE averaging to avoid transition years. Each unit’s potential PWE designation among these five categories remained constant across any given range of years for which its scrubber and operational status did not change. We presented the annual results as a percentage of total potential exposure in each year. The approach was designed to explore trends across years, and the calculated values were somewhat sensitive to the criteria listed in Table 1. Therefore, the results were not precise enough to diagnose a given year’s exposure distribution across the seven categories, and we focused on overarching trends in the discussion. Sensitivity of the results to the selection of the heat input value cutoff used to define high/low operating capacity is presented in Figure S7.
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol. The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Henneman L.R., Rasel M.M., Choirat C., Anenberg S.C, & Zigler C. (2023). Inequitable Exposures to U.S. Coal Power Plant–Related : 22 Years and Counting. Environmental Health Perspectives, 131(3), 037005.
Other organizations :
George Mason University, Swiss Data Science Center, ETH Zurich, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, George Washington University, The University of Texas at Austin
Emissions controls ("scrubbers"; control technologies identified by the following labels in the AMPD data set: Dry Lime FGD, Dry Sorbent Injection, Dual Alkali, Fluidized Bed Limestone Injection, Magnesium Oxide, Sodium Based, Wet Lime FGD, Wet Limestone, and Other)
Retirements
dependent variables
Population exposure to coal particulate matter (PM2.5)
control variables
Annual heat input of each unit (used to characterize units as operating at high capacity or low capacity)
positive controls
Not explicitly mentioned
negative controls
Not explicitly mentioned
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to
get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required