Public health impacts of GHG emission reduction strategies in household energy use

From Opasnet
Jump to: navigation, search



Assessment is based on the work by Wilkinson et al. 2009[1]

File:HIA housing energy Wilkinson09.ana

Scope

Purpose

Health impacts of different climate change mitigation strategies aimed at reducing GHG emissions from household energy use.

Boundaries

Spatial:

  • United Kingdom

Temporal:

  • Impacts during one year, reference year 2010

Population:

  • UK total population

Policy strategies:

  • Increased energy efficiency of household heating by
    • Increased insulation by dwelling fabric improvements
    • Improved dwelling ventilation control
    • Fuel switching from indoor household fossil fuel combustion to electricity
    • Reduce in indoor temperatures by change in occupant behaviour

Scenarios

  • Baseline
    • Distributions of efficiency for UK housing stock and associated GHG emissions and health effects
  • Scenario 1: dwelling fabric improvements
    • Overall heat loss of the fabric reduced from 224 J/s per ºC to 98 j/s per ºC
  • Scenario 2: improved dwelling ventilation control
    • The present permeability of the housing stock shifted to present reduced air leakage in all dwellings
    • Tightest dwellings (3 m3/m2 per h) assumed to have ideal mechanical ventilation
  • Scenario 3: fuel switching
    • All indoor combustion replaced by electricity
    • Effects on CO2 emission not modelled
  • Scenario 4: Occupant behaviour
    • Indoor temperature in all dwellings with average temperature > 18 ºC decreased by 1 ºC. Temperatures ≤18 ºC unchanged.
  • Scenario 5: combination of scenarios 1-4

Intended users

Participants

Definition

Decision variables

  • Dwelling fabric improvements (yes/no)
  • Improved ventilation control (yes/no)
  • Fuel switch to electricity (yes/no)
  • Decrease in indoor temperatures (yes/no)

Indicators

  • Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs)
  • Premature deaths
  • Household energy sector greenhouse gas emissions

Value variables

Other variables

Indoor exposures

  • Fine particles (PM2.5, µg/m3)
    • Baseline: 5.5
    • Scenario 1: 5.5
    • Scenario 2: 4.6
    • Scenario 3: 3.7
    • Scenario 4: 5.5
    • Scenario 5: 2.5
  • Radon (Bq/m3)
    • Baseline: 21.7
    • Scenario 1: 21.7
    • Scenario 2: 17.2
    • Scenario 3: 21.7
    • Scenario 4: 21.7
    • Scenario 5: 17.2
  • Carbon monoxide (CO, probability of poisoning)
    • Baseline: 1E-6
    • Scenario 1: 1E-6
    • Scenario 2: 1E-6
    • Scenario 3: 0
    • Scenario 4: 1E-6
    • Scenario 5: 0
  • Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS, exposure expressed in ETS units)
    • Baseline: 1.5
    • Scenario 1: 1.5
    • Scenario 2: 1.7
    • Scenario 3: 1.5
    • Scenario 4: 1.5
    • Scenario 5: 1.7
  • Mould growth (% with mold index >1)
    • Baseline: 17.7
    • Scenario 1: 17.3
    • Scenario 2: 20.3
    • Scenario 3: 17.7
    • Scenario 4: 18.7
    • Scenario 5: 20.8
  • Cold (winter indoor temperature C)
    • Baseline: 18.1
    • Scenario 1: 18.4
    • Scenario 2: 18.2
    • Scenario 3: 18.1
    • Scenario 4: 17.9
    • Scenario 5: 18.5

Exposure-response functions

Analyses

  • Comparative health impact assessment
  • Sensitivity analyses

Indices

  • Age
  • Pollutant

Result

Results

Change per million population compared with baseline scenario

Premature deaths Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5
PM2.5 0 -32 -64 0 -107
Radon 0 3 0 0 3
CO 0 0 -1 0 -1
ETS 0 24 0 0 24
Mold 0 0 0 0 0
Cold -7 -1 0 0 -8
Total -7 -6 -65 0 -89
DALYs
PM2.5 0 -310 -619 0 -1026
Radon 0 43 0 0 43
CO 0 0 -25 0 -25
ETS 0 219 0 0 219
Mold -2 12 0 5 15
Cold -60 -12 0 0 -72
Total -62 -48 -644 5 -847
CO2 emissions (MT) -33 -6 0 2 41


Change in disease burdens per MT CO2 saved

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5
Premature deaths -12.2 -64 - 0 -133
DALYs -115 -492 - 17.3 -1267

Conclusions

See also

References

  1. Wilkinson P., Smith K.R., Davies M., Adair H., Armstrong B.G., Barrett M., Bruce N., Haines A., Hamilton I., Oreszcyn T., Ridley I., Tonne C. & Chalabi Z. Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions: household energy. Health and Climate Series 4, The Lancet. Published online November 25, 2009. Doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61713-X [1]