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 (PMx 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 PM2.5, and estimates selected human health impacts from PM2.5 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.

E-waste bans and U.S. households' preferences for disposing of their e-waste.

To deal with the inadequate disposal of e-waste, many states have instituted bans on its disposal in municipal landfills. However, the effectiveness of e-waste bans does not seem to have been analyzed yet. This paper starts addressing this gap. Using data from a survey of U.S. households, we estimate multivariate logit models to explain past disposal behavior by households of broken/obsolete ("junk") cell phones and disposal intentions for "junk" TVs. Our explanatory variables include factors summarizing general awareness of environmental issues, pro-environmental behavior in the past year, attitudes toward recycling small electronics (for the cell phones model only), socio-economic and demographic characteristics, and the presence of state e-waste bans. We find that California's Cell Phone Recycling Act had a significant and positive impact on the recycling of junk cell phones; however, state disposal bans for junk TVs seem to have been mostly ineffective, probably because they were poorly publicized and enforced. Their effectiveness could be enhanced by providing more information about e-waste recycling to women, and more generally to adults under 60. Given the disappointing performance of policies implemented to-date to enhance the collection of e-waste, it may be time to explore economic instruments such as deposit-refund systems.

Time bomb or hidden treasure? Characteristics of junk TVs and of the US households who store them.

Within the growing stockpile of electronic waste (e-waste), TVs are especially of concern in the US because of their number (which is known imprecisely), their low recycling rate, and their material content: cathode ray tube televisions contain lead, and both rear projection and flat panel displays contain mercury, in addition to other potentially toxic materials. Based on a unique dataset from a 2010 survey, our count models show that pro-environmental behavior, age, education, household size, marital status, gender of the head of household, dwelling type, and geographic location are statistically significant variables for explaining the number of broken or obsolete (junk) TVs stored by US households. We also estimate that they are storing approximately 84.1 million junk TVs, which represents 40 pounds of scrap per household. Materials in each of these junk TVs are worth $21 on average at January 2012 materials prices, which sets an upper bound on collecting and recycling costs. This information should be helpful for developing more effective recycling strategies for TVs in the e-waste stream.

Integrating toxicity reduction strategies for materials and components into product design: a case study on utility meters.

Using RIO Tronics utility meter products as an industrial case study, the numeric Fraunhofer Toxic Potential Indicator (TPI) assessment tool is used to determine high impact materials with the aim of reducing the content of inherently toxic substances in these products. However, because product redesign with alternative materials affects entire components, overall component toxicity potential must also be explored. To achieve this, material TPI scores are aggregated into component TPI scores by 2 methods: 1) the Sum-Weighted Component TPI method, which considers the mass of materials in the component to assign an overall score, and 2) the Max Component TPI method, which scores the component with the highest impact material. With consideration of uncertainties from materials' toxicity information and mass estimates, key results from both scoring methods prioritized components that contain acrylonitrile-based polymers, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and stainless steel. Furthermore, an alternative materials assessment is carried out to identify less-toxic substitutes to meet cost and technical constraints. Substitute materials such as Al alloys for stainless steel and high-density polyethylene for PVC show promise for a combination of toxicity reduction and cost-effectiveness. The new screening methodology described can help product designers systematically benchmark toxicity potential in parallel to cost and functionality.

Taking the "waste" out of "wastewater" for human water security and ecosystem sustainability.

Humans create vast quantities of wastewater through inefficiencies and poor management of water systems. The wasting of water poses sustainability challenges, depletes energy reserves, and undermines human water security and ecosystem health. Here we review emerging approaches for reusing wastewater and minimizing its generation. These complementary options make the most of scarce freshwater resources, serve the varying water needs of both developed and developing countries, and confer a variety of environmental benefits. Their widespread adoption will require changing how freshwater is sourced, used, managed, and priced.

How much e-waste is there in US basements and attics? Results from a national survey.

The fate of used electronic products (e-waste) is of increasing concern because of their toxicity and the growing volume of e-waste. Addressing these concerns requires developing the recycling infrastructure, but good estimates of the volume of e-waste stored by US households are still unavailable. In this context, we make two contributions based on a national random survey of 2136 US households. First, we explain how much e-waste is stored by US households using count models. Significant explanatory variables include age, marital and employment status, ethnicity, household size, previous e-waste recycling behavior, and to some extent education, home ownership, and understanding the consequences of recycling, but neither income nor knowledge of e-waste recycling laws. Second, we estimate that on average, each US household has 4.1 small (

Leaching assessments of hazardous materials in cellular telephones.

Protocols for assessing the risks of discarded electronic products (e-waste) vary across jurisdictions, complicating the tasks of manufacturers and regulators. We compared the Federal Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP), California's Waste Extraction Test (WET), and the Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) on 34 phones to evaluate the consistency of hazardous waste classification. Our sample exceeded TCLP criteria only for lead (average 87.4 mg L(-1); range = 38.2-147.0 mg L(-1); regulatory limit = 5.0 mg L(-1), but failed TTLC for five metals: copper (average 203 g kg(-1); range = 186-224 g kg(-1); limit = 2.50 g kg(-1), nickel (9.25 g kg(-1); range = 6.34-11.20 g kg(-1); limit = 2.00 g kg(-1)), lead (10.14 g kg(-1); range = 8.2211.60 g kg(-1); limit = 1.00 g kg-1), antimony (1.02 g kg(-1); range = 0.86-1.29 g kg(-1); limit = 0.50 g kg(-1)), and zinc (11.01 g kg(-1); range = 8.82-12.80 g kg(-1); limit = 5.00 g kg(-1). Thresholds were not exceeded for WET. We detected several organic compounds, but at concentrations below standards. Brominated flame retardants were absent. These results improve existing environmental databases for e-waste and highlight the need to review regulatory testing for hazardous waste.

Financing electronic waste recycling Californian households' willingness to pay advanced recycling fees.

The growth of electronic waste (e-waste) is of increasing concern because of its toxic content and low recycling rates. The e-waste recycling infrastructure needs to be developed, yet little is known about people's willingness to fund its expansion. This paper examines this issue based on a 2004 mail survey of California households. Using an ordered logit model, we find that age, income, beliefs about government and business roles, proximity to existing recycling facilities, community density, education, and environmental attitudes are significant factors for explaining people's willingness to pay an advanced recycling fee (ARF) for electronics. Most respondents are willing to support a 1% ARF. Our results suggest that policymakers should target middle-aged and older adults, improve programs in communities with existing recycling centers or in rural communities, and consider public-private partnerships for e-waste recycling programs.