Cited by 103Air Quality and Health ImpactsToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols

National Estimates of Outdoor Air Toxics Concentrations

Open access
Rosenbaum, Arlene S., Axelrad, Daniel A., Woodruff, Tracey J., Wei, Yi-Hua, Ligocki, Mary P., Cohen, Jonathan P.·1999·Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

Abstract

The Clean Air Act identifies 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), or "air toxics," associated with a wide range of adverse human health effects. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has conducted a modeling study with the Assessment System for Population Exposure Nationwide (ASPEN) to gain a greater understanding of the spatial distribution of concentrations of these HAPs resulting from contributions of multiple emission sources. The study estimates year 1990 long-term outdoor concentrations of 148 air toxics for each census tract in the continental United States, utilizing a Gaussian air dispersion modeling approach. Ratios of median national modeled concentrations to estimated emissions indicate that emission totals without consideration of emission source type can be a misleading indicator of air quality. The results also indicate priorities for improvements in modeling methodology and emissions identification. Model performance evaluation suggests a tendency for underprediction of observed concentrations, which is likely due, at least in part, to a number of limitations of the Gaussian modeling formulation. Emissions estimates for HAPs have a high degree of uncertainty and contribute to discrepancies between modeled and monitored concentration estimates. The model's ranking of concentrations among monitoring sites is reasonably good for most of the gaseous HAPs evaluated, with ranking accuracy ranging from 66 to 100%.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10473289.1999.10463919

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Similar exposure assessment methods for different air pollutant compounds are heterogeneous in terms of internal validity.

    “The justification for this was based on empirical evidence demonstrating that similar exposure assessment methods for different air pollutant compounds are heterogeneous in terms of their internal validity [32, 33].”
  • Initial exposure assessment risk of bias ratings for NATA data were assigned as probably low for higher confidence, probably high for medium confidence, and high for lower confidence.

    ““probably high” for those with “medium” confidence (i.e., coke oven emissions, vinyl chloride, chloroform, ethylene dibromide, etc.), and “high” for those with “lower” confidence (i.e., arsenic compounds, beryllium compounds, cadmium compounds, lead compounds, etc.).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 34

  1. Wiley, J.; Robinson, J.; Piazza, T.; Garrett, K.; Cirkensa, K.; Cheng, Y.; Martin, G. Activity Patterns of California Residents; California Air Re- sources Board, 1991.
  2. Wiley, J.; Robinson, J.; Cheng, Y.; Piazza, T.; Stork, L.; Pladsen, K. Study of Children's Activity Patterns; California Air Resources Board, 1991.
  3. Lewis, C.W. J. Exposure Analysis and Environ. Epidemiol. 1991, 1(1), 31-44.
  4. Koutrakis, P.; Briggs, S.L.; Leaderer, B.P. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1992, 26, 521-527.
  5. Caldwell, J.; Woodruff, T.; Morello-Frosch, R.; Axelrad, D. Toxicol. Ind. Health 1998, 14(3), 429-454.
  6. California Air Resources Board. ARB Speciation Manual, Second Edition, Volumes 1 and 2; 1991.
  7. Edgerton, S.; Khalil, M.; Rasmussen, R. J. Environ. Sci.and Health, Part A-Environ. Sci. & Eng. 1985, 20(5), 563-581.
  8. Harley, R.; Hannigan, M.; Cass, G. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1992, 26(12), 2395-2408.
  9. Harley, R.; Cass, G. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1994, 28(1), 88-98.
  10. Lipari, F.; Dasch, J.; Scruggs, W. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1984, 18(5), 326- 330.
  11. Miller, C.; Srivastava, R.; Ryan, J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1994, 28, 1150- 1158.
  12. Sagebiel, J.; Zielinska, B.; Pierson, W.; Gertler, A. Atmos. Environ. 1996, 30(12), 2287-2296.
  13. Hildemann, L.; Markowski, G.; Cass, G. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1991, 25(4), 744-759.
  14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Study of Hazardous Air Pollut- ant Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units Pursuant to Section 112(n)((A) of the Clean Air Act; Scientific Peer Review Draft; Research Triangle Park, NC, 1995.
  15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Support Center for Regulatory Air Models Bulletin Board System, 1990.
  16. Mahrt, L.J. Atmos. Sci. 1985, 42, 2333-2349.
  17. Gossard, E.E.; Gayner, J. E.; Zamora, R. J.; Neff, W. D. J. Atmos. Sci. 1985, 42, 2156-2169.
  18. Nappo, C.J. Bound.-Layer Meteorol. 1991, 54, 69-87.
  19. Grosjean, D. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 1991, 41, 56-61.
  20. Kao, A.S. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 1994, 44, 683-696.
  21. Grosjean, D. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 1990, 40, 1397-1402.
  22. Grosjean, D. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 1990, 40, 1522-1531.
  23. Grosjean, D. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 1990, 40, 1664-1668.
  24. Grosjean, D. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 1991, 41, 182-189.
  25. Grosjean, D. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 1991, 41, 306-311.
  26. Atkinson, R. Chem. Rev. 1986, 85, 69-201.
  27. Rohde, H. Atmos. Environ. 1980, 14, 1197-1199.
  28. Lowe, D.C.; Schmidt, U.; Ehhalt, D.H.; Frischkorn, C.G.B.; Nurnberg, H.W. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1981, 15, 818-823.
  29. Khalil, M.; Rasmussen, R. Atmos. Environ. 1984, 18(9), 1805-1813.
  30. Panshin, S.; Hites, R. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1994, 28, 2001-2007.
  31. Platt, U.; Perner, D.; Patz, H.W. J. Geophys. Res. 1979, 84, 6329-6335.
  32. Singh, H.; Salas, L.; Cantrell, B.; Redmond, R. Atmos. Environ 1985, 19, 1911-1919.
  33. Wiedmann, T.; Guthner, B.; Class, T.; Ballschmiter, K. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1994, 28, 2321-2329.
  34. Novelli, P.C.; Steele, L.P.; Tans, P.P. J. Geophys. Res. 1992, 97, 20731- 20750.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rosenbaum, A. S., Axelrad, D. A., Woodruff, T. J., Wei, Y.-H., Ligocki, M. P., & Cohen, J. P.
Affiliations
  • Environmental Protection Agency (US)
  • a ICF Consulting , San Rafael , California , USA
Venue
Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association
Published
1999-10
Volume
49
Issue
10
Pages
1138-1152
ISSN
  • 1047-3289 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-2247
  • 2162-2906
OpenAlex
W2047205424
Cited by
103
References
11
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
9.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Toxic Organic Pollutants Impact
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Keywords
hazardous air pollutants, population exposure, aspen, emission source contributions, emission uncertainty, model evaluation, Clean Air Act, air quality modeling
MeSH terms
Air Pollutants, Models, Theoretical, United States, Hazardous Substances

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review