Ambient Air Pollution Exposure Estimation for the ... - ACS Publications

Subscriber access provided by UNIV OF NEBRASKA - LINCOLN

Article

Ambient Air Pollution Exposure Estimation for the Global Burden of Disease 2013 Michael Brauer, Greg Freedman, Joseph Frostad, Aaron van Donkelaar, Randall V Martin, Frank Dentener, Rita Van Dingenen, Kara Estep, Heresh Amini, Joshua Schulz Apte, Kalpana Balakrishnan, Lars Barregard, David M Broday, Valery Feigin, Santu Ghosh, Philip K. Hopke, Luke David Knibbs, Yoshihiro Kokubo, Yang Liu, Stefan Ma, Lidia Morawska, José Luis Texcalac Sangrador, Gavin Shaddick, Hugh Ross Anderson, Theo Vos, Mohammad H Forouzanfar, Richard T. Burnett, and Aaron Cohen Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b03709 • Publication Date (Web): 23 Nov 2015 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on November 24, 2015

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

Environmental Science & Technology is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 33

Environmental Science & Technology

Vos, Theo; Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington Forouzanfar, Mohammad; Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington Burnett, Richard; Health Canada, Cohen, Aaron; Health Effects Institute,

ACS Paragon Plus Environment


1

Ambient Air Pollution Exposure Estimation for the Global Burden of Disease 2013

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Michael Brauera*, Greg Freedmanb, Joseph Frostadb, Aaron van Donkelaarc, Randall V. Martinc, Frank Dentenerd, Rita van Dingenend, Kara Estepb, Heresh Aminie, Joshua S. Aptef, Kalpana Balakrishnang, Lars Barregardh, David Brodayi, Valery Feiginj, Santu Ghoshg, Philip K. Hopkek, Luke D. Knibbsl, Yoshihiro Kokubom, Yang Liun, Stefan Mao, Lidia Morawskap, José Luis Texcalac Sangradorq, Gavin Shaddickr, H. Ross Andersons, Theo Vosb, Mohammad H Forouzanfarb, Richard T. Burnettt, Aaron Cohenu.

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

a*

School of Population and Public Health, The University of British Columbia, 3rd Floor – 2206 East Mall, Vancouver BC V6T1Z3 Canada. email: [email protected] tel: 604 822 9585 fax: 604 822 4994 b Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle WA. USA c Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax NS. Canada d European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy e Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland f Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX. USA g Department of Environmental Health Engineering, Sri Ramachandra University, Chennai, India h Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden i Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Haifa, Israel j National Institute for Stroke & Applied Neurosciences, Auckland University of Technology, Aukland, New Zealand. k Department of Chemical Engineering, Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY. USA l School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia m Department of Preventive Cardiology, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center, Osaka, Japan n Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta GA. USA o Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore p School of Chemistry, Physics and Mechanical Engineering, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane QLD, Australia q National Institute of Public Health, Cuernevaca, Mexico r Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, UK. s Population Health Research Institute, St. George's University of London, London, UK t Health Canada, Ottawa, ON. Canada u Health Effects Institute, Boston MA. USA

39

Submitted to Environmental Science and Technology

40

Word count (including tables and figures): 6996 (text only: 5196)


Page 2 of 33

Page 3 of 33


41

Abstract

42

Exposure to ambient air pollution is a major risk factor for global disease. Assessment of the

43

impacts of air pollution on population health and evaluation of trends relative to other major risk

44

factors requires regularly updated, accurate, spatially resolved exposure estimates. We combined

45

satellite-based estimates, chemical transport model simulations and ground measurements from

46

79 different countries to produce global estimates of annual average fine particle (PM2.5) and

47

ozone concentrations at 0.1° × 0.1° spatial resolution for five-year intervals from 1990-2010 and

48

the year 2013. These estimates were applied to assess population-weighted mean concentrations

49

for 1990 – 2013 for each of 188 countries. In 2013, 87% of the world’s population lived in areas

50

exceeding the World Health Organization Air Quality Guideline of 10 µg/m3 PM2.5 (annual

51

average). Between 1990 and 2013, global population-weighted PM2.5 increased by 20.4 % driven

52

by trends in South Asia, Southeast Asia, and China. Decreases in population-weighted mean

53

concentrations of PM2.5 were evident in most high income countries. Population-weighted mean

54

concentrations of ozone increased globally by 8.9% from 1990 – 2013 with increases in most

55

countries– except for modest decreases in North America, parts of Europe, and several countries

56

in Southeast Asia.

57 58

TOC Art

59

2 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 4 of 33

60

Introduction

61

The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2013 provided important estimates of the global health

62

impacts attributable to ambient air pollution. Ambient particulate matter air pollution (PM2.5,

63

particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter 2.5 µm or smaller) was identified as a leading risk

64

factor for global disease burden with an estimated 2.9 million attributable deaths in the year

65

2013. An additional 217,000 deaths were attributable to long term ozone exposure 1. These two

66

pollutants were selected as indicators of exposure to ambient air pollution based on extensive

67

epidemiologic and mechanistic evidence indicating independent adverse health impacts2. These

68

disease burden estimates built upon those developed previously for the Global Burden of Disease

69

2010 (GBD 2010)3 which incorporated novel global air pollution exposure estimates for 1990,

70

2005, and 2010 that included both urban and rural areas and that merged data from ground

71

measurements, satellite retrievals and chemical transport models (CTM)2. In addition to the

72

application of these exposure estimates to the entire global population, their high spatial

73

resolution minimized biases due to spatial misalignment between air pollution exposure and

74

population information4. Beyond their direct use in the GBD 2010, the PM2.5 exposure estimates

75

were combined with CTM simulations to estimate sector-specific contributions to disease burden

76

from motor vehicle transportation5,6, and household solid fuel use7,8. Additionally, these

77

exposure estimates served as the basis of the World Health Organization air pollution mortality

78

estimates9 and were used by the World Bank as indicators of sustainable development10 and to

79

estimate the economic damages attributable to air pollution11. The estimates have also been used

80

in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) BenMap health and economic impact

81

assessment tool12, incorporated into the International Agency for Research on Cancer

82

Monograph on the carcinogenicity of outdoor air pollution13. Given the lack of ground


Page 5 of 33


83

measurements in many regions of the world, the above analyses were not previously possible

84

prior to development of consistent, globally applicable exposure estimates.

85 86

In the context of the most recent update of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD 2013)1 we

87

developed updates and revised global exposure estimates for PM2.5 and ozone (O3). We

88

incorporated improvements in satellite-based estimation of PM2.514, internally consistent

89

emissions inventories spanning this entire period and a substantially increased number of ground

90

measurements of particulate matter, compared to those utilized previously. Here we describe the

91

methodology used to estimate air pollution exposure for the GBD 20131, provide descriptive

92

information on year 2013 concentrations and illustrate trends since 1990, at the country level.

93 94

Methods

95

PM2.5

96

As in the GBD 2010 estimates, our overall approach to estimate annual average PM2.5

97

concentrations for GBD 2013 uses the mean of gridded values of satellite-based and CTM

98

estimates at 0.1° x 0.1° resolution, calibrated to available ground measurements. We first provide

99

a brief overview of the approach described previously for GBD 2010 and then describe details of

100

the updated inputs and methodology used in GBD 2013.

101

GBD 2010 estimates

102

In the previous GBD (2010) we used satellite-based estimates for PM2.5 for the year 200515

103

combined with simulations from the TM5 (Tracer Model, version 5) CTM16 based on year 2005



Page 6 of 33

104

emissions, which were the most current available at the time of analysis. The satellite-based

105

estimates combine aerosol optical depth (AOD) retrievals (which include the total column

106

between surface and the sensor) to estimate near-surface PM2.5 by applying the relationship of

107

PM2.5 to AOD simulated by the GEOS-Chem CTM. Our evaluations indicated that both TM5

108

and the satellite-estimates provided useful information which contributed to the estimation of

109

exposure2. To estimate exposures for 1990 we used a TM5 simulation based on 1990 emissions

110

but with the same “standard” meteorology as in the 2005 simulation. For the 1990 satellite-based

111

estimates we used the same spatial pattern from the year 2005 estimates and adjusted this to 1990

112

based upon the ratio of 2005:1990 simulations from the GEOS-Chem CTM17 that used

113

anthropogenic emissions from these years (while again maintaining consistent meteorology and

114

natural emissions). For year 2010 estimates, we used 2005 TM5 and satellite-based estimates and

115

extrapolated these to 2010 based on the 1990 – 2005 trend following a simple assumption that

116

the change proportional to the time period length from 2005 to 2010, relative to 2005 was 1/3 as

117

large as the change from 1990 to 2005, relative to 1990 as described by:

118

(PM2.5_2010-PM2.5_2005)/PM2.5_2005 = 1/3 * (PM2.5_2005 - PM2.5_1990)/PM2.5_1990

119

In addition, we compiled available annual average measurement data for ~2005 from multiple

120

sources2. These measurements were used to calibrate the average of the TM5 and satellite-based

121

estimates for 2005 at 0.1° x 0.1° grid-cell resolution with a simple prediction equation derived

122

for those locations with measurements.

123

GBD 2013 estimates

124

For GBD 2013, we followed a similar approach using updated inputs. Specifically, we used a

125

new series of satellite-based estimates for PM2.5 that included annual estimates for 1998 – 2012

(1)


Page 7 of 33


126

and an improved estimation algorithm14. Briefly, satellite-based PM2.5 estimates used aerosol

127

optical depth (AOD) retrievals to estimate near-surface PM2.5 by applying the relationship of

128

PM2.5 to AOD simulated by the GEOS-Chem CTM. These updated PM2.5 estimates make use of

129

both “unconstrained” (as used in GBD 2010) and “optimal-estimation” AOD retrievals, and used

130

the MODIS18, MISR19,20 and SeaWiFS21 satellite-borne instruments. In the optimal estimation

131

approach, AOD retrievals using observed MODIS top-of-atmosphere reflectance are constrained

132

by simulated AOD based on their relative uncertainties. The optimal estimation PM2.5 values

133

additionally incorporated vertical profile information from the CALIOP22 satellite instrument to

134

inform the relationship between column AOD and ground-level concentrations. These two

135

(optimal estimation and unconstrained) sets of estimates were then combined with information

136

on temporal variation based on SeaWiFS and MISR to estimate global PM2.5 estimates (50%

137

RH) at 0.1° x 0.1° for 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2011 (based on 3 years of retrievals, centered on the

138

year of interest). Estimates for 1995 and 1990 were based on the ratio of GEOS-Chem

139

simulations that used anthropogenic emissions (from EDGAR23) between 2005 and the

140

respective year of interest, but constant meteorology24.

141

We also included new TM5-FASST25,26 (FAst Scenario Screening Tool) simulations for 1990,

142

2000, and 2010, using an updated set of emissions inventories, and constant meteorological

143

inputs and emissions from dust and sea salt. TM5-FASST is a reduced form version of the TM5

144

CTM. TM5 is a nested 3-dimensional global atmospheric chemistry transport model, which

145

simulates ozone and aerosol components at 1° × 1° resolution16. TM5-FASST emulates the full

146

TM5 CTM with a set of linear relationships between emissions in 56 geographically defined

147

source regions, and pollutant concentrations in receptor regions. TM5-FASST simulations are

148

then sub-allocated based on population density (using the Gridded Population of the World, 6 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 8 of 33

149

version 3, GPWv327) to 0.1° x 0.1° grid cells. Here we used a consistent set of emissions

150

estimates [ECLIPSE v4a (IEA) 2010, 2000, 1990 emissions; RCP: international aviation and

151

shipping (2010); GFED v3.1: Forest fires and savannah burning (2000, 2010)] and “typical”

152

(year 2001) meteorology, dust, and sea salt contributions to simulate ambient (50% RH) PM2.5

153

concentrations at 0.1° x 0.1 ° for 1990, 2000 and 2010. Estimates for 1995, 2005 and 2011 were

154

generated by fitting natural cubic splines to the 1990, 2000 and 2010 estimates at the grid cell

155

level.

156

To collect updated measurement data for 2010-2013, we used a variety of information sources

157

including those used previously2, as well as new data, especially from China and India, where

158

available. We sought input from international GBD collaborators, conducted targeted data

159

searches and included measurements compiled from a literature search14 and the WHO ambient

160

air pollution in cities database9 (Supporting Information). A final database was constructed

161

including measurement values, year of annual average (2010-2013 data were targeted), site

162

coordinates (if available, or city centroid coordinates if not available), site type (if available),

163

data source and whether PM2.5 was measured directly or estimated from a PM2.5:PM10 ratio.

164

Given spatial biases in availability of ground measurements, differences in measurement

165

approaches between jurisdictions, and absence of details regarding measurement data in some

166

instances, the ground measurements were not used in evaluation of the exposure assessment

167

methodology but rather incorporated within the approach as an additional source of information.

168

For locations where daily values were obtained or where measurement completeness was

169

available we retained all sites with >70% valid measurements, as reported in source databases.

170

For locations where data were obtained for multiple years at the same location we retained one


Page 9 of 33


171

value per location, between the years 2008-2013 in the following order of preference: 2010,

172

2011, 2009, 2012, 2008, 2013.

173

If multiple monitoring types available at the same site were included in parent databases, these

174

values were averaged. Industrial and roadside sites were excluded (where indicated in source

175

databases; except in India where these were retained upon the advice of local experts who

176

indicated that these sites adequately represented population exposure). In the USEPA database,

177

sites indicated as "background surveillance" were designated as background, those indicated as

178

"continuous air monitoring program", "population-oriented monitoring", or "exposure studies"

179

were designated as population sites. Those sites or measurements identified as "episode

180

monitoring," "complaint investigation", or “events,” in the USEPA database were excluded. All

181

other sites in the USEPA database were identified as unspecified and retained.

182

In locations where no PM2.5 measurements were available, we estimated PM2.5 from

183

measurements of PM102,28. We preferentially used locally derived PM2.5:PM10 ratios. In these

184

cases ratios from any sites within 50 km where both PM10 and PM2.5 were measured were used.

185

These local ratios were only accepted and used to derive PM2.5 estimates for nearby sites if they

186

were between 0.2 and 0.8. If local ratios were not available we used a country and monitor-

187

specific average if available, followed by a country-specific average. Otherwise, we assumed a

188

ratio of 0.5 to estimate PM2.5 from PM10 measurements2.

189 190

In total we included 4073 data points from 3387 unique locations (1,854 [46%] from direct

191

measurements of PM2.5) in 79 countries (Figure S1; Supporting Information). Of the 2219 data

192

points in which PM2.5 was estimated from PM10, 1,151 (30% of 4073 total) were estimated using

193

a locally derived ratio, 590 (15%) were estimated using in-country monitors of the same type, 8 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 10 of 33

194

and 309 (8%) were estimated with other in-country monitors. The remaining 169 (4%) were

195

estimated with a ratio of 0.5, as in our GBD 2010 estimates. The mean ratio for the estimation

196

was 0.61. These individual measurements have unknown accuracy and representativeness, but

197

collectively they offer unprecedented ground-based information.

198

We then used a regression calibration approach to combine the mean of the satellite-based

199

estimates and the TM5-FASST simulations with the collective measurements to produce final

200

global estimates at 0.1° x 0.1 °grid-cell resolution. For the regression calibration, we initially

201

evaluated a simple regression model analogous to that used in the GBD 2010 estimates:

202

Measured ln(PM2.5) = β0 + β1 * ln(fused)

(2)

203

where fused is the mean of the satellite-derived and TM5 estimates for each grid cell. We first

204

tested whether to apply a single global calibration function or one that varied spatially. Modeling

205

with a random effect by 7 aggregated “super-regions” (due to the complete absence of

206

measurements in multiple regions) indicated regional variation in slopes but also very poor fits in

207

some regions, so a single global calibration function was chosen. Evaluation of model residuals

208

indicated no association with population density and addition of population density to the model

209

only minimally improved fit. We then evaluated the impact of including available information

210

describing the measurements including whether the exact site coordinates were known, whether

211

PM2.5 was directly measured or estimated and whether the monitoring site classification was

212

known or unspecified. Inclusion of these variables slightly improved the model R2 while slightly

213

reducing the residual standard error.

214

These two candidate global calibration models (Simple: β0= 0.82, β1 = 0.73, residual standard

215

error = 0.43, Multiple R-squared: 0.60, Adjusted R-squared: 0.60; “Advanced”, with additional 9 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 11 of 33


216

site parameters: β0= 0.42, β1=0.87, residual standard error = 0.41, Multiple R-squared: 0.64,

217

Adjusted R-squared: 0.64) were further evaluated by cross-validation where 10% of the

218

measurement sites were randomly selected for model evaluation. This was repeated for a total of

219

3 separate sets of 10% testing sites. In all cases the model with additional site parameters

220

(“Advanced”, Figure S2; Supporting Information) had a lower RMSE (12.17 vs 11.04; 12.17 vs

221

11.04; 10.21 vs 9.15) as well as lower Bayesian and Akaike’s Information Criteria. Therefore,

222

we selected the model with additional site parameters (whether coordinates were known, whether

223

PM2.5 was directly, and whether the site classification was known) (Figure S2; Supporting

224

Information). The relevant terms from this calibration function were then used to adjust the

225

gridded values of the mean of the satellite-based and TM5 estimates (“fused”):

226

Calibrated PM2.5 = exp[0.41765+(0.86953*ln(fused))]

(3)

227

Estimates for 2013 were generated by extrapolating from the 2010-2011 trend of calibrated

228

values. Specifically, we assessed the rate of change in concentrations between 2010 and 2011

229

and applied this growth rate to an exponential growth function to estimate concentrations in

230

2013:

231

PM2.5_2013 = PM2.5_2010*exp(rate.of.change *(2013-2010))

(4)

232

where, (annual) rate.of.change = ln(PM2.5_2011/ PM2.5_2010). The final PM2.5 estimates used in

233

the burden of disease estimation and presented in the Results section are the calibrated, and

234

(where applicable) extrapolated values. National level population-weighted mean and 95%

235

uncertainty interval concentrations were estimated by sampling 1000 draws of each fused grid

236

cell concentration in combination with the calibration parameters and the standard error of the

237

calibration function. Gridded exposure concentrations were then aggregated to national level 10 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 12 of 33

238

population-weighted means with the corresponding grid cell population value (using the Gridded

239

Population of the World, version 3, GPWv327).

240

Ozone

241

As in GBD 2010, we calculated a running 3-month average (of daily 1 hour maximum values)

242

for each grid cell over a full year and selected the maximum of these values. This metric was

243

chosen to align with epidemiologic studies of chronic exposure which typically employ a

244

seasonal (summer) average, and to account for global variation in the timing of the ozone

245

(summer) season2. These estimates were simulated with TM5-FASST at 0.1° x 0.1° for 1990,

246

2000 and 2010 using the same emissions datasets and meteorological inputs as for the PM2.5

247

simulations. Estimates for 1995, 2005, and 2011 were generated by fitting a natural cubic spline,

248

as described previously for PM2.5. As with PM2.5, an exponential growth model for ozone

249

concentrations was used to estimate 2013 concentrations from the 2011 estimates. Population

250

weighted mean concentrations and 95% uncertainty intervals for each country were estimated as

251

described above for PM2.5 and assuming a normal distribution with a standard deviation calculated

252

by assuming an uncertainty interval of ± 6% of the estimated concentration. As with GBD 2010

253

exposure estimates and given the scarcity of surface ozone measurements throughout the world

254

and the challenges in accessing hourly data from available monitoring sites to develop the

255

desired metric, we did not utilize surface ozone measurements for developing the global

256

estimates.

257 258

Results


Page 13 of 33


259

Of the ground measurements, while 79 countries were represented, more than half were from

260

high income countries in North America (25%), Western (32%) and Central (12%) Europe.

261

Because of a major expansion of China’s air quality monitoring network, 10% of the ground

262

measurements were from East Asia, and 5% were from South Asia. Countries in eleven regions

263

(Andean Latin America, Australasia, Central Asia, Eastern Europe, High-income Asia Pacific,

264

North Africa and Middle East, Southeast Asia, Southern Latin America, Southern Sub-Saharan

265

Africa, Tropical Latin America, Western Sub-Saharan Africa) each contributed less than 3% of

266

the measurement data, with no measurements at all from the other four regions (Caribbean,

267

Central Latin America, East and Central sub-Saharan Africa) of the world. The highest

268

measured annual average PM2.5 concentration in the assembled measurement database was 194

269

µg/m3 in Shijiazhuang, the capital of Hebei Province in China, while the lowest was 65 µg/m3) concentrations experienced by populations in

285

China and India. Fully 87% of the global population resided in areas above the WHO guideline

286

of 10 µg/m3, with essentially none of the population of China (0.4%) or India (0.01%) living in

287

areas meeting this level.

288

Large relative decreases in estimated PM2.5 concentrations between 1990 and 2013 at the 0.1° x

289

0.1° grid cell level were evident in the Eastern US., Europe, Russia and in parts of Southeast

290

Asia (Figure S3, Supporting Information). In contrast, large relative increases were apparent in

291

Western Canada, parts of South America, the Middle East, India and China. Somewhat similar

292

patterns were also evident for ozone (Figure S4, Supporting Information)

293

The trends in PM2.5 are examined in more detail in Figure 4ab - which display population-

294

weighted mean (95% uncertainty interval) distributions of concentrations globally and at the

295

country level for the ten most populous countries. Plots including PM2.5 trends all other countries

296

are presented in the Supporting Information (Figures S5-S25), along with all of the country-level

297

population-weighted estimates for PM2.5 and ozone for 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2013)

298

(File S1; Supporting Information). Table 1 presents population-weighted estimates and measures

299

of change for PM2.5 and ozone for 1990 and 2013 for the world’s ten most populous countries.

300

Large proportional increases in mean population-weighted PM2.5 concentrations were apparent in

301

India, China, Brazil, Bangladesh, India, China and Pakistan, with decreases observed in the U.S.,

302

Indonesia, Russia, Japan, and Nigeria.


Page 15 of 33


303

Between 1990 and 2013, decreases in population-weighted mean concentrations of PM2.5 were

304

evident in most of high income countries (Figure 4a, Figures S5, S10. S14, S20; Supporting

305

Information), in contrast to consistent increases in South Asia (Figure 4a, Figure S8: Supporting

306

Information), much of Southeast Asia (Figure S9; Supporting Information), and in China (Figure

307

4a). At the country-level, the highest population-weighted mean concentration estimated for

308

2013 was Mauritania (70 µg/m3), followed by China (55 µg/m3), Saudi Arabia (54 µg/m3),

309

Kuwait (49 µg/m3), Bangladesh (48 µg/m3), India (47 µg/m3), Pakistan and Nepal (46 µg/m3).

310

The lowest country-level population-weighted estimates were for several Pacific and Caribbean

311

island nations, Australia and Norway (≤ 6 µg/m3). Population-weighted ozone levels also

312

increased globally and generally throughout the most heavily populated countries from 1990 –

313

2013 (Figure 4b), although to a lesser degree than seen for PM2.5. There were modest decreases

314

in population-weighted ozone levels in the U.S., Mexico and Canada as well as parts of Europe,

315

likely due to implementation of air quality management programs, and several countries in

316

southeast Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore) (File S1; Supporting Information),.

317

We also compared estimates for the year 2010 using the updated methodology described in this

318

manuscript to those reported previously from GBD 20102 for the same year (Figure S26;

319

Supporting Information). This is a comparison of methodology, in contrast to the temporal

320

comparisons described above. Our updated methods estimated lower (by 50 µg/m3) levels in

321

some areas of North Africa, the Middle East and the Gobi Desert, all areas impacted by high

322

levels of windblown mineral dust. Slightly higher (~5 – 10 µg/m3) levels were estimated with the

323

updated methodology in Brazil and elsewhere in South America with noticeably higher (~30 –

324

40 µg/m3) levels in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Somewhat lower (~20 – 30 µg/m3) levels

325

were also estimated for some areas of eastern China. These differences may be due to the 14 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 16 of 33

326

additional temporal coverage incorporated into the current satellite-based and ground

327

measurements, as well as the newer emissions information included in the TM5-FASST

328

simulations. In North Africa the lower levels reflect changes in mineral dust emissions that were

329

driven by changes in local meteorology, and the higher levels in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan

330

likely reflect increases in emissions that may not have been represented in the earlier

331

methodology that extrapolated 2005 estimates to 2010. In China, the somewhat lower levels

332

estimated for GBD 2013 compared to those for GBD 2010 were likely affected by the inclusion

333

in the global calibration of substantially more ground measurements in China (Figure S2;

334

Supporting Information).

335

At the country-level, population-weighted mean estimates for PM2.5 for the year 2010 were very

336

similar for most countries between those estimated for GBD 2010 and GBD 2013. Estimates for

337

China were noticeably lower for GBD 2013 (54.8 µg/m3) compared to GBD 2010 (72.6 µg/m3),

338

as were several countries with high contributions from windblown mineral dust (Saudi Arabia:

339

53.8 vs 61.7 µg/m3; Qatar: 40.1 vs 69.0 µg/m3; United Arab Emirates: 40.9 vs 79.5 µg/m3 for

340

GBD 2013 vs GBD 2010, respectively). Higher levels were estimated in GBD 2013 for countries

341

in South Asia (India: 43.4 vs 32.0; Bangladesh: 45.7 vs 31.1 6; Pakistan: 43.4 vs 38.1; Nepal:

342

41.5 vs 32.7 µg/m3 for GBD 2013 vs GBD 2010, respectively).

343 344

Discussion

345

We extended previous global estimates of long-term average exposure to PM2.5 and ozone at 0.1

346

x 0.1° resolution to support the Global Burden of Disease 2013. Given the increasing emphasis

347

within the Global Burden of Disease on country-level (and sub-country) reporting30, we also

348

provided population-weighted estimates of exposure to PM2.5 and ozone for 188 different 15 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 17 of 33


349

countries for the years 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2013. As such, these data represent one

350

of the most extensive collections of global air pollution concentration estimates produced to date.

351

We applied improved satellite-based estimates that also incorporated additional information on

352

temporal trends and which have been independently shown to include reduced error compared to

353

those used previously in GBD 201014,15. In addition, we used CTM simulations which

354

incorporated internally consistent emissions trends from 1990 – 2013. Further, we incorporated

355

a substantially larger number of available surface measurements of PM2.5 to calibrate the

356

estimates based on satellite retrievals and CTM simulations. This calibration, which included

357

additional information on the ground measurements (whether the PM2.5 concentration was

358

directly measured, whether the exact site location was known and whether the monitoring site

359

classification was known) resulted in reduced error compared to a simpler form of the

360

calibration, analogous to that used in GBD 2010. In addition, while the calibration we employed

361

here was applicable over the full range of concentrations, our calibration function used in GBD

362

2010 was only valid for concentrations > 10 µg/m3. Given the advances in methodology used to

363

develop these estimates, compared to those previously reported2, we consider these estimates to

364

be more accurate.

365 366

Although these estimates incorporated methodological advancements and updated inputs, they

367

are not without limitations. Given the need to produce similar estimates in future years to support

368

regular updates to the Global Burden of Disease30 and other assessments, we anticipate further

369

enhancements to the methodology to address these limitations. Specifically, ground

370

measurements were underestimated by our estimates in some locations, notably in parts of South

371

America (e.g. Chile), southern Poland and Turkey, and in specific urban areas with high levels of



Page 18 of 33

372

ambient PM2.5 such as Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia (Figure S27; Supporting Information). The same

373

underestimation of ground level measurements in southern Poland and Ulaanbaatar was

374

identified by van Donkelaar et al, who suggested that higher wintertime (and in the case of

375

Ulaanbaatar also nighttime) emissions when satellite retrievals are more limited due to more

376

frequent winter cloud cover (or unavailable at night) are likely to be responsible14. A similar

377

phenomenon may also be contributing to poor agreement in Chile where winter, nighttime wood

378

burning contributes to elevated PM2.5 concentrations31,32. These underestimations of ground

379

measurements in specific locations were also evident in TM5-FASST simulations suggesting that

380

both CTM and satellite-based estimates may fail to accurately estimate ground-level PM2,5 in

381

relatively small areas having very high levels. Improvements in spatial precision of emissions

382

estimates and satellite retrievals and use of regional models may reduce these uncertainties.

383 384

In addition, we used available PM10 measurements to estimate PM2.5 concentrations in locations

385

where PM2.5 measurements were unavailable. Our use of PM2.5:PM10 ratios for the calibration

386

dataset represents a balance between measurement specificity and spatial representativeness. For

387

example in North Africa and the Middle East, South Asia, and high-income Asia Pacific

388

countries, less than 20% of available ground measurements were of PM2.5. Despite increases in

389

the number of available measurements used in our calibration (4073 in this analysis compared to

390

679 in that reported previously2), more than 50% of the ground measurements that were used

391

were estimated from PM10 measurements. Given the importance of these estimates in the

392

calibration, we placed additional importance on using location-specific PM2.5:PM10 ratios to

393

estimate PM2.5 concentrations, for example using ratios from measurements within 50km in 30%

394

of cases and in-country ratios for an additional 23% of cases. Further, our regression calibration


Page 19 of 33


395

included a term to account for the use of direct vs estimated PM2.5 measurements. Van Donkelaar

396

et al., using the same satellite-derived estimates included here, reported 58%, 53% and 65% of

397

explained variability in ground measurements of PM2.5 in North America, Europe and elsewhere,

398

respectively14. In comparison, our candidate simple regression model, which treated directly

399

measured and estimated ground PM2.5 measurements equally, explained 60% of variability in

400

ground measurements, while the (advanced) calibration model that was ultimately used

401

explained slightly more variability (64%). Overall, there is a need for additional PM2.5

402

measurements and greater global coverage. The establishment of a new global network to

403

address these shortcomings and to improve the capability of satellite-based estimates of global

404

particulate matter levels offers the promise of enhanced accuracy and representativeness33. The

405

need for additional air pollution measurements was also highlighted in the recent World Health

406

Assembly Resolution on Air Pollution34.

407 408

High levels of uncertainty in our estimates exist in regions of elevated windblown mineral dust.

409

The latter is partially driven by TM5-FASST use of standard dust contributions that do not align

410

with a specific year and the temporally variable levels of resuspended mineral dust in affected

411

regions. As we observed variability between regions in the function used to calibrate the fused

412

estimates ground measurements, there is a need to improve the incorporation of measurement

413

information. For example, in future work we aim to use the increasing number of surface

414

measurements of PM2.5, especially those in China, and to implement advanced approaches to

415

more directly incorporate ground measurements and other information. Future availability of

416

additional ground measurements may also increase the feasibility of allowing spatially varying

417

calibration functions. This might be achieved by geographically weighted regression35,36 or



Page 20 of 33

418

hierarchical modelling. For the latter, calibration models for different regions may include a

419

global calibration together with regional random effects. Such models sit naturally within a

420

Bayesian framework. Recent advances in computational methods for inference, for example

421

those based on Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations37,38, have increased the feasibility of

422

implementing such complex models. Harmonization of measurement approaches between

423

jurisdictions would also be beneficial.

424

Because we estimated year 2013 concentrations based upon year 2010 concentrations and trends

425

in satellite-based estimates from 2010 to 2011, differences between estimates for 2010 and 2013

426

may be overly influenced by short-term variability in meteorology rather than longer-term trends

427

in emissions, the latter being more stable over the 5-year periods included in our estimates.

428

However, as noted in Methods, the annual satellite-based estimates are 3-year moving averages,

429

centered on the year of interest which should partially mitigate this instability. Future estimations

430

may incorporate a more rigorous evaluation of temporal prediction approaches or include

431

operational forecasts.

432

The updated global exposure estimates presented here represent a further advance in

433

characterizing global population exposure to ambient air pollution for use in burden of disease

434

assessment and other impact analyses. The global coverage allows for estimation of

435

concentrations in areas without extensive ground monitoring, including for example, rural areas

436

with large emissions from household use of solid fuels7. Like our previous GBD 2010 estimates,

437

these are based on PM2.5 mass concentrations. Although there is considerable interest in, and

438

active research concerning, the effects of the myriad constituents of ambient air pollution, ozone

439

and PM2.5 mass concentrations remain the most robust and consistent indicators of health-

440

damaging air pollution from combustion and other major sources39,40. Use of these estimates in 19 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 21 of 33


441

combination with CTM simulations can provide information on sector-specific contributions to

442

ambient concentrations and disease burden to inform air quality management5–8. Improvements

443

in the quality of these estimates and the application of a consistent methodology to evaluate

444

temporal trends in exposure over a 23 year period should inform air quality management

445

strategies and other approaches to mitigate the health impacts of air pollution exposure.

446

Accordingly, we are committed to making these estimates available for others to use and have

447

provided the associated files of country-level population weighted (File S1) and gridded

448

estimates (linked to population data and urbanicity indicators, File S2) and a data dictionary (File

449

S3) in the Supporting Information. Given the evidence indicating the importance of ambient air

450

pollution to global disease burden1,3,9 and the expectation of annual Global Burden of Disease

451

updates beginning in 2015, we anticipate a need for regular updating and improving of these

452

estimates and their use in policy assessments and comparative analyses.

453 454 455

Acknowledgements

456

We thank the following Global Burden of Disease Collaborators for comments on an earlier draft

457

of the manuscript: Kim Yun Jin, Samath Dharmaratne, Maysaa El Sayed Zaki, Jost Jonas,

458

Farshad Pourmalek, Arindam Basu, Michelle Bell, Yousef Khader, Eun-Kee Park, Kingsley

459

Nnnanna Ukwaja, Mark Nieuwenhuijsen, Ivy Shiue, George Thurston, Yuchiro Yano, Dean

460

Hosgood, Awoke Misganaw, Jiang Guohong, Yohannes Adama Melaku, Semaw Ferede Abera,

461

Dietrich Plaß, Sung Kim, Ted Miller, Scott Weichenthal, Elisabete Weiderpass, Ricky Leung,

462

Yoshihiro Kokubo, Hwasin Shin. We also thank Sarah Henderson for assistance with merging

463

data. Figures 1, 2, S1, S3, S4, S26 and S27 were created with QGIS v2.8.2. 20 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 22 of 33

464 465 466


Page 23 of 33


467

Supporting Information

468

Additional figures describing the exposure estimates with the full data set of global gridded and

469

population-weighted country mean estimates along with a data dictionary, R code to create all

470

customized figures in the same style as those included in the manuscript, and a full listing of

471

ground measurement data sources. This information is available free of charge via the Internet at

472

http://pubs.acs.org/.



Page 24 of 33

473 1990

2013

%

1990

2013

%

PM2.5

PM2.5

Change

Ozone

Ozone

Change

Global

26.4

31.8

20.4

57.3

62.4

8.9

China

39.3

54.3

38.0

57.0

64.5

13.2

India

30.2

46.7

54.3

61.5

74.0

20.2

United States

16.4

10.7

-34.5

70.3

67.0

-4.7

Indonesia

21.0

14.8

-29.7

47.3

39.6

-16.1

Brazil

9.7

16.5

70.4

43.4

51.0

17.3

Pakistan

36.5

46.2

26.3

59.0

68.8

16.5

Nigeria

31.0

29.5

-4.7

66.3

67.5

1.9

Bangladesh

29.9

48.3

61.6

59.4

72.0

21.3

Russia

19.7

14.2

-27.6

48.6

48.3

-0.6

Japan

19.4

16.0

-17.5

56.8

60.5

6.7

Country

474 475

Table 1. 1990, 2013 and percent change since 1990 in global population-weighted annual

476

average PM2.5 (µg/m3) and population-weighted seasonal mean 1 hour daily maximum ozone

477

(ppb) concentrations and for the world’s ten most populous countries.

478


Page 25 of 33

479


References

480 481 482 483 484 485 486

(1)

Forouzanfar, M. H.; Alexander, L.; Anderson, H. R.; Bachman, V. F.; Biryukov, S.; Brauer, M.; Burnett, R.; Casey, D.; Coates, M. M.; Cohen, A.; et al. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks in 188 countries, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet 2015.

487 488 489 490 491

(2)

Brauer, M.; Amann, M.; Burnett, R. T.; Cohen, A.; Dentener, F.; Ezzati, M.; Henderson, S. B.; Krzyzanowski, M.; Martin, R. V; Van Dingenen, R.; et al. Exposure Assessment for Estimation of the Global Burden of Disease Attributable to Outdoor Air Pollution. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46 (2), 652–660.

492 493 494 495 496 497

(3)

Lim, S. S.; Vos, T.; Flaxman, A. D.; Danaei, G.; Shibuya, K.; Adair-Rohani, H.; Amann, M.; Anderson, H. R.; Andrews, K. G.; Aryee, M.; et al. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012, 380 (9859), 2224–2260.

498 499 500 501

(4)

Li, Y.; Henze, D.; Jack, D.; Kinney, P. The influence of air quality model resolution on health impact assessment for fine particulate matter and its components. Air Qual. Atmos. Heal. 2015, 1–18. (Online First). doi:10.1007/s11869-015-0321-z

502 503 504 505

(5)

Bhalla, K.; Shotten, M.; Cohen, A.; Brauer, M.; Shahraz, S.; Burnett, R.; Leach-Kemon, K.; Freedman, G.; Murray, C. J. L. Transport for health : the global burden of disease from motorized road transport; World Bank Group: Washington, DC, 2014.

506 507 508 509

(6)

Minjares, S. E. C. and R. S. and J. J. W. and M. Z. and R. Estimating source-attributable health impacts of ambient fine particulate matter exposure: global premature mortality from surface transportation emissions in 2005. Environ. Res. Lett. 2014, 9 (10), 104009.

510 511 512 513 514

(7)

Chafe, Z. A.; Brauer, M.; Klimont, Z.; Van Dingenen, R.; Mehta, S.; Rao, S.; Riahi, K.; Dentener, F.; Smith, K. R. Household cooking with solid fuels contributes to ambient PM2.5 air pollution and the burden of disease. Environ. Health Perspect. 2014, 122 (12), 1314–1320.

515 516 517

(8)

Residential heating with wood and coal: health impacts and policy options in Europe and North America; World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2015; 24 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


518 519 520

Page 26 of 33

http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/271836/ResidentialHeatingWoodCo alHealthImpacts.pdf

521 522 523

(9)

WHO | Mortality from ambient air pollution. http://www.who.int/gho/phe/outdoor_air_pollution/burden/en/ (accessed Nov 16, 2015)

524 525 526

(10)

World Development Indicators 2015; The World Bank, 2015; https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/21634

527 528 529 530

(11)

Cropper, M.L.; Khanna, S. How Should the World Bank Estimate Air Pollution Damages? RFF Discussion Paper 14-30. 2014 . http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-DP-1430.pdf

531 532 533

(12)

US EPA. Environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program - Community Edition (BenMAP-CE). http://www2.epa.gov/benmap (accessed Nov 16, 2015)

534 535 536 537

(13)

Loomis, D.; Grosse, Y.; Lauby-Secretan, B.; El Ghissassi, F.; Bouvard, V.; BenbrahimTallaa, L.; Guha, N.; Baan, R.; Mattock, H.; Straif, K. The carcinogenicity of outdoor air pollution. Lancet. Oncol. 2013, 14 (13), 1262–1263.

538 539 540 541

(14)

van Donkelaar, A.; Martin, R. V; Brauer, M.; Boys, B. L. Use of satellite observations for long-term exposure assessment of global concentrations of fine particulate matter. Environ. Health Perspect. 2015, 123 (2), 135–143.

542 543 544 545 546

(15)

van Donkelaar, A.; Martin, R. V; Brauer, M.; Kahn, R.; Levy, R.; Verduzco, C.; Villeneuve, P. J. Global estimates of ambient fine particulate matter concentrations from satellite-based aerosol optical depth: development and application. Environ. Health Perspect. 2010, 118 (6), 847–855.

547 548 549 550 551

(16)

Huijnen, V.; Williams, J.; van Weele, M.; van Noije, T.; Krol, M.; Dentener, F.; Segers, A.; Houweling, S.; Peters, W.; de Laat, J.; et al. The global chemistry transport model TM5: description and evaluation of the tropospheric chemistry version 3.0. Geosci. Model Dev. 2010, 3 (2), 445–473.

552 553 554 555 556

(17)

Bey, I.; Jacob, D. J.; Yantosca, R. M.; Logan, J. A.; Field, B. D.; Fiore, A. M.; Li, Q.; Liu, H. Y.; Mickley, L. J.; Schultz, M. G. Global modeling of tropospheric chemistry with assimilated meteorology: Model description and evaluation. J. Geophys. Res. 2001, 106 (D19), 23073.


Page 27 of 33


557 558 559 560 561

(18)

Levy, R. C.; Remer, L. A.; Mattoo, S.; Vermote, E. F.; Kaufman, Y. J. Second-generation operational algorithm: Retrieval of aerosol properties over land from inversion of Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer spectral reflectance. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2007, 112 (D13).

562 563 564 565 566

(19)

Diner, D. D.; Braswell, B. H.; Davies, R.; Gobron, N.; Hu, J.; Jin, Y.; Kahn, R. R.; Knyazikhin, Y.; Loeb, N.; Muller, J-P.; et al. The Value of Multiangle Measurements for Retrieving Structurally and Radiatively Consistent Properties of Clouds, Aerosols, and Surfaces Remote Sensing of Environment 2005, 97:495 – 518

567 568 569

(20)

Satellite Aerosol Remote Sensing over Land; Kokhanovsky, A. A., de Leeuw, G., Eds.; Springer Berlin Heidelberg: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009.

570 571 572 573

(21)

Hsu, N. C.; Jeong, M.-J.; Bettenhausen, C.; Sayer, A. M.; Hansell, R.; Seftor, C. S.; Huang, J.; Tsay, S.-C. Enhanced Deep Blue aerosol retrieval algorithm: The second generation. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2013, 118 (16), 9296–9315.

574 575 576 577 578 579

(22)

Winker, D. M.; Pelon, J. R.; McCormick, M. P. The CALIPSO mission: spaceborne lidar for observation of aerosols and clouds. In Third International Asia-Pacific Environmental Remote Sensing Symposium: Remote Sensing of the Atmosphere, Ocean, Environment, and Space; Singh, U. N., Itabe, T., Liu, Z., Eds.; International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2003; pp 1–11.

580 581 582 583 584

(23)

Janssens-Maenhout, G.; Dentener, F.; Aardenne, J. Van; Monni, S.; Pagliari, V.; Orlandini, L.; Klimont, Z.; Kurokawa, J.; Akimoto, H.; Ohara, T.; et al. EDGAR-HTAP: A Harmonized Gridded Air Pollution Emission Dataset Based on National Inventories; Publications Office, 2011.

585 586 587 588 589

(24)

Boys, B. L.; Martin, R. V; van Donkelaar, A.; MacDonell, R. J.; Hsu, N. C.; Cooper, M. J.; Yantosca, R. M.; Lu, Z.; Streets, D. G.; Zhang, Q.; et al. Fifteen-year global time series of satellite-derived fine particulate matter. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48 (19), 11109– 11118.

590 591 592 593

(25)

Van Dingenen, R.; Leitao, J.; Dentener, F. A multi-metric global source-receptor model for integrated impact assessment of climate and air quality policy scenarios. EGU Gen. Assem. 2014 2014.

594 595 596 597

(26)

Report on spatial emissions downscaling and concentrations for health impacts assessment. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). 2013. http://www.feem-project.net/limits/docs/limits_d4-2_iiasa.pdf 26 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 28 of 33

598 599 600

(27)

Gridded Population of the World (GPW), v3 | SEDAC http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/data/collection/gpw-v3 (accessed Nov 16, 2015).

601 602 603

(28)

Lall, R.; Kendall, M.; Ito, K.; Thurston, G. D. Estimation of historical annual PM2.5 exposures for health effects assessment. Atmos. Environ. 2004, 38 (31), 5217–5226.

604 605 606

(29)

Apte, J. S.; Marshall, J. D.; Cohen, A. J.; Brauer, M. Addressing Global Mortality from Ambient PM2.5. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49 (13), 8057–8066.

607 608 609 610

(30)

Protocol for the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD); Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation: Seattle, USA; 2015. http://www.healthdata.org/sites/default/files/files/Projects/GBD/GBD_Protocol.pdf

611 612 613 614 615

(31)

Sanhueza, P. A.; Torreblanca, M. A.; Diaz-Robles, L. A.; Schiappacasse, L. N.; Silva, M. P.; Astete, T. D. Particulate Air Pollution and Health Effects for Cardiovascular and Respiratory Causes in Temuco, Chile: A Wood-Smoke-Polluted Urban Area. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2009, 59 (12), 1481–1488.

616 617 618 619

(32)

Kavouras, I. G.; Koutrakis, P.; Cereceda-Balic, F.; Oyola, P. Source Apportionment of PM 10 and PM 25 in Five Chilean Cities Using Factor Analysis. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2001, 51 (3), 451–464.

620 621 622 623 624

(33)

Snider, G.; Weagle, C. L.; Martin, R. V.; van Donkelaar, A.; Conrad, K.; Cunningham, D.; Gordon, C.; Zwicker, M.; Akoshile, C.; Artaxo, P.; et al. SPARTAN: a global network to evaluate and enhance satellite-based estimates of ground-level particulate matter for global health applications. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2015, 8 (1), 505–521.

625 626

(34)

The Lancet. Air pollution at the forefront of global health. Lancet 2015, 385 (9984), 2224.

627 628 629 630 631

(35)

Hu, X.; Waller, L. A.; Al-Hamdan, M. Z.; Crosson, W. L.; Estes, M. G.; Estes, S. M.; Quattrochi, D. A.; Sarnat, J. A.; Liu, Y. Estimating ground-level PM(2.5) concentrations in the southeastern U.S. using geographically weighted regression. Environ. Res. 2013, 121, 1–10.

632 633 634 635

(36)

van Donkelaar, A.; Martin, R. V; Spurr, R. J. D.; Burnett, R. T. High-Resolution SatelliteDerived PM2.5 from Optimal Estimation and Geographically Weighted Regression over North America. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49 (17), 10482–10491.

636

(37)

Shaddick, G.; Zidek, J. V. A case study in preferential sampling: Long term monitoring of 27 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 29 of 33


637 638

air pollution in the UK. Spat. Stat. 2014, 9, 51–65.

639 640 641 642

(38)

Cameletti, M.; Lindgren, F.; Simpson, D.; Rue, H. Spatio-temporal modeling of particulate matter concentration through the SPDE approach. AStA Adv. Stat. Anal. 2012, 97 (2), 109–131.

643 644 645 646 647

(39)

Review of evidence on health aspects of air pollution – REVIHAAP project: final technical report. World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2013; http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/193108/REVIHAAP-Finaltechnical-report-final-version.pdf

648 649 650 651 652 653 654

(40)

Health risks of air pollution in Europe – HRAPIE project. Recommendations for concentration–response functions for cost–benefit analysis of particulate matter, ozone and nitrogen dioxide. World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2013; http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/238956/Health-risks-of-airpollution-in-Europe-HRAPIE-project,-Recommendations-for-concentrationresponsefunctions-for-costbenefit-analysis-of-particulate-matter,-ozone-and-nitrogen-dioxide.pdf

655



Figures

Figure 1. Estimated 2013 annual average PM2.5 concentrations (μg/m3). The PM2.5 estimates are generated from the grid cell average of satellite-based estimates and TM5-FASST simulations and calibrated with a prediction model incorporating surface measurements. White areas indicate no data.


Page 30 of 33

Page 31 of 33


Figure 2. Estimated 2013 seasonal (3-month) hourly maximum ozone concentrations (ppb) from TM5-FASST simulations. Note that the specific 3-month period varies by region to account for spatial differences in seasonal ozone. White areas indicate no data.



Figure 3. Global and regional distributions of population as a function of annual (2013) average ambient PM2.5 concentration for the world’s 10 most populous countries. Plotted data reflect local smoothing of bin-width normalized distributions computed over 400 logarithmically spaced bins; equal-sized plotted areas would reflect equal populations. Dashed vertical lines indicate World Health Organization Interim Targets (IT) and the Air Quality Guideline (AQG).


Page 32 of 33

Page 33 of 33




Figure 4. Global and country-level population-weighted mean (and 95% uncertanty intervals) concentrations for 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2013 for the world’s ten most populous countries (a) annual average PM2.5 (µg/m3), (b) 2013 seasonal (3-month) hourly maximum ozone concentrations (ppb) .


Page 34 of 33

Ambient Air Pollution Exposure Estimation for the ... - ACS Publications

Recommend Documents