Air Pollution and Health Impacts

  • 535 views
Uploaded on

AACIMP 2009 Summer School lecture by Yoshio Matsuki. "Environmental Externalities of Energy Options - Basics and Applications" course. 4th hour.

AACIMP 2009 Summer School lecture by Yoshio Matsuki. "Environmental Externalities of Energy Options - Basics and Applications" course. 4th hour.

More in: Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
535
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
37
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Atmospheric Dispersion and Damage Cost Y. Matsuki August 8, 2009 at 14:00 At NTUU “KPI”
  • 2. How can you calculate the externalities?
  • 3. How to calculate the monetary value of the health impacts D= (x)·f(x,C(x,Q))·Uv(x) dx impact of Area D: damage cost (Euro, US dollars, UAH) (x): population density (person/m2) f(x,C(x,Q)): Exposure-Response Function cases/(year.person. g/m3) Uv(x): unit cost (Euro/cases) C(x,Q): Concentration of the pollution ( g/m3) Q: Emission of the pollution ( g/year) x: Distance from the emission source (m)
  • 4. Plant Trypilska Power Station
  • 5. Trypilska Power Station, Emissions in 2006 Name of the pollutant Emissions, tons/year Total 74 605.000 Metals and their compounds 22.087 Total suspended particles 21 951.116 (TSP): PM10 10 975.560 Nitrogen compounds 11 108.921 Sulfur oxide and other sulfur 40 909.568 compound Carbon oxide 564.363
  • 6. Technical characteristics of the Trypilska Power Station Parameters Value of the parameters Stack height, m 180 Effective release height, 700 m (because of hot air and gas flow) Diameter of the stack, m 9.6 Flow rate from the stack, 14 m/s Released gas 413 temperature, K
  • 7. Cities around the Typilska power plant Name of the Population, persons Down wind distance, Prevailed down city km wind direction Uzyn 26,434 42,500 SSW, SW Obukhiv 32,776 9,500 WSW Vasylkiv 39,722 30,750 W Boyarka 35,968 37,500 WNW Vyshneve 34,465 37,500 NW Kyiv 2,611,327 36,250 NNW Brovary 86,839 29,500 N Boryspil 107,950 28,250 NE,ENE Rzhyschiv 8,447 29,250 SE Kagarlyk 13,757 32,250 SE Note: The down wind distances were measured from the Power Station to the centers of the cities
  • 8. Concentration of the pollution( g/m3) C(x,Q): Gaussian Plume Model Q - h2 C = ---------------- exp [--------] 21/2 3/2 ux z 2 z2
  • 9. Some hints for Excel •=SQRT(3.14, 3) •=EXP(-h**2/2*Sigmaz**2) •=POWER(A1;2) •Q in micro gram/sec Q - h2 C = ---------------- exp [--------] 21/2 3/2 ux z 2 z2
  • 10. z
  • 11. Atmospheric Stability Day Night Surface Wind Incoming Solar Radiation Thinly Heavy Speed Overcast Cloud (meter/second Strong Moderate Slight or clear ) sky <2 A A-B B 2-3 A-B B C E F 3-5 B B-C C D E 5-6 C C-D D D D >6 C D D D D
  • 12. Weather observation Day Wind Speed Wind Direction Atmospheric Stability(A, (meter/second) E, ESE, SSE, S….. B… .F) Aug 7 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 Aug 8 0600 0700 0800 0900 2100 0900
  • 13. Unit cost Uv for Long-term Mortality Value of 1 YOLL = v = constant v v v Uv = v + ---- + ----- + ……+ ----- 1+r (1+r)2 (1+r)N r = discount rate of one year N = years of human life
  • 14. Exposure-Response • PM10 long-term mortality • 2,60 × 10 -4 g/m3 • (Leksell & Rabl, 2001)
  • 15. Examples of externality studies
  • 16. Summary of Cost Estimates in mECU/kWh Canada France Germany Pub. Occ. Env G Pu Occ Env. Gw. Pub Oc Env. G . w. b. . . c. w. Coal 2.3 nq 53 nq 0.5 29 8.4 Lignite 10.5 Oil 69 nq 0.7 16 16.5 Natural 12 nq 0.1 8 3.0 Gas Nuclea 0.01- 2.5 0.07 0 0 3.8 r 0.05 Wind 0.2 Hydro Photo 2.7 Voltaic Pub. public impacts Occ. occupational impacts Env. Environmental (buildings, crops, ecosystems,…), excluding global warming Gw. Global warming nr not reported nq not quantified
  • 17. Summary of Cost Estimates in mECU/kWh (continued) Greece US Russia Pub. Occ. Env. Gw. Pub Occ Env G Pu Occ Env Gw. . . . w. b. . . Coal 0.52 nr 1.1 Lignite 20 0.30 0.66 38 Oil 10 0.17 0.95 21 0.15 nr 0.21 Natural 2.4 0.17 0.66 5.8 0.01 nr Gas 1 Nuclea 0.17 0.4 r 0.26 -4 Wind 0.84 0.09 1.2 0.2 Hydro 1.2 3.8 0 0.14 Photo Voltaic Pub. public impacts Occ. occupational impacts Env. Environmental (buildings, crops, ecosystems,…), excluding global warming Gw. Global warming nr not reported nq not quantified
  • 18. Germany 1997 Damages of fossil fuel cycles
  • 19. Damages of nuclear fuel cycle
  • 20. External costs of PV cycle
  • 21. External costs of wind fuel cycle
  • 22. Damages of biomass fuel cycle
  • 23. Biomass 2
  • 24. Biomass 3
  • 25. External costs for electricity production in the EU (in EUR-cent per kWh) 2002 AUT: Austria, BE: Belgium, DE: Germany, DK: Denmark, ES: Spain , FI: Finland, FR: France, GR: Greece, IE: Ireland, IT: Italy, NL: Norway, NO: Netherlands, PT: Portugal, SE: Sweden, UK: United Kingdom
  • 26. Monetary values used for economic valuation
  • 27. Results of the coal fuel cycle before NewExt [€-Cent/kWh]
  • 28. Results of the oil fuel cycle before NewExt [€-Cent/kWh]
  • 29. Results of the gas fuel cycle before NewExt [€-Cent/kWh]
  • 30. • DENOX NOx removal system • FGD Flue Gas Desulfurization • SCR Selective catalytic reduction
  • 31. Conclusions • Externalities of energy generation systems are proven to be significant. • There is a developed methodology to calculate energy externalities, with transparent and verifiable step by step approach. • Regarding some additional externalities in Ukraine (on energy security, coal power, people’s perception upon the catastrophic accident), the necessity to calculate and include them into the price of electricity is very strong.