Evaluation of the Public Health Impacts of Traffic Congestion: A Health Risk Assessment

BackgroundTraffic congestion is a significant issue in urban areas in the United States and around the world. Previous analyses have estimated the economic costs of congestion, related to fuel and time wasted, but few have quantified the public health impacts or determined how these impacts compare in magnitude to the economic costs. Moreover, the relative magnitudes of economic and public health impacts of congestion would be expected to vary significantly across urban areas, as a function of road infrastructure, population density, and atmospheric conditions influencing pollutant formation, but this variability has not been explored.MethodsIn this study, we evaluate the public health impacts of ambient exposures to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations associated with a business-as-usual scenario of predicted traffic congestion. We evaluate 83 individual urban areas using traffic demand models to estimate the degree of congestion in each area from 2000 to 2030. We link traffic volume and speed data with the MOBILE6 model to characterize emissions of PM2.5 and particle precursors attributable to congestion, and we use a source-receptor matrix to evaluate the impact of these emissions on ambient PM2.5 concentrations. Marginal concentration changes are related to a concentration-response function for mortality, with a value of statistical life approach used to monetize the impacts.ResultsWe estimate that the monetized value of PM2.5-related mortality attributable to congestion in these 83 cities in 2000 was approximately $31 billion (2007 dollars), as compared with a value of time and fuel wasted of $60 billion. In future years, the economic impacts grow (to over $100 billion in 2030) while the public health impacts decrease to $13 billion in 2020 before increasing to $17 billion in 2030, given increasing population and congestion but lower emissions per vehicle. Across cities and years, the public health impacts range from more than an order of magnitude less to in excess of the economic impacts.ConclusionsOur analyses indicate that the public health impacts of congestion may be significant enough in magnitude, at least in some urban areas, to be considered in future evaluations of the benefits of policies to mitigate congestion.

[1]  C. Vionnet.  [Environmental health]. , 1983, Krankenpflege. Soins infirmiers.

[2]  Wolfgang S. Homburger,et al.  Fundamentals of traffic engineering , 1984 .

[3]  SARI ALM,et al.  Urban commuter exposure to particle matter and carbon monoxide inside an automobile , 1999, Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology.

[4]  Robert B. Noland,et al.  Analysis of Metropolitan Highway Capacity and the growth in vehicle miles of travel , 2000 .

[5]  Nagui M. Rouphail,et al.  EMISSIONS REDUCTION THROUGH BETTER TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT: AN EMPIRICAL EVALUATION BASED UPON ON-ROAD MEASUREMENTS , 2001 .

[6]  R. Noland.  Relationships between highway capacity and induced vehicle travel , 2001 .

[7]  D. Schrank,et al.  THE 2004 URBAN MOBILITY REPORT , 2002 .

[8]  R. Noland,et al.  A review of the evidence for induced travel and changes in transportation and environmental policy in the US and the UK , 2002 .

[9]  John S Evans,et al.  A Regression‐Based Approach for Estimating Primary and Secondary Particulate Matter Intake Fractions , 2002, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[10]  R. Burnett,et al.  Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. , 2002, JAMA.

[11]  Bowen Hammond Harllee Branch Jack McDonough Scherer Wans Yates.  Estimation of Primary and Secondary Particulate Matter Intake Fractions for Power Plants in Georgia , 2003 .

[12]  Michael Riediker,et al.  Exposure to particulate matter, volatile organic compounds, and other air pollutants inside patrol cars. , 2003, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  Todd Alexander Litman,et al.  Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis Techniques, Estimates and Implications Second Edition (2009) , 2003 .

[14]  J Wayne Miller,et al.  Development and application of a mobile laboratory for measuring emissions from diesel engines. 1. Regulated gaseous emissions. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[15]  J Wayne Miller,et al.  Emission rates of particulate matter and elemental and organic carbon from in-use diesel engines. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[16]  Kent C Johnson,et al.  Development and application of a mobile laboratory for measuring emissions from diesel engines. 2. Sampling for toxics and particulate matter. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[17]  Daniel J. Graham,et al.  Road Traffic Demand Elasticity Estimates: A Review , 2004 .

[18]  R. Burnett,et al.  Spatial Analysis of Air Pollution and Mortality in Los Angeles , 2005, Epidemiology.

[19]  U. Epa,et al.  Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule , 2005 .

[20]  J. Schwartz,et al.  Reduction in fine particulate air pollution and mortality: Extended follow-up of the Harvard Six Cities study. , 2006, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[21]  David R. Cocker,et al.  Emission rates of regulated pollutants from on-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles , 2006 .

[22]  Robert B. Noland,et al.  Flow improvements and vehicle emissions: effects of trip generation and emission control technology , 2006 .

[23]  Peter A. Scheff,et al.  Fine particulate source apportionment using data from the USEPA speciation trends network in Chicago, Illinois: Comparison of two source apportionment models , 2007 .

[24]  Nicholas Z. Muller,et al.  Measuring the damages of air pollution in the United States , 2007 .

[25]  John D. Spengler,et al.  Spatial patterns of mobile source particulate matter emissions-to-exposure relationships across the United States , 2007 .

[26]  Jonathan I. Levy,et al.  Quantifying the Efficiency and Equity Implications of Power Plant Air Pollution Control Strategies in the United States , 2007, Environmental health perspectives.

[27]  Sangil Leea,et al.  Source apportionment of PM 2 . 5 : Comparing PMF and CMB results for four ambient monitoring sites in the southeastern United States , 2008 .

[28]  Sangi Lee,et al.  Source apportionment of PM2.5: Comparing PMF and CMB results for four ambient monitoring sites in the southeastern United States , 2008 .

[29]  J. Schwartz,et al.  The Effect of Dose and Timing of Dose on the Association between Airborne Particles and Survival , 2007, Environmental health perspectives.

[30]  Ali S. Kamal,et al.  Sources of ambient fine particulate matter at two community sites in Detroit, Michigan , 2008 .

[31]  Jonathan I Levy,et al.  Evaluating Efficiency‐Equality Tradeoffs for Mobile Source Control Strategies in an Urban Area , 2009, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[32]  R. Burnett,et al.  Extended follow-up and spatial analysis of the American Cancer Society study linking particulate air pollution and mortality. , 2009, Research report.

[33]  Joel Schwartz,et al.  Uncertainty and Variability in Health‐Related Damages from Coal‐Fired Power Plants in the United States , 2009, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[34]  Bryan J. Hubbell,et al.  The influence of location, source, and emission type in estimates of the human health benefits of reducing a ton of air pollution , 2009, Air quality, atmosphere, & health.

[35]  Board on Energy,et al.  Hidden Costs of Energy:: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use , 2010 .