Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Oct;120(10):1404-10.
doi: 10.1289/ehp.1104851. Epub 2012 Jul 18.

Health benefits from large-scale ozone reduction in the United States

Affiliations

Health benefits from large-scale ozone reduction in the United States

Jesse D Berman et al. Environ Health Perspect. 2012 Oct.

Abstract

Background: Exposure to ozone has been associated with adverse health effects, including premature mortality and cardiopulmonary and respiratory morbidity. In 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered the primary (health-based) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone to 75 ppb, expressed as the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hr average over a 24-hr period. Based on recent monitoring data, U.S. ozone levels still exceed this standard in numerous locations, resulting in avoidable adverse health consequences.

Objectives: We sought to quantify the potential human health benefits from achieving the current primary NAAQS standard of 75 ppb and two alternative standard levels, 70 and 60 ppb, which represent the range recommended by the U.S. EPA Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC).

Methods: We applied health impact assessment methodology to estimate numbers of deaths and other adverse health outcomes that would have been avoided during 2005, 2006, and 2007 if the current (or lower) NAAQS ozone standards had been met. Estimated reductions in ozone concentrations were interpolated according to geographic area and year, and concentration-response functions were obtained or derived from the epidemiological literature.

Results: We estimated that annual numbers of avoided ozone-related premature deaths would have ranged from 1,410 to 2,480 at 75 ppb to 2,450 to 4,130 at 70 ppb, and 5,210 to 7,990 at 60 ppb. Acute respiratory symptoms would have been reduced by 3 million cases and school-loss days by 1 million cases annually if the current 75-ppb standard had been attained. Substantially greater health benefits would have resulted if the CASAC-recommended range of standards (70-60 ppb) had been met.

Conclusions: Attaining a more stringent primary ozone standard would significantly reduce ozone-related premature mortality and morbidity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Contents of this article are solely the responsibility of the grantee and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. EPA.

R.H.W. is employed by RH White Consultants LLC. The authors declare they have no actual or potential competing financial interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Estimated reductions in annual ozone (8-hr maximum) if regulatory attainments of 75, 70, and 60 ppb had been achieved (2005–2007).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Estimated numbers of avoided nonaccidental deaths in 15 MSAs following regulatory attainments of 75, 70, and 60 ppb according to year (2005–2007) [estimated using national C-R functions from Bell et al. (2004)]. MSA population sizes are provided in Supplemental Material, Table S2 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1104851).

References

    1. Bell ML, Dominici F, Samet JM. A meta-analysis of time-series studies of ozone and mortality with comparison to the National Morbidity, Mortality, and Air Pollution Study. Epidemiology. 2005;16:436–445. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bell ML, McDermott A, Zeger SL, Samet JM, Dominici F. Ozone and short-term mortality in 95 US urban communities, 1987–2000. JAMA. 2004;292:2372–2378. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bell ML, Peng RD, Dominici F. The exposure–response curve for ozone and risk of mortality and the adequacy of current ozone regulations. Environ Health Perspect. 2006;114:532–536. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boldo E, Linares C, Lumbreras J, Borge R, Narros A, García-Pérez J, et al. Health impact assessment of a reduction in ambient PM2.5 levels in Spain. Environ Int. 2011;37:342–348. - PubMed
    1. Briggs DJ, Sabel CE, Lee K. Uncertainty in epidemiology and health risk and impact assessment. Environ Geochem Health. 2009;31:189–203. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms