Air quality and public health impacts of UK airports. Part I: Emissions

The potential adverse human health and climate impacts of emissions from UK airports have become a significant political issue, yet the emissions, air quality impacts and health impacts attributable to UK airports remain largely unstudied. We produce an inventory of UK airport emissions - including aircraft landing and takeoff (LTO) operations and airside support equipment - with uncertainties quantified. The airports studied account for more than 95% of UK air passengers in 2005. We estimate that in 2005, UK airports emitted 10.2 Gg [-23 to +29%] of NOx, 0.73 Gg [-29 to +32%] of SO2, 11.7 Gg [-42 to +77%] of CO, 1.8 Gg [-59 to +155%] of HC, 2.4 Tg [-13 to +12%] of CO2, and 0.31 Gg [-36 to +45%] of PM2.5. This translates to 2.5 Tg [-12 to +12%] CO2-eq using Global Warming Potentials for a 100-year time horizon. Uncertainty estimates were based on analysis of data from aircraft emissions measurement campaigns and analyses of aircraft operations.The First-Order Approximation (FOA3) - currently the standard approach used to estimate particulate matter emissions from aircraft - is compared to measurements and it is shown that there are discrepancies greater than an order of magnitude for 40% of cases for both organic carbon and black carbon emissions indices. Modified methods to approximate organic carbon emissions, arising from incomplete combustion and lubrication oil, and black carbon are proposed. These alterations lead to factor 8 and a 44% increase in the annual emissions estimates of black and organic carbon particulate matter, respectively, leading to a factor 3.4 increase in total PM2.5 emissions compared to the current FOA3 methodology. Our estimates of emissions are used in Part II to quantify the air quality and health impacts of UK airports, to assess mitigation options, and to estimate the impacts of a potential London airport expansion. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd.

Development of modelling method selection tool for health services management: From problem structuring methods to modelling and simulation methods

Background: There is an increasing recognition that modelling and simulation can assist in the process of designing health care policies, strategies and operations. However, the current use is limited and answers to questions such as what methods to use and when remain somewhat underdeveloped. Aim. The aim of this study is to provide a mechanism for decision makers in health services planning and management to compare a broad range of modelling and simulation methods so that they can better select and use them or better commission relevant modelling and simulation work. Methods. This paper proposes a modelling and simulation method comparison and selection tool developed from a comprehensive literature review, the research team's extensive expertise and inputs from potential users. Twenty-eight different methods were identified, characterised by their relevance to different application areas, project life cycle stages, types of output and levels of insight, and four input resources required (time, money, knowledge and data). Results: The characterisation is presented in matrix forms to allow quick comparison and selection. This paper also highlights significant knowledge gaps in the existing literature when assessing the applicability of particular approaches to health services management, where modelling and simulation skills are scarce let alone money and time. Conclusions: A modelling and simulation method comparison and selection tool is developed to assist with the selection of methods appropriate to supporting specific decision making processes. In particular it addresses the issue of which method is most appropriate to which specific health services management problem, what the user might expect to be obtained from the method, and what is required to use the method. In summary, we believe the tool adds value to the scarce existing literature on methods comparison and selection. © 2011 Jun et al.