Health Impact Assessments A Tool for Designing Climate Change Resilience Into Green Building and Planning Projects

2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adele Houghton

Historical records have documented considerable changes to the global climate, with significant health, economic, and environmental consequences. Climate projections predict more intense hurricanes; increased sea level rise; and more frequent and more intense natural disasters such as heat waves, heavy rainfall, and drought in the future (1; 2). The coast along the Gulf of Mexico is particularly vulnerable to many of these environmental hazards and at particular risk when several strike simultaneously—such as a hurricane disrupting electricity transmission during a heat wave. Due to its significant contribution to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the building sector already plays an important role in climate change mitigation efforts (e.g., reducing emissions). For example, voluntary programs such as the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Rating System (3), the Architecture 2030 Challenge (4), the American College and University Presidents' Climate Commitment (5), and the Clinton Climate Initiative (6) focus almost exclusively on reducing energy consumption and increasing renewable energy generation. Mandatory regulations such as the International Energy Conservation Code (7), the International Green Building Code (8), and CalGreen (9) also emphasize GHG emission reduction targets. This leadership role is necessary. After all, the United States EPA estimates that the building sector accounts for 62.7% of total annual GHG emissions in the U.S., when the construction sector, facility operations, and transportation are factored in. In fact, the construction sector alone is the third largest industrial emitter of GHGs after the oil and gas and chemical industries, contributing 1.7% of total annual emissions (10; 11). As significant as these contributions appear, the built environment's true contribution to climate change is much larger than the GHG emissions attributed to building construction and operations. It is also a major determinant of which populations are vulnerable to climate change-related hazards, such as heat waves and flooding (12; 13). Architecture and land use planning can therefore be used as tools for building community resilience to the climate-related environmental changes underway (13). Climate change regulations and voluntary programs have begun to incorporate requirements targeting the built environment's ability to work in tandem with the natural environment to both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect its occupants from the health consequences of a changing climate. For example, 11 states have incorporated climate change adaptation goals into their climate action plans (14). In 2010, the not-for-profit organization ICLEI: Local Governments for Sustainability launched a climate change adaptation program (15) to complement their existing mitigation program, which supports municipalities who have signed the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement (16). New tools have been introduced to measure community vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. One of these tools, Health Impact Assessments (or HIAs), has emerged over the past decade as a powerful methodology to provide evidence-based recommendations to decision makers and community planning officials about the likely health co-benefits and co-harms associated with proposed policies and land use development proposals (17). While HIAs are becoming a more common feature of community planning efforts, this paper introduces them as an approach to designing climate change resilience into specific building projects. HIAs have been used in Europe and other parts of the world for decades to provide a science-based, balanced assessment of the risks and benefits to health associated with a proposed policy or program (18). In the U.S., they have been used over the past decade to evaluate transit-oriented developments, urban infill projects, and California's capand-trade legislation, among other topics (17; 19). To date, HIAs have been used mainly to inform large-scale community planning, land use, industrial, and policy decisions. However, the recommendations generated through the HIA process often bring to light previously unforeseen vulnerabilities, whether due to existing infrastructure, building technology, or socio-economic conditions. Designers can make use of the HIA process and its resulting recommendations to prioritize design/retrofit interventions that will result in the largest co-benefits to building owners, the surrounding community, and the environment. An HIA focused on the health impacts of climate change will likely generate recommendations that could enhance the longevity of a building project's useful life; protect its property value by contributing to the resilience of the surrounding community; and result in design decisions that prioritize strategies that maximize both short-term efficiencies and long-term environmental, economic, and social value.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darija Bilandžija ◽  
Marija Galić ◽  
Željka Zgorelec

<p>In order to mitigate climate change and reduce the anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the Kyoto protocol has been adopted in 1997 and the Paris Agreement entered into force in 2016. The Paris Agreement have ratified 190 out of 197 Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Croatia is one of them as well. Each Party has obliged regularly to submit the national inventory report (NIR) providing the information on the national anthropogenic GHG emissions by sources and removals by sinks to the UNFCCC. Reporting under the NIR is divided into six categories / sectors, and one of them is land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector, where an issue of uncertainty estimates on carbon emissions and removals occurs. As soil respiration represents the second-largest terrestrial carbon flux, the national studies on soil respiration can reduce the uncertainty and improve the estimation of country-level carbon fluxes. Due to the omission of national data, the members of the University of Zagreb Faculty of Agriculture, Department of General Agronomy have started to study soil respiration rates in 2012, and since then many different studies on soil respiration under different agricultural land uses (i.e. annual crops, energy crop and vineyard), management practices (i.e. tillage and fertilization) and climate conditions (i.e. continental and mediterranean) in Croatia have been conducted. The obtained site specific results on field measurements of soil carbon dioxide concentrations by <em>in situ</em> closed static chamber method will be presented in this paper.</p>


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e00125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Nocentini ◽  
John Field ◽  
Andrea Monti ◽  
Keith Paustian

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 10-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asta Ervola ◽  
Jussi Lankoski ◽  
Markku Ollikainen ◽  
Hannu J. Mikkola

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-19
Author(s):  
Gina Powers ◽  
Cynthia Stone

In 2021, the Society of Practitioners of Health Impact Assessment (SOPHIA) celebrates its 10-year anniversary.  As part of the celebration, we asked founding SOPHIA members and key SOPHIA leaders to reflect on the organization’s formation in 2011, to share their thoughts on SOPHIA’s key challenges and to highlight important accomplishments. Respondents also weighed in on the future of SOPHIA and the value of SOPHIA membership.  Research was conducted using written surveys, interviews, and review of written material.  Surveys were sent in July of 2021 to eleven active SOPHIA members, many of whom have served as president, vice president, board member or founding member for SOPHIA.  Of the eight survey recipients who were interviewed or completed the written survey, nearly all have been conducting Health Impact Assessments (HIAs) for 10 or more years. Survey respondents’ HIA experience included assessments focused on a variety of policies, projects and programs, including housing, land use, economic security, the built environment, transportation, immigration policies, minimum wage policies, criminal justice and more. This article includes information gleaned through written material review; however, it is largely based on the feedback, insights and experiences shared by survey respondents verbally and in writing.


Author(s):  
Aaiysha Khursheed ◽  
George Simons ◽  
Brad Souza ◽  
Jennifer Barnes

Over the past few decades, interest in the effects of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on global climate change has peaked. Increasing temperatures worldwide have been blamed for numerous negative impacts on agriculture, weather, forestry, marine ecosystems, and human health. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reports that the primary GHG emitted in the U.S. is carbon dioxide (CO2), most of which stems from fossil fuel combustion [1]. In fact, CO2 represents approximately 85% of all GHG emissions nationwide. The other primary GHGs include nitrous oxide (N2O), methane (CH4), ozone (O3), and fluorinated gases. Since the energy sector is responsible for a majority of the GHGs released into the atmosphere, policies that address their mitigation through the production of electricity using renewable fuels and distributed generation are of significant interest. Use of renewable fuels and clean technologies to meet energy demand instead of relying on traditional electrical grid systems is expected to result in fewer CO2 and CH4 emissions, hence reducing global climate change impacts. Technologies considered cleaner include photovoltaics, wind turbines, and combined heat and power (CHP) devices using microturbines or internal combustion engines. The Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) in California [2] provides incentives for the installation of these technologies under certain circumstances. This paper assesses the GHG emission impacts from California’s SGIP during the 2005 program year by estimating the reductions in CO2 and CH4 released when SGIP projects are in operation. Our analysis focuses on these emissions since these are the two GHGs characteristic of SGIP projects. Results of this analysis show that emissions of GHGs are reduced due to the SGIP. This is because projects operating under this program reduce reliance on electricity generated by conventional power plants and encourage the use of renewable fuels, such as captured waste heat and methane.


2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
James H. Diaz, MD, MPH-TM, DrPH

With a documented increase in average global surface temperatures of 0.6ºC since 1975, Earth now appears to be warming due to a variety of climatic effects, most notably the cascading effects of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from human activities. There remains, however, no universal agreement on how rapidly, regionally, or asymmetrically the planet will warm or on the true impact of global warming on natural disasters and public health outcomes. Most reports to date of the public health impact of global warming have been anecdotal and retrospective in design and have focused on the increase in heat-stroke deaths following heat waves and on outbreaks of airborne and arthropod-borne diseases following tropical rains and flooding that resulted from fluctuations in ocean temperatures. The effects of global warming on rainfall and drought, tropical cyclone and tsunami activity, and tectonic and volcanic activity will have far-reaching public health effects not only on environmentally associated disease outbreaks but also on global food supplies and population movements. As a result of these and other recognized associations between climate change and public health consequences, many of which have been confounded by deficiencies in public health infrastructure and scientific debates over whether climate changes are spawned by atmospheric cycles or anthropogenic influences, the active responses to progressive climate change must include combinations of economic, environmental, legal, regulatory, and, most importantly, public health measures.


2012 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 1250013 ◽  
Author(s):  
XIAOGUANG CHEN ◽  
HAIXIAO HUANG ◽  
MADHU KHANNA

This paper examines the changes in land use in the U.S. likely to be induced by biofuel and climate policies and the implications of these policies for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the 2007–2022 period. The policies considered here include a modified Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) by itself as well as combined with a cellulosic biofuel tax credit or a carbon price policy. We use a dynamic, spatial, multi-market equilibrium model, Biofuel and Environmental Policy Analysis Model (BEPAM), to endogenously determine the effects of these policies on cropland allocation, food and fuel prices, and the mix of first- and second-generation biofuels. We find that the RFS could be met by diverting 6% of cropland for biofuel production and would result in corn prices increasing by 16% in 2002 relative to the business-as-usual baseline. The reduction in GHG emissions in the U.S. due to the RFS is about 2%; these domestic GHG savings can be severely eroded by emissions due to indirect land-use changes and the increase in gasoline consumption in the rest of the world. Supplementing the RFS with a carbon price policy or a cellulosic biofuel tax credit induces a switch away from corn ethanol to cellulosic biofuels and achieves the mandated level of biofuel production with a smaller adverse impact on crop prices. These supplementary policies enhance the GHG savings achieved by the RFS alone, although through different mechanisms; greater production of cellulosic biofuels with the tax credit but larger reduction in fossil fuel consumption with a carbon tax.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document