The health impact from coal power plants in Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei
Catalogue Summary.....................................................................................................................................................1 Policy demands............................................................................................................................................3 Estimated health impacts casued by coal power plants..............................................................................4 Map of modeled coal power plants and map of pollution dispersion from JJJ coal power plants...............6 Methodology...............................................................................................................................................7 PM2.5 pollution and trends in Jingjinji........................................................................................................9 Understanding pollution from coal power plants......................................................................................10
Summary Beijing and the Jingjinji region have a major air pollution problem that reached emergency proportions in winter 2012-2013. One of the key contributors to the problem is the very large amount of coal burning in the region, and power generation is the region’s biggest coal-burning sector. Greenpeace commissioned U.S. air pollution modeling expert Dr. H. Andrew Gray to assess the contribution for coal-fired power plants to the PM2.5 pollution in China. The modeling covers over 2,000 power plants, of which 200 are located in Jingjinji. Due to the ongoing debate about regional air pollution control, the results for the Jingjinji region are being released in advance of the final report. The key findings are:
1
The 192 coal-fired power plants within Jingjinji caused an estimated 9,900 preliminary deaths 1 including an estimated 850 deaths from lung cancer within the region in 2011, with 2,000 deaths in Beijing, 1,200 in Tianjin and 6,700 in Hebei. 75% of these impacts are caused by Hebei’s coal power plants. Except of 9,900 preliminary deaths, the health impact also includes 11,110 case asthma, 12,100 case Chronic Bronchitis, 1,010 case hospital admission and 59,500 outpatient visits Out of the 1,982 deaths and other health impacts in Beijing that are attributable to Jingjinji power plants, 63% is caused by power plants in Hebei and 19% by power plants in Tianjin. In other words, the health impacts caused by Hebei and Tianjin power plants in Beijing are four times as large as the impacts caused in Beijing by Beijing’s own coal-fired power plants. In Tianjin, 61% of the impacts are caused by Hebei power plants and 6% by Beijing power plants. In Hebei, 5% of the impacts are caused by Beijing power plants and 16% by Tianjin power plants. Hebei’s power plant emissions cause an estimated 7,400 preliminary deaths within Jingjinji, of which 1,244 in Beijing. Health impacts in Beijing include 200 lung cancers, 40 infant deaths, 1,900 children suffering from asthma, 14,000 doctor and hospital visits. The worst impacts of Jingjinji power plants befall Hebei, however, due to the large population. A total of 6,739 deaths, including 600 lung cancers are estimated to be caused by Jingjinji power plant pollution in Hebei.
The concerns about PM2.5 contributing to China’s high lung cancer rates were highlighted by Greenpeace sampling and laboratory work over last winter, finding that the PM2.5 pollution contained harmful amounts of cancer-causing arsenic, lead, cadmium, nickel and other toxic heavy metals. Arsenic levels exceeded national standards. WHO estimates that 20% of lung cancer in China is linked to PM2.5 pollution2. The power sector consumes over one third of all coal in the Jingjinji region, and is responsible for over one third of industrial SO2 and NOx emissions. However, if all coal-burning sectors were included in the impact estimates, the results would be even larger: about 32% of coal consumption in Hebei is for power generation. This further emphasizes the need for regional level action.
1 9,927 deaths with a 95% confidence interval of 3,622-13,040. The health impacts quoted in this briefing are rounded central estimates. 2 Cohen, AJ 2013: The Burden of Disease Attributable to Ambient Air Pollution: Global, Regional; and Chinese Estimates from GBD 2010. Presentation at Air Pollution and Health Impacts Workshop, organized by HEI and Tsinghua University, Beijing March 2013. 2
Policy demands
these results emphasize the need to control regional pollution, particularly Hebei’s pollution. JJJ should commit to reducing coal-burning from right now. set a faster timeline for meeting interim air quality targets – 2023
3
Estimated health impacts casued by coal power plants Table 1. Estimated health impacts caused by Jingjinji power plants within the region.
Health impact category Total mortality of which: Stroke mortality Lung cancer mortality COPD mortality Ischemic heart disease mortality Infant mortality Low birth weight Asthma, children Asthma, adults Chronic Bronchitis Respiratory Hospital Admission Cardiovascular Hospital Admission Outpatient Visits (internal medicine) Outpatient Visits (pediatrics) Work loss days / sick leave days
Impact 9,930 6,430 850 920 1,730 190 1,060 9,330 1,780 12,100 5,050 4,960 39,900 19,600 16,400
Unit deaths per year cases per year cases per year cases per year cases per year cases per year cases per year cases cases cases cases per year cases per year cases per year cases per year days on average workday
Table 2. Estimated health impacts caused by Jingjinji power plants in each province.
Total mortality of which: Stroke mortality Lung cancer mortality COPD mortality Ischemic heart disease mortality Infant mortality Low birth weight Asthma, children Asthma, adults Chronic Bronchitis
Beijing 1,980
Tianjin 1,220
Hebei 6,740
1,280 170 180 350 40 210 1,860 350 2,410
790 100 110 210 20 130 1,150 220 1,490
4,370 580 620 1,200 100 720 6,330 1,200 8,210 4
Respiratory Hospital Admission Cardiovascular Hospital Admission Outpatient Visits (internal medicine) Outpatient Visits (pediatrics) Work loss days / sick leave days
1010 990 7,960 3,910 3,280
620 610 4,900 2,410 2,020
3,430 3,370 27,100 13,300 11,000
5
Map of modeled coal power plants and map of pollution dispersion from JJJ coal power plants Figure 1. Map of modeled coal-fired power plants in the Jingjinji region
6
Graph: map of pollution dispersion from JJJ coal power plants Figure 2. Jingjinji power plants’ emissions visualized on the map – each of the 200 power plants is represented by a circle, and the larger the circle, the larger the emissions from the power plant. The cities with largest power plant emissions are Shijiazhuang and Handan.
Methodology Greenpeace commissioned the U.S. air pollution modeling expert Dr. Andrew Gray to assess the PM2.5 exposure caused by Chinese coal-fired power plants. Dr. Gray has 30 years of experience in air pollution research, having worked for the U.S. government, in academic projects and as an independent consultant. Dr. Gray used the CALPUFF modeling system to evaluate the dispersion of pollutants from over 2000 operating coal-fired power plants, and the contribution these emissions make to PM2.5 levels in China. The CALPUFF modeling system is recommended by the U.S. EPA for modeling long-range transport of air pollution from point sources, such as power plant stacks. It is an advanced air pollution dispersion model that simulates the effects of time- and space-varying meteorological conditions on pollutant transport, transformation and removal.3 The model has been applied in China earlier by a Chinese-U.S. team in Harvard University4. A full year of meteorological data was obtained, including data on winds, 3 http://www.src.com/calpuff/calpuff1.htm 4 Zhou et al 2006: The influence of geographic location on population exposure to emissions from power plants throughout China. Environment International 32 (2006) 365 – 373. 7
precipitation and other key meteorological variables that the model uses to calculate air pollution dispersion. Model output is PM2.5 level increases caused by power plants in each point in a 12x12km grid that covers Eastern and Central China. The modeling grid for each modeled source is 2580 km x 3480 km, using 12 km grid spacing5. This data was combined with high-resolution population data, matching the 2010 official census data, to estimate the number of people exposed to the pollution in each grid location, giving the total exposure caused by the power plants. The deaths caused by PM2.5 exposure were assessed using health risk models developed for the WHO Global Burden of Disease study6, the most up-to-date and authoritative assessment of the health impacts of PM2.5 globally, including in China. For other health impacts, the most applicable epidemiological results and official or academic data on the incidence and prevalence of different health problems was used. The emissions from the coal-fired power plants in 2011 were estimated based on average emission levels calculated from Chinese official statistics and power company CSR reports, as well as China Electricity Council plant-by-plant data on capacity, operating hours and thermal efficiency of power plants, and MEP data on installed pollution control equipment. Data on the location of the over 2000 power plants was compiled by Greenpeace. While every effort has been made to estimate the air quality and health impacts of power plants in Jingjinji as accurately as possible, there are always potential sources of error. The first of these is that if the emission data from MEP and the power companies is not accurate, this will affect the results. Secondly, Chinese authorities do not make plant-level emission data available, and the national and company level emissions need to be attributed to individual power plants using all available plant-level data. Individual power plants’ emission control performance can vary from the average, but the total health impact estimates are still quite robust, as long as the total amount of emissions is correct. Thirdly, the atmospheric simulations carried out by the current version of the CALPUFF model have been found to correspond to observations relatively well, but due to the complexity of atmospheric processes, there is always uncertainty involved. The population data is accurate enough that any uncertainty is negligible compared to the other steps. Lastly, the statistical relationships between PM2.5 exposure and health impacts have uncertainty associated with them; for example, the 95% confidence interval for the number of deaths from Jingjinji power plants is 3,600-13,900, with the best estimate being 9,800. This uncertainty affects the total impacts much more than the relative severity of the impacts of individual power plants or power plants in different provinces. Overall, Greenpeace believes that the modeling results give an unprecedentedly robust and detailed picture of the role of coal-fired power plants in Jingjinji’s air pollution problem, and the magnitude of the health impacts caused by power generation from coal in the region.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041200500200X 5 With the exception of sources close to the boundaries of the modeling domain. 6 Lim SS et al 2012: A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990—2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Lancet 380:2224-2260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61766-8 8
PM2.5 pollution and trends in Jingjinji Air quality in January 2013 was the worst since measurements started - since 2001. Coal consumption for power generation in Jingjinji increased 43% from 2006 to 2011, while overall coal consumption grew 36%. This growth is happening almost entirely in Hebei. Jingjinji’s air pollution emissions actually increased in 2011, after some years of slow decline. Rapid growth in coal consumption is undermining any benefits from improved pollution controls, making the air pollution challenge impossible to tackle without bringing total coal consumption under control. The power sector consumes 32% of total coal burned in Hebei.7 Figure 3. Average January PM10 levels in the Jingjinji capitals from 2001 to 2013, estimated from MEP data 8.
600 500
PM10, ug/m3
400 300 200
Beijing Shijiazhuang Tianjin Total
100 0 01 02 0 3 0 4 05 06 0 7 08 09 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 20 20 2 0 2 0 20 20 2 0 20 20 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0
The impacts of coal-fired power plants are being made much worse by the lacking enforcement of air emission standards. Officially reported air pollution emissions from power sector are at least 50% higher than they should be if all power plants met the emission standards, and particulate matter emissions are approximately twice as high. Pollution control equipment listings by MEP show that in Hebei, 10% of coal-fired capacity was still lacking flue gas desulphurization in 2011, while Beijing and Tianjin had full coverage. Only 10% of coal-fired capacity in Hebei and Tianjin had de-NO x equipment installed, while Beijing was already nearing 90%.
7 China Energy Statistical Yearbooks 2007-2012; China Environmental Statistical Yearbook 2012. 8 Data downloaded from http://datacenter.mep.gov.cn/report/air_daily/air_dairy_en.jsp 9
Coal consumption in Jingjinji by province 450 400 350 300
HEBEI TIANJIN BEIJING
250 200 150 100 50 0 2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Coal consumption by sector in Jingjinji in 2011
Power Heat Coking Industry Small scale use Other
Understanding pollution from coal power plants Coal-fired power generation emits by far more SO2 and NOx – two of the key sources of PM2.5 in the atmosphere – than any other economic sector. Coal-fired power plants were the source of 50% of 10
industrial SO2 emissions, 70% of NOx emissions and 20% of soot emissions in 2011. 9 This is despite the impressive progress made in installing new emission controls. Gaseous SO2 and NOx emissions are transformed in the atmosphere into sulphate and nitrate particles, two key constituents of PM2.5. These “secondary” particles make up one third of Beijing’s PM2.5 pollution10. The microscopic PM2.5 particles the microscopic particles penetrate deep into the lungs, and further into the bloodstream, causing inflammation, respiratory problems, coagulation of blood and toxic effects on many internal organs, including the brain. The result is increased risk of death from heart attack, stroke, lung cancer and respiratory diseases, and increased risk of asthma and respiratory infections.
More information Andrew’s full resume, see http://newenergyeconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Gray-AnalysisNEE_OppStayExhs_1.13.2012-2.pdf#page=5 Technical background note on the modeling
9 China Environment Statistical Yearbook 2012 10 Yao et al 2010: Studies on formation and control of combustion particulate matter in China: A review. 11
