ArticleEnvironmental health insights2014
Assessment of Particulate Matter Levels in Vulnerable Communities in North Charleston, South Carolina prior to Port Expansion.
Article in Environmental health insights, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Air pollution exposure assessment at schools and playgrounds in Williamsburg Brooklyn NYC, with a view to developing a set of policy solutions.Journal of environmental studies and sciences · 2022Article
- Community-based participatory research for the study of air pollution: a review of motivations, approaches, and outcomes.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2017Review
- Assessment of sociodemographic and geographic disparities in cancer risk from air toxics in South Carolina.Environmental research · 2015Article
- A critical review of an authentic and transformative environmental justice and health community--university partnership.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe Port of Charleston, one of the busiest US ports, currently operates five terminals. The fifth terminal is being planned for expansion to accommodate container ships from the proposed Panama Canal expansion. Such expansion is expected to increase traffic within local vulnerable North Charleston neck communities by at least 7,000 diesel truck trips per day, more than a 70% increase from the present average rate of 10,000 trucks per day. Our objective was to measure the current particulate matter (PM) concentrations in North Charleston communities as a baseline to contrast against future air pollution after the proposed port expansion.
methodsSaturation study was performed to determine spatial variability of PM in local Charleston neck communities. In addition, the temporal trends in particulate air pollution within the region were determined across several decades. With the BGI sampler, PM samples were collected for 24 hours comparable to the federal reference method protocol. Gravimetric analysis of the PM filter samples was conducted following EPA protocol.
resultsThe range of the PM10 annual average across the region from 1982 to 2006 was 17.0-55.0 μg/m3. On only two occasions were the records of PM10 averaged above the 50.0 μg/m3 national standard. In the case of PM2.5, the annual average for 1999-2006 ranged from 11.0 to 13.5 μg/m3 and no annual average exceeded the 15.0 μg/m3 PM2.5 annual standard.
conclusionsAlthough ambient PM levels have fallen in the Charleston region since the 1960s due to aggressive monitoring by the stakeholders against air pollution, local air pollution sources within the North Charleston neck communities have consistently contributed to the PM levels in the region for several decades. This baseline assessment of ambient PM will allow for comparisons with future assessments to ascertain the impact of the increased truck and port traffic on PM concentrations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.