Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41867129›Full record

ArticleResearch report (Health Effects Institute)2025

Assessing Source Contributions to Air Quality and Noise in Unconventional Oil Shale Plays.

Meredith Franklin, Gunnar Schade, Detlev Helmig, Lara Cushing, Jill Johnston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research report (Health Effects Institute), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Meredith FranklinUniversity of Toronto, Canada.
Gunnar SchadeTexas A&M University, USA.
Detlev HelmigBoulder AIR, USA.
Lara CushingUniversity of California, Los Angeles, USA.
Jill JohnstonUniversity of Southern California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Unconventional oil and gas development (UOGD Methods: During one year of stationary air monitoring in Loving, New Mexico, in the western part of the Permian Basin (PB), we characterized the magnitude, frequency, and duration of UOGD-related emissions at temporal scales from 1 minute to seasonal. Continuous monitoring was performed for meteorological variables, near-surface ozone, nitrogen oxides (NO Results: Most of the monitored primary air pollutants showed high variability, with frequent concentration spikes that exceeded background mole fractions by up to three orders of magnitude. The frequency of concentration spikes, their maximum mole fractions, and averaged metrics (hourly, 8-hour, 24-hour, and annual) were higher than those reported from mostly urban comparison sites. Near-surface ozone measurements confirmed that this area of the PB is in nonattainment of the ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), exceeding the 70 ppb threshold more than 30 days of the year, and that this nonattainment is driven by UOGD-related emissions of VOCs and NO Conclusions: Our extensive air quality research in the Permian-Delaware Basin revealed, at times, extraordinarily high levels of air pollution, including air toxics such as benzene, and frequent high ozone days in violation of the ozone NAAQS. Our analyses show that the overwhelming amount of this pollution is due to UOGD activities, including emissions from production and storage, gas flaring, and truck traffic.

Indexed as

Air PollutantsAir PollutionNoiseOil and Gas FieldsEnvironmental MonitoringHumansNew MexicoNitrogen OxidesOzoneSulfur DioxideVolatile Organic CompoundsAir PollutantsNitrogen OxidesOzoneSulfur DioxideVolatile Organic Compounds

Identifiers

PMID41867129
PMCPMC13006887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.