PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Environmental Protection”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 163 records · Page 9Linked to original sources
PubMed2001

Community values for environmental protection in a cane farming catchment in northern Australia: a choice modelling study.

Choice modelling is an emerging approach to estimating the non-use values of environmental services with multiple attributes. In this paper, results are reported of a choice modelling study conducted in the Herbert River District of North Queensland to estimate the value placed on the protection of natural vegetation in areas suitable for cane production by the local community. Resource use options that vary in the level of environmental protection and the level of agricultural production were presented as a series of choice sets and respondents were asked to choose among a set of three discrete alternatives in a given choice set. The alternatives in each choice set were described by four attributes, pertaining to the area of teatree woodlands, the area of vegetation along rivers and in wetlands, regional income from cane production, and an environmental levy. The responses were analysed together with socio-economic data using a nested-logit discrete-choice model to estimate the community willingness-to-pay for the protection of natural vegetation. The results indicate that the environmental values of wetlands are comparable to returns from commercial production of sugar cane and that the values of teatree woodlands are comparable to returns from extensive grazing. It is argued that land allocation policies should recognise these values in tandem with commercial benefits of production to ensure that resources are used more efficiently.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Site-specific data confirm arsenic exposure predicted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The EPA uses an exposure assessment model to estimate daily intake to chemicals of potential concern. At the Anaconda Superfund site in Montana, the EPA exposure assessment model was used to predict total and speciated urinary arsenic concentrations. Predicted concentrations were then compared to concentrations measured in children living near the site. When site-specific information on concentrations of arsenic in soil, interior dust, and diet, site-specific ingestion rates, and arsenic absorption rates were used, measured and predicted urinary arsenic concentrations were in reasonable agreement. The central tendency exposure assessment model successfully described the measured urinary arsenic concentration for the majority of children at the site. The reasonable maximum exposure assessment model successfully identified the uppermost exposed population. While the agreement between measured and predicted urinary arsenic is good, it is not exact. The variables that were identified which influenced agreement included soil and dust sample collection methodology, daily urinary volume, soil ingestion rate, and the ability to define the exposure unit. The concentration of arsenic in food affected agreement between measured and predicted total urinary arsenic, but was not considered when comparing measured and predicted speciated urinary arsenic. Speciated urinary arsenic is the recommended biomarker for recent inorganic arsenic exposure. By using site-specific data in the exposure assessment model, predicted risks from exposure to arsenic were less than predicted risks would have been if the EPA's default values had been used in the exposure assessment model. This difference resulted in reduced magnitude and cost of remediation while still protecting human health.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2006

Improving radioactive waste management: an overview of the Environmental Protection Agency's low-activity waste effort.

Radioactive waste disposal in the United States is marked by a fragmented regulatory system, with requirements that often focus on the origin or statutory definition of the waste, rather than the hazard of the material in question. It may be possible to enhance public protection by moving toward a system that provides disposal options appropriate for the hazard presented by the waste in question. This paper summarizes aspects of an approach focusing on the potential use, with appropriate conditions, of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle-C hazardous waste landfills for disposal of "low-activity" wastes and public comments on the suggested approach.

Decision Making↗