Human epidemiology and animal toxicology experiments indicate that many chemicals or mixtures termed air toxics have the potential to impact human health. As toxicology, epidemiology and air contaminant measurement techniques have improved over the decades, scientists and regulators have increased their focus on the levels of each chemical or material in the air in an effort to link potential exposures with potential health effects.
Air toxics emissions from mobile sources have the potential to impact human health and often represent a regulatory agency concern. The FHWA has responded to this concern by developing an integrated research program to answer the most important transportation community questions related to air toxics, human health, and the NEPA process. To this end, A variety of research has been conducted by FHWA, EPA, HEI and others related to all aspects of MSAT. Links to FHWA sponsored ongoing studies and analysis of MSAT in the near road environment are provided below.
Quantitative Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) analysis performed to fulfill National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements are done using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's emissions model MOVES, and in California EMFAC. Five case studies were developed to highlight how project sponsors approached various aspects of modeling MSAT emissions estimates at the project level, including the affect network, and MOVES inputs.
NOTE — These documents are disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for use of the information contained in these documents.
The Health Effects Institute (HEI) is a nonprofit corporation chartered in 1980 as an independent research organization to provide high-quality, impartial, and relevant science on the health effects of air pollution. FHWA provides a grant to HEI. Some highlighted reports from the HEI are:
In 2015 the Health Effects Institute (HEI) released the last in a three part series of reports in a multiyear research effort to study the health effects of diesel emissions: Advanced Collaborative Emissions Study (ACES). This included reports on Subchronic Exposure Results: Biologic Responses in Rats and Mice and Assessment of Genotoxicity and Lifetime Cancer and Non-Cancer Assessment in Rats Exposed to New-Technology Diesel Exhaust. The Executive Summary "summarizes the main findings of emissions and health testing of new technology heavy-duty diesel engines capable of meeting US 2007/2010 and EURO VI/6 diesel emissions standards. The results demonstrated the dramatic improvements in emissions and the absence of any significant health effects. The Executive Summary presents the main findings of all three phases of the project and places the results in the context of health risk assessment, noting that 'the overall toxicity of exhaust from modern diesel engines is significantly decreased compared with the toxicity of emissions from traditional-technology diesel engines."
In 2015 the Health Effects Institute (HEI) released Special Report 19, that contains "the intensive review and analysis of the studies of mine and truck workers exposed to older diesel engine exhaust." The purpose was to review two epidemiological studies of diesel exhaust and lung cancer "to consider whether data or results from these studies might also be used to quantify lung cancer risk in populations exposed to diesel exhaust at lower concentrations and with different temporal patterns, such as those experienced by the general population in urban areas worldwide." To date, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not established a cancer risk screening level for diesel exhaust*. In its report, HEI's Diesel Epidemiology Panel concluded that "the studies are well prepared and are useful for applying the data to calculate the cancer risk due to exposure to diesel exhaust. The Panel noted, however, that efforts to apply these studies to estimate human risk at today's ambient levels will need to consider the much lower levels of emission pollutants from newer diesel technology as well as the limitations... identified in each study." In the Report (page 6), it is stated that "detailed evaluations of these studies... lay the groundwork for a systematic characterization of the exposure-response relationship and associated uncertainties in a quantitative risk assessment, should one be undertaken" by the EPA.
*HEI 1999 Diesel Exhaust review identified numerous limitations of epidemiological studies available at that time and did not recommend a cancer risk due to exposure to diesel exhaust be established. See the HEI Diesel Epidemiology Expert Panel. 1999. Diesel Emissions and Lung Cancer: Epidemiology and Quantitative Risk Assessment. Special Report. Cambridge, MA: Health Effects Institute.
Given concerns about the possibility of MSAT exposure in the near road environment, The Health Effects Institute (HEI) dedicated a number of research efforts at trying to find a MSAT "hotspot." In 2011 three studies were published that tested this hypothesis. In general, the authors confirm that while highways are a source of air toxics, they were unable to find that highways were the only source of these pollutants and determined that near road exposures were often no different or no higher than background or ambient levels of exposure, and hence no true hot spots were identified. These studies provide additional information:
In 2010, HEI released Special Report #17, investigating the health effects of traffic related air pollution. The goal of the research was to synthesize available information on the effects of traffic on health. Researchers looked at linkages between: (1) traffic emissions (at the tailpipe) with ambient air pollution in general, (2) concentrations of ambient pollutants with human exposure to pollutants from traffic, (3) exposure to pollutants from traffic with human-health effects and toxicologic data, and (4) toxicologic data with epidemiological associations. Challenges in making exposure assessments, such as quality and quantity of emissions data and models, were investigated, as was the appropriateness of the use of proximity as an exposure-assessment model. Overall, researchers felt that there was "sufficient" evidence for causality for the exacerbation of asthma. Evidence was "suggestive but not sufficient" for other health outcomes such as cardiovascular mortality and others. Study authors also note that past epidemiologic studies may not provide an appropriate assessment of future health associations as vehicle emissions are decreasing overtime.
In 2007, the HEI published Special Report #16: Mobile-Source Air Toxics: A Critical Review of the Literature on Exposure and Health Effects. The purpose of this Report was to accomplish the following tasks:
The HEI chose to review literature for acetaldehyde, acrolein, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter (POM). Diesel exhaust was included, but not reviewed in this study since it had been reviewed by HEI and EPA recently. In general, the Report concluded that the cancer health effects due to mobile sources are difficult to discern since the majority of quantitative assessments are derived from occupational cohorts with high concentration exposures and some cancer potency estimates are derived from animal models. The Report suggested that substantial improvements in analytical sensitively and specificity of biomarkers would provide better linkages between exposure and health effects. Noncancer endpoints were not a central focus of most research, and therefore require further investigation. Subpopulation susceptibility also requires additional evaluation.
The study was designed to compare modeled levels of the six priority MSATs identified in FHWA's 2006 guidance with measurements at existing MSAT monitoring sites in the study area. MOBILE6.2 emissions factors and the ISC3ST dispersion model were used (some limited testing of the CALPUFF model was also performed). Key findings include: 1) modeled mean annual concentrations from highways were well below estimated Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) cancer and non-cancer risk values for all six MSAT; 2) modeled concentrations dropped off sharply within 50 meters of roadways; 3) modeled MSAT concentrations tended to be higher along highways near the Denver Central Business District (CBD) than along the I-70 East corridor (in some cases, they were higher within the CBD itself, as were the monitored values); and 4) dispersion model results were generally lower than monitored concentrations but within a factor of two at all locations.
