Home medical care (HMC) is advancing not only in Japan but also throughout the world. In Japan, HMC waste is legally classified as municipal waste. Nevertheless, some municipalities do not collect some or all the HMC waste because of fear of infection. Therefore, this study was conducted to clarify the following two issues: First, have the municipalities made progress in collecting and appropriate disposal of HMC waste in the past 13 years? Second, is there a difference between a large city and a small city in terms of appropriate disposal progress? A total of 687 municipalities published the treatment of HMC waste. Currently, 42 municipalities collected all HMC waste. 236 municipalities were collecting HMC waste except for self-injection needle. 117 municipalities were collecting HMC waste except for self-injection needle and Syringe. The collection status of HMC waste was better in cities with high population than in cities with low population. HMC waste collection status was progressed over 13 years. However, more than 60% of the municipality staff stated that they could not avoid being anxious about infection caused by HMC waste. We suggest that providing HMC waste education to the municipalities wherein these efforts have not yet progressed is important.
Three modeling approaches, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) zero-out, the Comprehensive Air quality Model with extensions (CAMx) zero-out, and the CAMx probing tools ozone source apportionment tool (OSAT), were used to project the contributions of various source categories to future year design values for summer 8-hr average ozone concentrations at selected U.S. monitors. The CMAQ and CAMx zero-out or brute-force approaches predicted generally similar contributions for most of the source categories, with some small differences. One of the important findings from this study was that both the CMAQ and CAMx zero-out approaches tended to apportion a larger contribution to the “other” category than the OSAT approach. For the OSAT approach, this category is the difference between the total emissions and the sum of the tracked emissions and consists of non-U.S. emissions. For the zero-out approach, it also includes the effects of nonlinearities in the system because the sum of the sensitivities of all sources is not necessarily equal to the sum of their contributions in a nonperturbed environment. The study illustrates the strengths and weaknesses of source apportionment approaches, such as OSAT, and source sensitivity approaches, such as zero-out. The OSAT approach is suitable for studying source contributions, whereas the zero-out approach is suitable for studying response to emission changes. Future year design values of summer 8-hr average ozone concentrations were projected to decrease at all the selected monitors for all the simulations in each city, except at the downtown Los Angeles monitor. Both the CMAQ and CAMx results showed all modeled locations project attainment in 2018 and 2030 to the current National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) level of 75 ppb, except the selected Los Angeles monitor in 2018 and the selected San Bernardino monitor in 2018 and 2030.
Implications:This study illustrates the strengths and weaknesses of three modeling approaches, CMAQ zero-out, CAMx zero-out, and OSAT to project contributions of various source categories to future year design values for summer 8-hr average ozone concentrations at selected U.S. monitors. The OSAT approach is suitable for studying source contributions, whereas the zero-out approach is suitable for studying response to emission changes. Future year design values of summer 8-hr average ozone concentrations were projected to decrease, except at the downtown Los Angeles monitor. Comparing projections with the current NAAQS (75 ppb) show attainment everywhere, except two locations in 2018 and one location in 2030. 相似文献