Experience in Substantiating Emission Quotas per Contributions Made to Unacceptable Airborne Health Risks within the Clean Air Federal Project

Introduction: The Clean Air Federal Project aims at a significant improvement of the quality of life of the population residing in cities with high and very high ambient air pollution through the mechanism of mandatory emission quotation.
Objective: To test the algorithm and mathematical apparatus for selecting quota objects based on health risk criteria.
Materials and Methods: The study object was the city of Chita. Calculations of ground-level air concentrations of more than 100 chemicals at 15 thousand points of the residential territory (188 industrial facilities, 28 thousand sources of autonomous heat supply, 391 sections of the street network) using the “Ecologist–City” software were performed. Carcinogenic, acute and chronic non-carcinogenic health risks were assessed using a standardized procedure. At each point and in the city as a whole, contribution of each chemical and each subject to human health risks was determined.
Results: A list of 29 business entities and other emission sources contributing the most to the inhalation risk and recommended for inclusion in the list of quota objects has been formed. For each object, a list of chemicals has been created, in respect of which it is advisable to develop measures to reduce, including within the framework of directive regulation. It has been shown that there is no validity of the mandatory reduction of emissions of priority substances on all objects. At the same time, some objects excluded from quotation make significant contributions to unacceptable health risks. It is advisable to include them in the list of regulated facilities.
Conclusions: The targeted emission reduction at facilities making the greatest contribution to violations of hygienic standards and health risks will most effectively mitigate the threat to citizens’ health. The transition from imposed emission reduction to the targeted planning of air protection measures appears both relevant and justified. Quantitative parameters of the required reduction in emissions should be adequate to the contributions of sources and chemicals to air pollution and unacceptable health risks.

1. Martsinkovskiy OA, Dvinyanina OV, Vas’kina AA, Roma­nov AV. Federal project “Clean Air”: A new standard of living. Standarty i Kachestvo. 2022;(3):93-95. (In Russ.)

2. Grinevsky AM. [Clean Air Federal Project.] Chernye Metally. 2021;(10):76-77. (In Russ.)

3. Lukin AU, Gileva TE, Kostyleva NV. [On quoting of ambient emissions of enterprises.] In: Current Problems of Ecology: Proceedings of the XXIV International Scientific and Practical Conference, Tula, February 17, 2020. St. Petersburg: Naukoemkie Tekhnologii Publ.; 2020:107-113. (In Russ.)

4. Kuzmin SV, Avaliani SL, Dodina NS, Shashina TA, Kislitsin VA, Sinitsyna OO. The practice of applying health risk assessment in the Federal Project “Clean Air” in the participating cities (Cherepovets, Lipetsk, Omsk, Novokuznetsk): Problems and prospects. Gigiena i Sanitariya. 2021;100(9):890-896. (In Russ.) doi: 10.47470/0016-9900-2021-100-9-890-896

5. Revich BA. How effective is “Clean air for health in 12 cities” project? Ekologicheskiy Vestnik Rossii. 2020;(3):58-68. (In Russ.)

6. Popova AYu, Zaitseva NV, May IV. Population health as a target function and criterion for assessing efficiency of activities performed within “Pure air” federal project. Health Risk Analysis. 2019;(4):4-13. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2019.4.01.eng

7. Revich BA, Kharkova TL, Kvasha EA. Selected health parameters of people living in cities included into “Clean air” Federal project. Health Risk Analysis. 2020;(2):16-27. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2020.2.02.eng

8. Starova EV. Inefficient costs of air protection. Pravo i Ekonomika. 2020;(2(384)):77-81. (In Russ.)

9. Starova EV. [The balance of social, environmental, and economic interests is a prerequisite for improving legal regulation in the field of environmental protection and the use of natural resources]. In: Socio-Economic Development and Quality of the Legal Environment: Proceedings of the VIII Moscow Legal Forum (XIX International Scientific and Practical Conference), Moscow, April 8–10, 2021. Moscow: Kutafin University Publ.; 2021;(Pt 5):261-262. (In Russ.)

10. Zaitseva NV, May IV, Kiryanov DА, Goryaev DV. Scientific substantiation of priority chemicals, objects for setting quotas and trends in mitigating airborne public health risks within activities performed by the sanitary service of the Russian Federation. Health Risk Analysis. 2022;(4):4-17. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2022.4.01.eng

11. Kleyn SV, Popova EV. Hygienic assessment of ambient air quality in Chita, a priority area of the Federal Clean Air Project. Zdorov’e Naseleniya i Sreda Obitaniya. 2020;(12(333)):16-22. (In Russ.) doi: 10.35627/2219-5238/2020-333-12-16-22

12. Popova EV, Vekovshinina SA. [Assessment of the dynamics of inhalation risk to the health of the Chita population during the implementation of the Clean Air Federal Project.] In: Health Risk Analysis – 2024: Proceedings of the XIV Russian Scientific and Practical Conference with International Participation, Perm, May 15–16, 2024. Perm: Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies; 2024;1:174-182. (In Russ.)

13. Prüss-Ustün A, Wolf J, Corvalán C, Bos R, Neira M. Preventing Disease Through Healthy Environments: A Global Assessment of the Burden of Disease from Environmental Risks. Geneva: WHO; 2016. Accessed September 18, 2025. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/204585/9789241565196_eng.pdf?sequence=1

14. Faridi S, Krzyzanowski M, Cohen AJ, et al. Ambient air quality standards and policies in Eastern Mediterranean countries: A review. Int J Public Health. 2023;68:605352. doi: 10.3389/ijph.2023.1605352

15. Chen F, Zhang W, Mfarrej MFB, et al. Breathing in danger: Understanding the multifaceted impact of air pollution on health impacts. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2024;280:116532. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2024.116532

16. Prüss-Ustün A, Wolf J, Corvalán C, Neville T, Bos R, Neira M. Diseases due to unhealthy environments: An updated estimate of the global burden of disease attributable to environmental determinants of health. J Public Health (Oxf). 2017;39(3):464-475. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdw085

17. Zaitseva NV, Kleyn SV, Kiryanov DA, Andrishunas AM, Chigvintsev VM, Balashov SYu. Optimization of regulatory actions based on a differentiated approach to managing ambient air quality and health risks. Health Risk Analysis. 2024;(1):4-17. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2024.1.01.eng

18. Andrishunas AM, Balashov SYu. [Forecast assessment of the effectiveness of air protection measures at thermal power plants.] In: Health Risk Analysis – 2024: Proceedings of the XIV Russian Scientific and Practical Conference with International Participation, Perm, May 15–16, 2024. Perm: Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies; 2024;1:121-126. (In Russ.)

19. Rakitskii VN, Avaliani SL, Novikov SM, Shashina TA, Dodina NS, Kislitsin VA. Health risk analysis related to exposure to ambuent air contamination as a component in the strategy aimed at reducing global non-infectious epidemics. Health Risk Analysis. 2019;(4):30-35. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2019.4.03.eng

20. Kriga AS, Nikitin SV, Ovchinnikova EL, et al. On implementation of “Clean air” Federal project in Omsk. Health Risk Analysis. 2020;(4):32-46. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2020.4.04.eng

21. WHO Regional Office for Europe, OECD. Economic Cost of the Health Impact of Air Pollution in Europe: Clean Air, Health and Wealth. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2015. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/350716/WHO-EURO-2015-4102-43861-61759-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (дата обращения: 18.09.2025).

22. Antipanova AN, Koshkina VS. [Social “damage” of the carcinogenic risk to population health in a major steel-making center in the system of public health monitoring.] Izvestiya Chelyabinskogo Nauchnogo Tsentra UrO RAN. 2007;(2):46-50. (In Russ.)

23. Lebedeva-Nesevrya NA, Leukhina AV. [Public satisfaction with environmental conditions as a key indicator of the National Ecology Project.] In: Popova AYu, Zaitseva NV, eds. Health Risk Analysis – 2020 with the International Meeting on Environment and Health Rise–2020 and the Round Table on Food Safety: Proceedings of the Tenth Russian Scientific and Practical Conference with International Participation, Perm, May 13–15, 2020. Perm: Perm National Research Polytechnic University; 2020;2:296-300. (In Russ.)

24. Barg АО, Lebedeva-Nesevrya NА, Kornilitsyna МD. Methodical approaches to assessing subjective health risk perception by population under exposure to ambient air pollution. Health Risk Analysis. 2022;(2):28-37. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2022.2.03.eng