1 | P a g e

CHAPTER 1
Introduction and Outline:
1.1 Introduction
In todays scenario environmental degradation can be considered as a by-
product of economic activities. Several forms of environmental degradation
cause real costs to the economy and to peoples welfare. Yet these costs
often go unmeasured due to several uncertainties and knowledge gaps and
thus their magnitudes are largely unknown. The environmental damage
categories due to any economic activity can be summarized as damages to
the following:
Air quality: impacts of air pollution on health (costs of mortality and
morbidity from airborne diseases) and the environment ( through
reduced visibility and aesthetic value of landscape)
Agricultural land: losses of agricultural productivity on croplands
and the rangelands due to unsustainable practices.
Forests: losses of forest goods (for example timber, firewood, and
non-wood forest products) and services (such as watershed
protection and recreation) due to deforestation and forest
degradation.
Water: impacts on major economic sectors of water salinity,
contamination, waterlogging, dam sedimentation, and
overexploitation of groundwater.
Waste: impacts on the environment and public welfare of
inappropriate waste collection, transport, and disposal.
Coastal zone: losses of recreational and landscape value due to
unsustainable coastal activities.
Air pollution is one of the most serious environmental problems around
the world. The rapid economic expansion and population growth over
the past few decades has made extensive energy utilization giving rise
to several pollution generating economic activities (e.g. mining).The
effects of air pollution have multifaceted consequences for human
welfare in areas such as health, agriculture and the ecosystem. Air


2 | P a g e

pollutants such as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO
2
),
particulates (PM
10
and PM
2.5
), sulphur dioxide (SO
2),
and ozone have
serious impacts on health. Epidemiological evidence supports an
association between exposure to these ambient air pollutants and
various health effects, such as respiratory symptoms or illness (e.g.
asthma), impaired cardiopulmonary function, reduction of lung
function, and premature mortality. In particular, the most serious health
impacts include a significant reduction in life expectancy and premature
death both of which are strongly linked to exposure to PM. Although
exposure to air pollution damages the health of everyone especially
vulnerable people (e.g. elderly people, children, and those with
underlying disease) are at greater risk of being affected by air pollutants.
Uncertainties in the estimates of external costs of air pollution are
endemic, but following the extensive research and subsequent review
process a certain degree of consensus has emerged in the literature as to
the accounting for external effects of air pollution [1].
1.2 Outline of the thesis: In the given thesis we have estimated the
social cost of air pollution due to opencast coal mine. Chapter 1 covers
the major impacts of air pollution due to coal mines in the surrounding
areas. Chapter 2 covers the most widely used methods around the world
for quantification of mortality and morbidity effects. Under chapter 3,
the monetization techniques commonly used are elaborated. In chapter
4, a methodology is provided for the work to be performed. Chapter 5
covers the calculation part. Lastly, chapter 6 contains the result,
discussions and conclusion part.









3 | P a g e

CHAPTER 2
Impact due to coal mines
In India, Coal is considered as an important fossil fuel for generation of
electricity and for other industrial purposes. Its importance in electricity
generation has become more prominent after increase in international price
of crude oil. Therefore, coal mining is now essential part of civilization.
Traditionally, coal mining and coal fired power plants are considered to be
most polluted industry.
Mining of coal releases a number of toxic pollutants in the atmosphere and
water bodies, some of which remain behind as solid waste, and some of
which are released into the atmosphere. These pollutants are responsible for
a large number of illnesses and premature deaths, both to people directly
involved in the industry and the people living in the surrounding areas.
Coal combustion emissions released into the atmosphere contain nitrous
oxides which are responsible for industrial and urban smog, sulfur dioxide
which is the primary reactive agent behind acid rain, mercury which
accumulates in the food chain, and large amounts of carbon dioxide which
is the most important greenhouse gas contributing to climate change. Coal
mining itself also releases significant amounts of methane, another
extremely potent greenhouse gas resulting in global warming.
Coal dust in mines and near storage and transport facilities contributes to
serious respiratory illness such as asthma and pneumoconiosis (black lung).
Solid combustion wastes such as fly ash pollute groundwater near storage
facilities, contaminating individual and community water supplies.
In almost every case of international literature ,the studies and associated
reports on the health effects of exposure to coal dust of respirable particle
size (i.e. PM10 and smaller) relate to coal miners and coal mine sites, either
underground or opencast. In many cases the actual extent of exposure,
usually expressed as time in years but also on occasions as total body
burden of inhaled dust, has been established. In turn, this has been used to
draw conclusions on the dose-response relationship for the onset of adverse
health effects from respirable coal dust exposure.



4 | P a g e

2.1 Impact on public health due to coal mining [1]:
There are a number of negative health effects of coal that occur through its
mining, preparation, combustion, waste storage, and transport.
Reduction in life expectancy (particulates, sulphur dioxide, heavy
metals, benzene, radionuclides, etc.)
Respiratory hospital admissions (particulates, ozone, sulphur
dioxide)
Black lung from coal dust.
Congestive heart failure (particulates and carbon monoxide)
Non-fatal cancer, osteoporosis, ataxia, renal dysfunction (benzene,
radionuclides, heavy metals, etc.)
Chronic bronchitis, asthma attacks, etc. (particulates, ozone)
Loss of IQ from air and water pollution (mercury)
Degradation and soiling of buildings that can effect human health
(sulfur dioxide, acid deposition, particulates)
Global warming (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide)
Ecosystem loss and degradation, with negative effects on health and
quality of life.
2.1.1 Respiratory Effects
Premature death.
Air pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide (NO 2) and fine particulate
matter adversely affect lung development.
Air pollution triggers attacks of asthma, which now affects more
children, who are particularly susceptible to the development of
pollution-related asthma attacks.
Coal pollutants also play a role in the development of chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a lung disease characterized
by permanent narrowing of airways.
Exposures to ozone and PM are also correlated with the development
of and mortality from lung cancer, the leading cancer killer in both
men and women.



5 | P a g e

2.1.2 Cardiovascular Effects
Air pollution is known to negatively impact cardiovascular health.
Pollutants produced by coal combustion can lead to cardiovascular
disease, such as artery blockages leading to heart attacks, and tissue
death and heart damage due to oxygen deprivation.
Nitrogen oxides and PM2.5, along with other pollutants, are
associated with hospital admissions for potentially fatal cardiac
rhythm disturbances according to recent researches.
There are also cardiovascular effects from long-term air pollution
exposure. Exposure to chronic air pollution over many years
increases cardiovascular mortality.
2.1.3 Nervous System Effects
The nervous system is also a target for coal pollutions health effects,
as the same mechanisms thought to mediate the effect of air
pollutants on coronary arteries also apply to the arteries that nourish
the brain. These include stimulation of the inflammatory response
and oxidative stress, which can lead to stroke and other cerebral
vascular disease.
Several studies have shown a correlation between coal-related air
pollutants and stroke.
Coal contains trace amounts of mercury that, when burned, enter the
environment and can act on the nervous system to cause loss of intellectual
capacity. Coal-fired power plants are responsible for approximately one-
third of all mercury emissions attributable to human activity.
Apart from these, there are occupational health effects resulting from
accidents and diseases of persons working in coal mines. Accident causes
immediate impacts while occupational diseases generally occur as a more
or less delayed response following a long term exposure to an external
burden, e.g. airborne pollutants, noise, vibration etc. Exposure to radon and
lung cancer may result in coal miners mortality. Exposure to dust is related
to several different epidemiological measures of lung disease in coal
miners. It may lead to coal workers simple pneumoconiosis (CWSP) and
to its advanced or complicated form of Progressive Massive Fibrosis
(PMF) or to chronic bronchitis as determined from the presence of
respirable symptoms, and to the respiratory symptoms, and to the
respiratory symptoms of breathlessness. Exposure to coalmine dust is also


6 | P a g e

associated with loss of lung function. The accidental injury may be
categorised as fatalities (defined as mortality or permanent
disabilities),major injuries (defined to include major fractures, amputations,
serious eye injuries, some causes of loss of consciousness and any injury
requiring hospital treatments for more than 24 hours) and minor injuries (
defined to include other accidents responsible for the loss of more than
three working days).
2.2 Impact on agriculture due to coal mines:
The air pollutants due to coal mines cause severe damage to the agricultural
land present in the buffer zone and surrounding areas. Most damage arises
due to foliar uptake of pollutants rather than through the deposition to the
soil. Apart from this soil acidification is also caused due to pollutants
which depend on the type of vegetation, soil parent material and climate.
Effects of SO
2
on crops are complicated because they may stimulate or
reduce growth, depending on concentration and the presence of other
pollutants or stresses which creates uncertainty in measurements.
The emissions from the mines are transported and exposed to the crops
according to the wind direction and climate. Sometimes these pollutants
react among themselves in the existing atmosphere to form more complex
pollutants due to persisting conditions (temperature and humidity). These
pollutants interact with the crops either through dry deposition or wet
deposition.
Dry deposition results in several damages in plants like foliar necrosis,
physiological damage, chlorosis, pest performance, leaching, growth
stimulation, climate interactions etc. Wet deposition on the other hand
leads to soil acidification and mobilization of heavy metals and nutrients.
This ultimately results in root damage, leaching from foliage, nutrients loss
from soil, nutritional balance, climate interactions, pest performance etc.
Both dry and wet depositions finally results in yield loss, degradation in
soil quality and appearance etc.





7 | P a g e

2.3 Impacts on forests and natural terrestrial ecosystems due
to coal mines:
Forests play an important part in the economy of the country. In addition to
timber production, it performs a wide range of other functions including
use for recreation, protection from avalanches in mountainous areas, CO
2

uptake and storage, water management and wildlife habitat. The problem of
forest decline due to atmospheric pollution is characterised by a given set
of symptoms, which often affect trees of only one species over a restricted
geographical range. Declines have long term consequences on yield or even
on the existence of a forest or species. The setting up of coal mines results
in loss of timber value and other mentioned values mentioned above. Apart
from that, the pollution generated from respective mine affects the
adjoining forest areas.
The coal fuel cycle imposes a range of burdens on terrestrial ecosystems
like climate change, nitrogen deposition, acidic deposition, change of land
use and other types of disturbances and exposure to heavy metals.
Nutrients and acidic deposition affect natural ecosystems in different ways.
Acidic deposition leads to changes in soil or water chemistry. This in turn
causes depletion of base cations, including several of the elements most
essential for plant growth. Mobility of heavy metals and other potentially
toxic elements such as aluminium tends to increase. Particular attention has
been paid to the involvement of acidic deposition in forest decline and the
reduced species diversity of lichens in areas subject even to very low levels
of SO
2
.
Nitrogen deposition generally increases the productivity of ecosystem. In
habitats where productivity has been limited by low N availability this
typically leads to the displacement of some species by those better able to
utilise high nitrogen levels. A particular problem is the invasion of heather
moorlands by common grasses. Species diversity at affected sites almost
always declines.
The emissions from the mine activity causes damage to the plant species
and alter the food quality in the forests. This results in habitat loss and
altered availability of food for herbivores/decomposers/carnivores. All
these things affect growth, biomass allocation, and survival of


8 | P a g e

species/individuals. This ultimately results in loss of recreational and
existence values and other commercial losses.
2.4 Impacts on building materials due to coal mines:
The impacts for most materials generally fall into three categories i.e.
discoloration, material loss and structural failure. For most materials, the
dry deposition of SO
2
exerts the strongest corrosive effect of atmospheric
pollutants. Wet deposition of pollutants expressed as rain acidity has a
corrosive effect on certain materials, but is generally weaker. The role of
atmospheric NO
2
has not yet been clarified. Although a strong synergistic
effect with SO
2
has been observed in laboratory studies. However ozone
has recently been observed to act synergistically with SO
2
in the field [1].
Ozone is also known to damage some polymeric materials such as paints,
plastic and rubbers [2].
Apart from this, the extraction of coal results in ground subsidence which
causes damage to buildings and the sewer systems. The vibration from the
use of heavy machinery also causes cracks in the window panes and
cement layers. So, damage assessment can be done for utilitarian buildings
(houses, shops, factories, offices, schools etc.), historical buildings and
other structures prone to corrosion due to pollution in the coal mining
areas.
2.5 Impacts of coal mining on ground and surface water:
Mining activity can contaminate aquatic ecosystems from draining and
leaching of refuse piles, and from the contamination of surface water with
pit water. Any acid precipitation percolating through the pile and
subsequently through the soil is buffered by carbonates and silicates. This
process releases a quantity of cations (Fe
2+
, Ca
2+
, Na
2+
, and Mg2
+
) and CO
2
equivalent to the buffered acid. When ferric sulphide is oxidised in the
refuse pile, the pH can decrease further as this process produces sulphuric
acid and can mobilise trace elements.
Once all the buffering capacity is used up in the pile, the underlying soil
will be acidified, leading to the mobilisation of the trace elements. The
transport of the chemicals depends on the underground water flow regime
and on its adsorption and desorption capacity, as well as on the mobility
and persistency of the chemicals. Chloride can be regarded as conservative,
i.e. moving similarly to a water molecule.


9 | P a g e

Similarly, the surface water bodies in the surrounding areas of a mine are
affected when mine water is pumped from the pit. These increase the
ambient concentration of pollutants in the receiving stream which makes
the water unfit for drinking and other uses. Even aquatic ecosystem is also
affected by the same.
2.6 Impact due to noise pollution in coal mining areas:
Each stage of mining activity is associated with some kind of emissions of
sound. The use of heavy earth moving machinery in the opencast mines
aggravates the problem. Noise basically results from the emission of sound,
which is vibration of air (or any other medium) due to perturbation by some
mechanical vibration. Some sound is generated naturally in the
environment, notably by the action of wind, but much is anthropogenic in
origin. The ears of humans and many other animals are sensitive to these
vibrations and therefore can detect sound.
Unwanted anthropogenic sound is generally recognised as a disbenefit. At
very high levels, characteristic of some working environments, it can
impair hearing unless appropriate health and safety measures are
introduced. At lower levels it can interrupt sleep or hinder verbal
communication. In general, unwanted sound affects human amenity.













10 | P a g e

CHAPTER 3
Methods to estimate health impacts
3.1 Intake Fraction Approach:
An intake fraction measures the change in population-weighted ambient
concentrations of a pollutant (e.g. PM
2.5
) per unit of primary pollutant
emitted from a pollution source. For example, if Q= emissions of PM
2.5

from a power plant in grams per second, C
i
is the change in ambient
PM
2.5
in grid cell I resulting from Q, P
i
is the population of the grid cell
and BR is the average breathing rate, then the intake fraction is defined as,
(1) IF= [P
i
C
i
BR]/Q,
Where the sum (1) is taken over all grid cells for which C
i
>0. The IF
corresponding to an air pollution source depends on the distribution of
population around the source, on meteorological conditions, and on
characteristics of the source that affect {Ci/Q} [3].
Once the intake fraction has been estimated for a particular source and
pollutant, it can be used to calculate health impacts. Rearranging equation
(1), the population-weighted average change in ambient concentrations,
P
i
C
i
, is given by
(2) IF*Q/BR= P
i
C
i

Thus, once IF has been calculated and annual emissions (Q) are known
P
i
C
i
can be calculated. In most epidemiological studies of the health
effects of air pollution, the relative risk (RR) of death or illness associated
with a change in pollutant concentration is given by
(3) RR=exp ( P
i
C
i
),
Where is estimated from an epidemiological study. The number of
case (E) of premature mortality or illness associated with P
i
C
i
is
given by
(4) E= (( RR-1)/R)*BaseCases
Implying that (RR-1)/RR) is the fraction of existing cases attributable to
the source [3].


11 | P a g e

3.2 Dose Response Relationships:
A DRR (Dose Response Relationship) is usually a function of a large
number of variables, such as air pollution: nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide,
sulphate aerosol, black smoke, particulates, ozone and ammonia according
to the literature of health impacts of air pollution. In addition to these
variables, the number of WLDs (Work Loss Days) is influenced by other
variables as well such as education and occupation, income, job situation
(employed or not), race, sex, age and habits such as drinking and smoking.
A DRR can be represented by the following formula [4]:
WLD=f (P
1
.P
N
, X
1
XM)
WLD= annual work loss days;
P
i
= air pollutant i;
X
i
= other variables j.
Based on the above formula Netherlands formulated the following health
model for estimating an empirical DRR.
WLD= f (P
1
P6, X1 X4)
WLD= annual work loss days; P
1
=sulphur dioxide;
P
2
=sulphate aerosol; P
3
=black smog;
P
4
=particulates; P
5
= ammonia;
P
6
=ozone; X
1
=unemployment percentage in a region;
X
2
= percentage of labour force in a region receiving a pension under the
Dutch Disablement Insurance Act;
X
3
= population density as an indicator for the urbanization rate of a region;
X
4
= average annual gross income per capita in a region.
The DRR is then estimated by means of two techniques: the ordinary least
squares method (OLS) and the one-way fixed-effects method (OWFEM).
In Jakarta the following model was developed with the help of damage
function approach using dose-response relationships to estimate the health
impacts of air pollution. [5]


12 | P a g e

dH
i
= b
i
*POP
i
*dA
Where: dH
i
= change in population risk of health effect I;
b
i
= slope from the dose-response curve for health impact I;
POP
i
= population at risk of health effect I;
dA = change in ambient air pollutant under consideration.

3.3 Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY):
There are certain measures of population health that combine information
on mortality and non-fatal health outcomes to represent the health of a
particular population as a single number. These may be categorised as
follow [6]-[8]:
Health expectancies.

Health expectancies measure years of life gained or years of improved
quality of life. In this group of measures, among others, following
measures are classified:

Active Life Expectancy (ALE),

Disability-Free Life Expectancy (DFLE),

Disability-Adjusted Life Expectancy (DALE),

Healthy Adjusted Life Expectancy (HALE),

Quality Adjusted Life Expectancy (QALE).

Health gaps.

Health gaps measure lost years of full health in comparison with some
ideal health status or accepted standard. In this group of measures among
others, following measures (indicators) are classified:

Potential Years of Life Lost (PYLL),


13 | P a g e


Healthy Years of Life Lost (HYLL),

Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY),

Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY).

3.3.1 Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY) concept:
DALY can be defined as an indicator of Burden of Disease in a population
from certain externalities. The DALY is a time-based measure that
combines years of life lost due to premature mortality and years of life lost
due to time lived states less than ideal health. One DALY can be thought of
as one lost year of healthy life, and the BoD can be thought of as a
measurement of the gap between current health status and an ideal situation
where everyone lives into old age, free of disease and disability. In other
words, DALYs are the combination (more precisely the sum) of two
dimensions: the present value of future years of lifetime lost through
premature mortality, and the present value of years of future lifetime
adjusted for the average severity (frequency and intensity) of any mental or
physical disability caused by a disease or injury [6].
The DALY measures health gaps as opposed to health expectancies. It
measures the difference between a current situation and an ideal situation
where everyone lives up to the age of the standard life expectancy, and in
perfect health. Based on life tables, the standard life expectancy at birth is
set at 80 years for men and 82.5 for women [7].

The DALY combines in one measure the time lived with disability and the
time lost due to premature mortality:

DALY = YLL + YLD

Where:
YLL = years of life lost due to premature mortality.
YLD = years lived with disability.

The DALY is based on the premise that the best approach for measuring
the burden of disease is to use units of time. Having chosen units of time as


14 | P a g e

the unit of measure, the burden of disease can still be calculated using
incidence or prevalence measures. Time lost due to premature mortality is a
function of the death rate and the duration of life lost due to a death at each
age. Because death rates are incidence rates, there is no obvious alternative
for mortality than to use an incidence perspective. By contrast, for non-fatal
health outcomes, both incidence and prevalence measures have been
routinely used. Thus, it is possible to calculate the number of healthy years
of life lost because of people living in disease states, in terms of prevalent
cases of disease in the population in the year of interest, or in terms of the
incident stream of healthy years of life lost into the future for incident cases
of the disease in the year of interest [8].

3.3.2 The years of life lost dimension

The standard life expectancy for the DALY measure is already mentioned
earlier which is defined as living in a completely healthy state until death at
age around 80 years for males and 82.5 years for females. It is taken from
the country having highest life expectancy in the world i.e. Japan. If we
have to represent it graphically then perfect health is 1 on the y-axis and
death is 0 on the DALY diagram. The ideal life is quantified as the total
area in the box which is a combination of the number of years lived and the
full quality of life without disability [9]-[12].

If a person dies prematurely, the number of years lost is counted up to
the standardised maximum life span. Such a measure of premature death in
number of years lost is known as "years of life lost" (YLL) [12].

Fig.3.1 Graphical presentation of a life in full health for male


15 | P a g e

The calculation of YLL can be understood using the following scenario:
A man dies due to heart attack at 30 years of age. In terms of years of life
lost, 50 years are lost due to this premature death (YLLs = 80-30 years).
This could be illustrated in the following figure:

Fig.3.2 the grey area represents the time lost due to premature death.

On a population basis, the YLL metric essentially corresponds to the
number of deaths multiplied by the standard life expectancy at the age at
which death occurs, and it can be rated according to social preferences. The
basic formula for calculating the YLL for a given cause, age or sex, is:

YLL = N x L

Where:
N = number of deaths
L = standard life expectancy at age of death (in years).


3.3.3 Quantifying time lived with disability

There are at least two ways of measuring the aggregate time lived with a
disability. One method is to take point prevalence measures of disability,
adjusting for seasonal variation if present, and express them as an annual
prevalence. The alternative is to measure the incidence of disabilities and
the average duration of each disability. The product of the incidence and


16 | P a g e

the duration will then provide an estimate of the total time lived with
disability. This is the approach used for the DALY [13].

The disability is measured in length in years and in severity. Severity
weights have been appointed for each disabling condition on a scale from
one to zero. The disability severity weight for each disease reflects the
average degree of disability a person suffers with each condition. Panels of
healthy experts with knowledge about disease conditions have determined
the weights [14].

The severity weight is then multiplied by the average time a person is
suffering from the disability from each disease [9-12]. A measure of years
lived in health states less than ideal health is known as "years lived with
disability" (YLD). The following example will improve our understanding
on YLDs [12].

At the age of 30, a man gets a knee injury and his health is jeopardized with
a weighted severity of 0.1. The injury is incurable and a man suffers until
he dies at the age of 80 years.
In terms of years lost due to disability this mans health is only 0.9 of the
maximum of 1.0 for the entire 50-year period. This could be illustrated in
the following figure. The grey area in Figure represents his life years lost
due to disability, and YLDs corresponds to 5 years (YLDs = 0.150= 5
years).


Fig.3.3 Illustration of life of a man who gets a knee injury at the age of 30.


17 | P a g e

To estimate YLD on a population basis, the number of disability cases is
multiplied by the average duration of the disease and a weight factor that
reflects the severity of the disease on a scale from 0 (perfect health) to 1
(dead). The basic formula (without applying social preferences) for one
disabling event is [13]:

YLD = I x DW x L



Although the disability weights used in DALY calculations quantify
societal preferences for different health states, the weights do not represent
the lived experience of any disability or health state, or imply any societal
value for the person in a disability or health state. Rather, they quantify
societal preferences for health states in relation to the societal ideal of good
health. Thus, a weight for paraplegia of 0.57 does not mean that a person in
this health state is half dead, that they experience their life as halfway
between life and death, or that society values them less as a person
compared to healthy people. It means that, on average, society judges a
year with blindness (weight 0.43) to be preferable to a year with paraplegia
(weight 0.57), and a year with paraplegia to be preferable to a year with
unremitting unipolar major depression (weight 0.76). It also means that, on
average, society would prefer a person to have a year in good health
followed by death, than a year with paraplegia followed by death. Society
would also prefer a person to live three years with paraplegia followed by
death (3 years x 0.57 = 1.7 lost healthy years), than have one year of
good health followed by death (2 lost years of good health) [9].

Following the GBD terminology, and consistent with the WHO
International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), the
term disability is used broadly in BoD analyses to refer to departures
from good or ideal health in any of the important domains of health. These


18 | P a g e

include mobility, self-care, participation in usual activities, pain and
discomfort, anxiety and depression, and cognitive impairment. In some
contexts, health is understood to mean absence of illness, but in the
context of summary measures of population health, health is given a
broader meaning. As well as implying the absence of illness, it also means
that there are no impairments or functional limitations due to previous
illness or injury. Note that disability (i.e. a state other than ideal health)
may be short-term or long-term. For example, a day with a common cold is
a day with disability [14].

3.3.4 Calculation of DALYs with discounting and age weighting

Discounting health with time reflects the social preference of a healthy year
now, rather than in the future. To do this, the value of a year of life is
generally decreased annually by a fixed percentage. For example, with a
3% discount rate, the YLL is [15]:

YLL=N (1-e
-rL
)/r



Similarly, the formula for YLD is:






19 | P a g e






































Table 3.1 Examples of disability weights
a


Disease or sequelae


AIDS 0.50
Infertility 0.18
Diarrhoea disease, episodes 0.11
Measles episode 0.15
Tuberculosis 0.27
Malaria, episodes 0.20
Trachoma, blindness 0.49
Trachoma, low vision 0.24
Lower respiratory tract infection, episodes 0.28
Lower respiratory tract infection, chronic 0.01
sequelae
Cancers, terminal stage 0.81
Diabetes mellitus cases (uncomplicated) 0.03
Unipolar major depression, episodes 0.30
Alcohol dependence syndrome 0.18
Parkinson disease cases 0.32
Alzheimer disease cases 0.64
Post-traumatic stress disorder 0.11
Angina pectoris 0.10
Congestive heart failure 0.17
Chronic obstructive lung disease, 0.39
symptomatic cases
Asthma, cases 0.06
Deafness 0.17
Benign prostatic hypertrophy 0.04
Osteoarthritis, symptomatic hip or knee 0.11
Brain injury, long-term sequelae 0.35
Spinal cord injury 0.73
Sprains 0.06
Burns (>60%) long term 0.25
a
Adapted from Murray & Lopez (1996).



20 | P a g e



Table 3.2 Standard life expectancy table [17]



































Sex Sex Sex
Age Age Age Males Females
0 34 68 15,15 17,90
1 35 69 14,36 17,05
2 36 70 13,58 16,20
3 37 71 12,89 15,42
4 38 72 12,21 14,63
5 39 73 11,53 13,85
6 40 74 10,85 13,06
7 41 75 10,17 12,28
8 42 76 9,62 11,60
9 43 77 9,08 10,93
10 44 78 8,53 10,25
11 45 79 7,99 9,58
12 46 80 7,45 8,90
13 47 81 7,01 8,36
14 48 82 6,56 7,83
15 49 83 6,12 7,29
16 50 84 5,68 6,76
17 51 85 5,24 6,22
18 52 86 4,90 5,83
19 53 87 4,56 5,43
20 54 88 4,22 5,04
21 55 89 3,88 4,64
22 56 90 3,54 4,25
23 57 91 3,30 3,98
24 58 92 3,05 3,71
25 59 93 2,80 3,43
26 60 94 2,56 3,16
27 61 95 2,31 2,89
28 62 96 2,14 2,71
29 63 97 1,97 2,53
30 64 98 1,80 2,36
31 65 99 1,63 2,18
32 66 100 1,46 2,00
33 67



21 | P a g e

CHAPTER 4
Monetization of impacts
4.1 Human Capital Approach:

For the human capital approach, it has based values on avoided lost earnings.
This valuation concept is based on the loss that results from a premature death
for the economy as a whole. It is a concept based on the general society, without
regarding the individual difference in valuing different risks (lower or higher) of
mortality. Using the gross production/consumption as a valuation indicator, the
approach is limited to valuation of material aspects of life only. Overcoming
this shortfall, this indicator is often combined with additional values for
immaterial cost for pain, grief and suffering of the victims and their relatives
[19].
The main advantage of this approach depends on its simple calculation concept,
and also easy data collection. It is easier to understand and handle for the non-
economists than those valuation approaches based on more sophisticated and
complex approaches or utility concepts in economics [19].
Its main disadvantages, however, are very obvious. First of all, when valuing an
increase in security (e.g. a consequence of air pollution level), most people may
consider firstly their own fear/aversion or fear/aversion of their relatives of a
premature death (psychological cost). So, here the maintenance of a certain
level of income/production/consumption does not play a major role. This fact is
not reflected in HCA, since HCA covers mainly the material consequences of a
premature death. Absolutely, HCA assumes that the value of a person is only
represented by its production or consumption [19].
Secondly, for HCA, the valuation of production/consumption loss is based on
the society as a whole and does not reflect the individual point of view.
Therefore, it neglects a basic principle of (welfare-) economic theory, according
to which each valuation of positive or negative impacts has to be based on the
variations in the utility of the concerned individuals [20].
Thirdly, as above mentioned, most Chinese researchers actually assume growth
rate is equal to discount rate when they used HCA, however, this assumption is
a too strong to be available and realistic. If a discount rate must be chosen, this
choice will have major implications in the valuations, especially when the


22 | P a g e

number of years of lost production/consumption is high, and that means the
result is sensitive to the rate used to discount the value of future life-years,
which is usually assumed by the research rather than estimated on the basic of
actual behaviour [20].
The adjusted human capital approach (AHC), which is widely used in China,
represents an important departure from the traditional human capital approach.
Because the use of foregone earnings would assign a value of zero to the lives
of the retired and the disabled, the AHC approach avoids this problem by
assigning the same value-per capita GDP- to a year of life lost by all persons,
regardless of age. For this reason, the adjusted human capital approach can be
viewed as a social statement of the value of avoiding premature mortality [21].
The AHC values a life lost at any age by the present discounted value of per
capita GDP over the remainder of the individuals expected life. In computing
the AHC measure, real per capita GDP is assumed to grow at rate annually
and is discounted to the present at the rate r. AHC, is thus given by following
equation:
AHC= GDP
0
[(1+)
t
/(1+r)
t
]
Where GDP
0
is per capita GDP in the base year and t is remaining life
expectancy. In the base case calculations =7% and r=8 % [21].
4.2 WTP and value of statistical life (VSL)
Generally economists use the method of value of statistical life for monetising
the mortality part of the health damage of pollution for monetising the value of
health damage. VSL represents the loss of value due to the shortening of life.
For valuing morbidity, on the other hand, two alternative approaches are used:

Observed capital approach: This includes techniques that rely on
demand and cost functions, market prices, and observed behaviour
and choices. Household production functions and cost of illness
studies illustrate this approach [22-24]. According to this method, the
cost of illness studies considers the wage or earning loss due to the
loss of working days and the cost of treatment to monetise morbidity.

Constructed market approach: In this method the people are
directly asked about their willingness to pay or accept compensation


23 | P a g e

for certain assumed change in the level of pollution or risk of
morbidity. The contingent valuation method (CVM) is an example of
this method.
While the observed market valuation is based on actual behaviour, it
does not capture the valuation of those aspects of morbidity like
suffering or pain for which there is no market signal. The observed
market often values a part of the totality which we wish to value. For
example, the cost of illness studies cannot capture the cost of
suffering and pain due to illness which cannot be observed in the
market. The constructed market approach as illustrated by the CVM
can avoid this problem only if the questionnaire is precise and
focused on all the relevant issues and also if the respondents reveal
their true preferences and be realistic while structuring their
preferences. As a consequence of all these difficulties, the valuation
of health damage cost has often been found to be unreliable and
uncertain as arrived at in either approach. It is, in fact, difficult to
give a point estimate of the damage cost with reliability. It is
therefore often a range of interval estimates of such valuation that are
given assuming different scenarios of values for the uncertain factors
relating to the environmental parameters of exposure or ambient
concentration effect or to the ones relating to the epidemiological
impact or to the monetisation of damage [25, 26].

Comparing with HCA, the main advantage of WTP approach relies in its
foundation on the individual viewpoint of concerned population. It attempts to
estimate the demand (WTP) for an improved environmental quality. Actually it
is only measured by how much the concerned individuals are READY to pay
(probably not a true payment) in order to improve their own security. Then
doing statistical amounts of all concerned individuals results in a value that a
group of concerned individuals attributes to the improvement in security or the
reduction environmental impacts [19].
However, this approach requires a high quality for those researchers who use
CVM to elicit the peoples WTP. Researchers must be professional in
economics theory and method and skilled in designing questionnaires and
experimental in a real survey. Unbelievable, any one engineer or scientist can
do best this work [19].


24 | P a g e

In Sommer et al. (1999) Opinion, the main difficult of the WTP approach
consists of obtaining reliable and correct empirical estimations. A multitude of
empirical assessment conducted so far for the VSL has provided a very large
range. It also appears that according to the questions and the starting values
designed, a direct interview with the individual persons (CVM) may lead to
unrealistic and biased results.
In addition, besides starting-point bias, strategic bias and hypothetical bias,
there are other kind biases due to (1) a payment amount is not realizable, since
respondents give a lower or higher amount; (2) a question mode is not liked by
respondents, so they give a confuse answer [27].
4.2.1 Example of CVM questionnaire:
(a) Consider the following two areas in which your village could be
located. Which do you prefer, taking into account the differences in the
life years lost and the differences in your cash income? Remember that
all other aspects of the two areas are the same and similar to the current
area in which you live.
If area2 is chosen initially then tick the symbol (+) in the box. Change the
amount of money in area2 and ask the interviewee to reconsider.


Area1 Area2
You have a cash income of RS20,000
per month
You have a cash income of RS.18400
per month
There is a risk of 40 life years lost in
the area
There is a risk of 20 life years lost in
the area
You have same amounts of your own
products to consume as in your own
village
You have same amounts of your own
products to consume as in your own village



25 | P a g e


(b). Ask: What value of cash income would make Area One and Area Two
equally desirable for you given the difference in the life years lost from mine
pollution? (Please Specify :-). Go to the end of this question.
Carrying out this survey on a greater mass of people, we will get the average
value of DALY according to the residents in the mine area.

4.3 Transfer WTP approach
Some researchers would like to transfer an estimate of WTP from other
countries and correct it using ratio of GDP per capita. Indeed, in most
developing countries researchers have to transfer an estimate of WTP from
developed countries, which usually were corrected for ratio of GDP per capita
or for other economic indicators. It is a common knowledge that there are many
differences between two countries, especially between a developing country and
a developed country. Some of differences may be corrected for some ratios,
such as GDP per capita and income per capita. But some of differences may not
be corrected directly by using quantitative method, such as cultural background
and education background, payment custom and consumer behaviour,
understanding security and danger, life value sense, society open level, etc. [28]
[29]



26 | P a g e

CHAPTER 5
METHODOLOGY

The basic methodology for estimation of health damage cost due to air pollution
in opencast coal mines involves the following steps:
Estimation of emissions inventories of various pollutants from various
activities and inventories in opencast coal mines.
Estimation of the relationship between rates of pollutants from exhausts
and the air qualities as given by the ambient concentration of pollutants at
the receptors locations where these are being monitored by the
regulatory authority.
Assessment of the physical impact of the exposure of the different
pollutants on human health in terms of morbidity and mortality (generally
through dose response curves and then quantifying it using DALY
approach)
Monetisation of health damage after proper quantification with the
methods mentioned before.
But here we have to estimate the future costs of air pollution due to a proposed
mine. So we do not have the option to evaluate the cost of damage since we are
not aware how the mine will affect the surrounding environment. So here we
have adopted the methodology for the evaluation of social cost of air pollution
due to a proposed opencast coal mine.

Methodology adopted:
Step 1: Collection of air quality data and the estimates of its health
impacts for major polluted cities in India were done.
Step 2: Formulating of exposure response curves from the given data was
done.
Step 3: Collection of air pollutants dispersion data in ambient atmosphere
for mine area through air dispersion modeling and population data were
done.
Step 4: Deducing of the estimate cases from the previously made
exposure response curves extrapolated for the mine area was done.
Step 5: Calculation of DALYs for the respective cases.
Step 6: Monetization of the total DALYs calculated.


27 | P a g e

5.1 Collection of air quality data and the estimates of its health impacts
for major polluted cities in India.

There is a paucity of data regarding morbidity and mortality impacts due to
pollution in coal mines in our country. So here we extrapolated the estimates of
mortality and morbidity from 15 most polluted cities in the country assuming
the similar demographic profile and sensitive population as in the mine area.

The data was collected from a study using more detailed air monitoring data
collected by NEERI and Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB).The impact of
indoor air pollution from the residential use of biofuels was not considered even
though it is potentially a large public health factor in both urban and rural areas.
The health impacts of air pollutants are most easily estimated through the use of
dose-response functions drawn from epidemiological studies done around the
world. Similar reviews from the World Bank studies were used for estimating
health impacts in India .By using dose-response functions estimated in the cities
in more developed countries, the estimates derived in the study are likely to be
conservative: given the lower standard of living, nutrition, and health in
developing countries, there is a higher percent of the population in the marginal
health that would be more susceptible to negative health impacts from air
pollution [30].

Here we were having the data for the cities- Agra, Ahmedabad, Bangalore,
Bhilai, Bhopal, Bombay, Kolkata, Dhanbad, Delhi, Jaipur, Kanpur, Jamshedpur,
Mysore, Varanasi and Nagpur. The corresponding estimates for premature
mortality, hospital admissions and sickness requiring medical treatment and
cases for incidence of minor sickness were available.













28 | P a g e

Table 5.1.Estimated data for premature mortality [30]




































S.No. City Population Premature
mortality
TSP and
RSPM/ PM10
Mortality/
population
1 Agra 8,91,790 1569 451.93 0.175
2 Ahmedabad 46,31,200 2979 146.94 0.064
3 Bangalore 57,01,446 254 90.83 0.004
4 Bhilai 6,85,474 464 226.46 0.067
5 Bhopal 50,32,450 663 214.92 0.013
6 Bombay 99,25,891 4477 100.81 0.045
7 Calcutta 43,99,819 5726 120.33 0.130
8 Dhanbad 19,49,526 995 364.64 0.051
9 Delhi 94,20,644 7491 229.73 0.079
10 Jaipur 38,88,000 1145 142.3 0.029
11 Kanpur 18,74,409 1894 153.97 0.101
12 Jamshedpur 4,60,577 118 106.5 0.025
13 Mysore 22,81,653 72 105.1 0.003
14 Varanasi 9,29,270 1851 489.23 0.199
15 Nagpur 90,21,129 506 92 0.005




29 | P a g e

Table 5.2 Estimated data for incidence of minor sickness [30]




































S.No. City Population PM level Cases Cases/population
1 Agra 891790 451.93 40794073 45.744
2 Ahmedabad 4631200 146.94 72177644 15.585
3 Bangalore 5701446 90.83 8326282 1.460
4 Bhilai 685474 226.46 11917298 17.385
5 Bhopal 5032450 214.92 17024691 3.382
6 Bombay 9925891 100.81 156452916 15.762
7 Calcutta 4399819 120.33 179479908 40.792
8 Dhanbad 1949526 364.64 26864178 13.779
9 Delhi 9420644 229.73 241958219 25.683
10 Jaipur 3888000 142.3 31708958 8.155
11 Kanpur 1874409 153.97 49247224 26.273
12 Jamshedpur 460577 106.5 3172627 6.888
13 Mysore 2281653 105.1 2376599 1.041
14 Varanasi 929270 489.23 48125143 51.788
15 Nagpur 9021129 92 17681765 1.960



30 | P a g e

Table 5.3 Estimated data for hospital admissions and sickness requiring
medical treatment [30]
























5.2 Formulating exposure response curves from the given data.
From the data collected in step 1, we formulated an exposure response
curve for the morbidity and mortality due to air pollution for Indian
scenario. The population data for the cities was collected for the given
year [31].
For the type of estimates the ratio of cases v/s population was found out.
Using this ratio and the estimate cases, best fit exposure-response curves
were made using Microsoft Excel. Here we had formulated three dose
response curves for various estimates.
Equation for fig.5.1 is given as:
Y= (ATAN ((X-250)*0.008)-ATAN (-2)))*0.09)

S.No. City Population PM level Cases Cases/population
1 Agra 891790 451.93 665769 45.744
2 Ahmedabad 4631200 146.94 1183033 15.585
3 Bangalore 5701446 90.83 135887 1.460
4 Bhilai 685474 226.46 194493 17.385
5 Bhopal 5032450 214.92 277847 3.382
6 Bombay 9925891 100.81 2579210 15.762
7 Calcutta 4399819 120.33 3022786 40.792
8 Dhanbad 1949526 364.64 421663 13.779
9 Delhi 9420644 229.73 3990012 25.683
10 Jaipur 3888000 142.3 520947 8.155
11 Kanpur 1874409 153.97 812381 26.273
12 Jamshedpur 460577 106.5 51778 6.888
13 Mysore 2281653 105.1 38787 1.041
14 Varanasi 929270 489.23 785414 51.788
15 Nagpur 9021129 92 290710 1.960



31 | P a g e

Equation for fig.5.2 is given as:
Y= (ATAN ((X-150)*0.013) +1.09)*0.35)
Equation for fig.5.3 is given as:
Y= (ATAN ((X-110)*0.035) +1.32)*18)




Fig.5.1 Exposure response for premature mortality cases






Fig.5.2 Exposure response for incidence of minor sickness cases
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Series2
PM Concentration
R
a
t
i
o
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Series2
PM Concentration
R
a
t
i
o


32 | P a g e




Fig.5.3 Exposure response for hospital admissions and sickness requiring
medical treatment




5.3 Collection of air pollutants dispersion data in ambient atmosphere for
mine area through air dispersion modeling and population data.

Case Study:
Mine A was a proposed coal mine in some hilly and undulating terrain of India
(fig.9) .The drainage pattern of the core zone was dendritic. PM 10 was present
between 11 to 55 g/m
3
.The concentrations of SO
2
and NO
x
were considerably
low compared to the 80 g/m
3
NAAQS limit for residential, rural and other
areas.

Air modelling data of the locations around the proposed mine area was
made available to us from the environmental impact assessment report.
We were having the population data of all the locations along with the
concentration of particulates before mining and after mining conditions. So, the
Step 3 of the methodology that we have adopted here was satisfied.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Series2
PM Concentration
R
a
t
i
o


33 | P a g e


Village
Fig.5.4 Topography of Mine A



5.4 Deducing the estimate cases from the previously made exposure
response curves extrapolated for the mine area.

Now from the dose response curves formulated in step 2, the estimate cases of
premature mortality and morbidity along with hospital admissions were derived
for the villages in the Mine A. For every change in PM concentration, the
corresponding ratio would come for the villages through which the estimate
cases were generated by multiplying the given population for each village. The
total cases were generated for each kind by summation of cases of all villages
generated before as shown in tables A1, A2 and A3.





34 | P a g e

5.5 Calculation of DALYs for the respective cases.
We got the total cases of mortality and morbidity from previous step.
Now using table 6.we calculated the total DALYs lost [32].
The mortality cases include mortality of adults and mortality of children
under age 5. The cases were divided according to the ratio of both types
of mortality given in the table 6.Then DALYs lost for total cases of
mortality were calculated.
The hospital admissions include emergency room visits and chronic
bronchitis is the disease requiring medical treatment. Total DALYs lost
were calculated similar to the last step.
The Incidence of minor sickness include restricted activity days, lower
respiratory illness in children and respiratory symptoms (adults) and
hence DALYs lost were calculated.
Total DALYs lost were calculated by summation of all the DALYs lost in
different cases.

5.6 Monetization of the total DALYs calculated.
Now since no concrete WTP and HCA studies were available for the
country so we had extrapolated the cost of DALY in US to Indian
scenario.
The cost of DALY (in $) is 2,510 for lower bound HCA and 18,310 for
upper bound WTP method in 2006 [33].
PPP conversion factor was then multiplied to the given DALY cost to
convert it in rupees. The PPP conversion factor is 11.41 for India.
Purchasing power parity (PPP) is a component of some economic
theories and is a technique used to determine the relative value of
different currencies. The concept of purchasing power parity allows one
to estimate what the exchange rate between two currencies would have to
be in order for the exchange to be at par with the purchasing power of the
two countries' currencies. Using that PPP rate for hypothetical currency
conversions, a given amount of one currency thus has the same
purchasing power whether used directly to purchase a market basket of
goods or used to convert at the PPP rate to the other currency and then
purchase the market basket using that currency [34, 35].
The indexation factor was calculated for the current scenario. The
indexation of currency or exchange rate often refers to a country pegging


35 | P a g e

its currency to the US dollar. The ratio of cost inflation index in 2006-07
to 2013-14 is calculated as indexation factor [36-38].
The total cost was then calculated as = indexation factor total DALYs
lost DALY cost (in rupees).



























36 | P a g e

CHAPTER 6
Calculations:
Table 6.1 DALYs for different health end points [32]
Health Effect DALYs lost per 10,000 cases
Mortality adults 75,000
Mortality children under 5 340,000
Chronic Bronchitis (adults) 22,000
Respiratory hospital admissions 160
Emergency Room visits 45
Restricted activity days (adults) 3
Lower respiratory illness in children 65
Respiratory symptoms (adults) 0.75
Note: DALYs are calculated using discount rate of 3% and full age weighting
based on WHO table
6.1 Premature Mortality:
Total cases of premature mortality =45
Mortality adults: mortality children under 5= 75000:340000
Therefore,
Mortality adults cases= (45*75000)/ (75000+340000) = 8 (approx.)
Mortality children under 5= (45*340000)/ (75000+340000) = 37 (approx.)
Corresponding DALYs = ((75000)*8/10000) + (340000*37/10000) = (60 +
1258) = 1318 DALYs lost
6.2 Hospital admissions and sickness requiring medical treatment:
Total hospital admissions and emergency room visits and sickness requiring
medical treatment =170
Respiratory hospital admissions = (170* 160)/ (160+45+22000) = 1 (approx.)
Emergency Room Visits = (170* 45)/ (160+45+22000) = 1(approx.)
Chronic Bronchitis = (170*22000)/ (160+45+22000) = 168 (approx.)
Corresponding DALYs =


37 | P a g e

(1* 160)+ (1*45) + (168*22000)/10000 = (3696000+160+45)/10000= 369.6
6.3 Incidence of minor sickness:
Total incidence cases =9975
Restricted activity days (adults) = (3*9975)/ (3+65+0.75)
Lower respiratory illness in children = (65*9975)/ (3+65+0.75)
Respiratory symptoms (adults) = (0.75*9975)/(3+65+0.75)
Corresponding DALYs =
(3*435) + (65*9431) + (0.75*109)/10000= (1305+613015+81.75)/10000=61.4
Total DALYs lost =1318 + 369.6 + 61.4 = 1749
6.4 Monetization of impacts:
PPP conversion factor in 2006 = 11.41
Cost inflation index 2006-07 = 519
Cost inflation index 2013-14 = 939
Indexation factor = 939/519 = 1.8
Total cost = 1.8*1749*DALY cost











38 | P a g e

CHAPTER 7
Result, Discussion and Conclusion
7.1 Result:
Table 7.1:
DALY cost Cost/DALY in $ Cost in
Rs.(11.41*cost)
Annual Total
cost (Rs.)
Lower bound
HCA
2510 28639.1 90161614.6
Upper bound WTP 18310 208917.1 657712814.2

7.2 Assumptions:
Here we have assumed that major impacts are from particulates ignoring
SO
2
, NO
2
and other pollutants. Since the area that we have considered in
the case study have concentration levels of other pollutants under
controlled levels according to the standards of World Health
Organization. So all the mortality and morbidity effects considered are
due to increase in particulate concentration level.
Exposure response applicable for major polluted cities will also be
applicable for mine area. The data we pooled here is for urban areas in
the country. We have assumed the demographic profile and sensitive
population exposed to be the same for the given mine area.
The impacts of other sources of air pollution are considered to be
negligible with respect to air pollution generating through mines. There
may be several other sources like indoor air pollution due to burning fuel,
transport etc. But all these are assumed to be not having significant
impact on the people.
7.3 Knowledge Gaps:
Availability and quality of emissions data: The data collected was not
sufficient enough for us to go for more certain estimates. Several
uncertainties were associated with the data regarding its availability and
quality for the given study.


39 | P a g e

Synergistic effects of several pollutants: We had only considered the
direct effects of particulate air pollution in our study. There was a gap
regarding the combined effects of pollutants regarding mortality and
morbidity.
Paucity of survey data in the country: The survey data in developing
countries like India is not available in sufficient amounts. Therefore we
have to extrapolate the data generated in developed countries to carry on
our studies.

7.4 Conclusion:
Thus, in the given thesis we had provided an estimate of the range of cost to the
society in future impacted by the proposed opencast coal mine. The lower
bound was set for HCA method since it provides the cost for the materialistic
aspect and other intangible costs are not included in it. On the other hand, the
upper bound cost was calculated keeping in mind all the tangible and non-
tangible losses due to air pollution in the mine area. The overall work was done
to check the profitability of the mine development for the people in the mine
area and surrounding areas.

7.5 Future Suggestions:
Instead of extrapolating data from developed countries we can have our
own data using survey methods.
Further research for exposure response relationships can be done.
Monetization of other impacts apart from health impacts can be done.
Impacts of other sorts of pollution must be brought into account.
We can use DALY calculator from R statistical tool for calculating
DALYs. It requires a thorough survey and more reliable data for more
robust calculation [19].







40 | P a g e

Appendix

Table A. Air quality data for Mine A
S. No.

Locations population
Increment in
PM (g)
before
mining
(g)
After
mining
(g)
1. V1 385 2 12 14
2. V2 658 5 20 25
3. V3 552 5 23 28
4. V4 1417 5 28 33
5. V5 420 10 45 55
6. V6 2003 10 55 65
7. V7 1211 3 20 23
8. V8 611 10 50 60
9. V9 396 2 23 25
10. V10 1496 2 45 47
11. V11 309 2 18 20
12. V12 544 2 16 18
13. V13 772 1 14 15
14. V14 333 1 11 12
15. V15 1943 4 40 44
16. V16 654 4 32 36
17. V17 592 1 35 36
18. V18 912 1 34 35
19. V19 556 1 33 34
20. V20 796 1 36 37
21. V21 459 1 32 33
22. V22 639 1 30 31
23. V23 1363 2 45 47
24. V24 643 1 23 24
25. V25 576 1 22 23
26. V26 2121 1 21 22
27. V27 1377 1 26 27
28. V28 421 1 27 28
29. V29 1113 4 39 43
30. V30 659 1 21 22
31. V31 1502 1 34 35
32. V32 1990 1 36 37


41 | P a g e

33. V33 1223 1 37 38
34. V34 944 2 25 27
35. V35 648 1 19 20
36. V36 1308 1 28 29
37. V37 325 1 22 23
38. V38 628 1 24 25
39. V39 1485 1 27 28
40. V40 924 1 21 22
41. V41 955 4 48 52
42. V42 278 1 23 24
43. V43 1295 1 47 48
44. V44 1088 1 43 44
TOTAL 40524




































42 | P a g e

Table A1. Deduced mortality cases for Mine A

S.No.
cases before mining cases after mining
Premature mortality due to
mining
1. 0.691755 0.812414 0.120659 1
2. 2.023827 2.573162 0.549335 1
3. 1.972434 2.44274 0.470305 1
4. 6.270583 7.519877 1.249294 2
5. 3.171973 4.02165 0.849677 1
6. 19.17944 23.53715 4.35771 5
7. 3.724703 4.327207 0.602504 1
8. 5.221394 6.50298 1.281586 2
9. 1.415007 1.54859 0.133583 1
10. 11.29827 11.88631 0.588047 1
11. 0.849617 0.950399 0.100782 1
12. 1.320691 1.495765 0.175074 1
13. 1.629048 1.751226 0.122178 1
14. 0.546656 0.598323 0.051667 0
15. 12.81152 14.29633 1.484808 2
16. 3.353799 3.826355 0.472556 1
17. 3.355556 3.463612 0.108055 1
18. 5.00406 5.169371 0.16531 1
19. 2.950636 3.050721 0.100085 1
20. 4.657154 4.80346 0.146307 1
21. 2.353813 2.435867 0.082054 0
22. 3.050763 3.163431 0.112667 1
23. 10.29381 10.82957 0.535767 1
24. 2.2976 2.405684 0.108084 1
25. 1.962023 2.058192 0.096169 0
26. 6.872998 7.224741 0.351743 1
27. 5.619496 5.855726 0.23623 1
28. 1.790313 1.863031 0.072719 0
29. 7.129855 7.97441 0.844555 1
30. 2.135458 2.244745 0.109288 1
31. 8.241336 8.513591 0.272255 1
32. 11.64288 12.00865 0.365766 1
33. 7.380191 7.606556 0.226366 1
34. 3.691588 4.014383 0.322795 1


43 | P a g e

35. 1.887041 1.99307 0.106029 1
36. 5.788231 6.01571 0.22748 1
37. 1.107044 1.161307 0.054262 0
38. 2.349564 2.455845 0.10628 1
39. 6.314998 6.5715 0.256502 1
40. 2.994177 3.147412 0.153235 1
41. 7.777568 8.550187 0.772619 1
42. 0.993364 1.040094 0.04673 0
43. 10.28929 10.54654 0.257257 1
44. 7.79529 8.005357 0.210067 1



Total=
45




































44 | P a g e

Table A2.Deduced morbidity cases for Mine A (a)
S.No. cases before
mining
cases after
mining
hospital admissions and sickness requiring
medical treatment due to mining
1. 3.735389 4.575185 0.839796 1
2. 12.32329 16.31875 3.995462 4
3. 12.32598 15.79612 3.470139 4
4. 40.5491 49.99516 9.446061 10
5. 22.26696 29.37668 7.109716 8
6. 140.0988 178.6008 38.50206 39
7. 22.68009 27.04124 4.361145 5
8. 37.40222 48.42002 11.01781 11
9. 8.842551 9.82101 0.978458 1
10. 79.3128 84.12698 4.814177 5
11. 5.066093 5.787075 0.720982 1
12. 7.678037 8.918948 1.240911 2
13. 9.174138 10.03027 0.856136 1
14. 2.873672 3.230869 0.357197 1
15. 88.03938 99.9426 11.90322 12
16. 22.18195 25.81788 3.635927 4
17. 22.53265 23.37031 0.837664 1
18. 33.43741 34.71246 1.275043 2
19. 19.61701 20.38509 0.768076 1
20. 31.42359 32.56357 1.139979 2
21. 15.56807 16.19462 0.626554 1
22. 19.95945 20.81124 0.851791 1
23. 72.2616 76.64778 4.386179 5
24. 14.35798 15.14777 0.789787 1
25. 12.16251 12.86189 0.699387 1
26. 42.23994 44.78589 2.545955 3
27. 35.88132 37.63259 1.75127 2
28. 11.50568 12.0474 0.541723 1
29. 48.77815 55.51348 6.735333 7
30. 13.12405 13.91509 0.791034 1
31. 55.06907 57.16898 2.099907 2
32. 78.55899 81.40893 2.849948 3
33. 50.03172 51.80453 1.772813 2
34. 23.4117 25.79896 2.387258 3
35. 11.37573 12.136 0.760272 1
36. 37.42994 39.13287 1.702933 2


45 | P a g e

37. 6.862525 7.257144 0.39462 1
38. 14.7944 15.57473 0.780334 1
39. 40.58417 42.495 1.910829 2
40. 18.40156 19.51069 1.109129 2
41. 55.26961 61.73177 6.462157 7
42. 6.20765 6.549113 0.341463 1
43. 72.82382 74.94675 2.122925 3
44. 54.26655 55.96374 1.697192 2


Total 170








































46 | P a g e

Table A3. Deduced morbidity cases for Mine A (b)
S.No. cases before
mining
cases after
mining
incidence cases of minor sicknesses due to
mining
1. 227.8988 266.6295 38.73075 39
2. 670.384 870.2156 199.8316 200
3. 660.8851 839.403 178.5179 179
4. 2154.772 2665.72 510.9481 511
5. 1234.867 1726.054 491.1864 492
6. 8231.632 11353.59 3121.958 3122
7. 1233.792 1449.876 216.0847 216
8. 2129.464 2951.311 821.8465 822
9. 474.1132 523.7164 49.60316 50
10. 4398.479 4711.77 313.2908 314
11. 279.8757 314.8156 34.93986 35
12. 433.6056 492.7262 59.12054 60
13. 534.6441 574.6013 39.95717 40
14. 180.8359 197.1176 16.28175 17
15. 4781.907 5517.043 735.1361 736
16. 1181.032 1385.217 204.1849 205
17. 1206.074 1253.897 47.82273 48
18. 1786.029 1858.006 71.97699 72
19. 1045.971 1088.851 42.88049 43
20. 1685.983 1751.815 65.83259 66
21. 828.8896 863.4901 34.60048 35
22. 1060.802 1106.852 46.04986 46
23. 4007.438 4292.876 285.4381 286
24. 769.8353 809.6849 39.84953 40
25. 654.6551 689.6192 34.96412 35
26. 2284.503 2410.631 126.128 127
27. 1910.112 2001.038 90.92688 91
28. 611.7917 640.1969 28.40514 29
29. 2640.276 3051.033 410.7563 411
30. 709.8008 748.9891 39.18828 40
31. 2941.465 3060.006 118.5411 119
32. 4214.957 4379.539 164.5815 165
33. 2691.546 2795.125 103.5792 104
34. 1248.455 1371.808 123.3533 124
35. 623.1933 660.1958 37.00244 37
36. 1989.02 2079.212 90.19214 91


47 | P a g e

37. 369.38 389.1081 19.72802 20
38. 790.7964 830.5401 39.74368 40
39. 2157.983 2258.177 100.1939 101
40. 995.229 1050.176 54.94685 55
41. 3111.851 3556.998 445.1466 446
42. 332.837 350.0659 17.22888 18
43. 4078.705 4219.735 141.0305 141
44. 2982.501 3089.317 106.816 107


Total 9975


































48 | P a g e

References:
1. Pervin, T., Gerdtham, U. and Lyttkens, C.H. (May 30, 2007).Societal
costs of air pollution-related health hazards: A review of methods and
results. Retrieved September 11,2008 from
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)

2. Kucera, V., Henriksen, J., Leygraf, C., Coote, A.T., Knotkova, D. and
Stockle, B. (1993a). Materials Damage Caused by Acidifying Air
Pollutants- 4 Year Results from an International Exposure Programme
within UNECE. International Corrosion Congress, Houton, September
1993.

3. Lee, D.S., Holland, M.R. and Falla, N. An Assessment of the Potential
Damage to Materials in the UK from Tropospheric Ozone. Report no.
AEA/CS/18358021/001, submitted to the Department of the
Environment, London.(1994)

4. Cropper, M., Gamkhar, S., Malik, K., Limonov, A. and Patridge, I. Air
pollution control in India: Getting the prices right. (January3, 2012).
5. Zuidema, T. and Nentjes, A. (July 8, 1996). Health Damage of Air
Pollution: An estimate of a Dose-Response Relationship for the
Netherlands. Environment and Resource Economics, 1997.

6. Ostro, B. Estimating the Health and Economic Effects of Particulate
Matter in Jakarta: A preliminary Assessment, paper presented at the
Fourth Annual Meeting of the International Society for Environmental
Epidemiology, 26-29 August. Cuernavaca, Mexico (1992).

7. Murray, C.J.L. and Lopez, A.D. Assessing health needs: the Global
Burden of Disease Study. In: Detels, R., McEwen, J., Beaglehole, R.,
Tanaka, H., editors. Oxford Textbook of Public Health - Fourth edition.
New York: Oxford University Press Inc. P.243-54 (2004).

8. Jankovic, S. Summary measures of population health and their relevance
for health policy. In: Galan, A. and Scintee, G., editors. Public Health
Strategies. A handbook for teachers, researchers, health professionals
and decision makers. Lage: Hans Jacobs Publishing Company; 2005.


49 | P a g e

P.190-207. Available from URL: http://www.snz.hr/ph-
see/publications.htm. Accessed: August 14, 2009.

9. Atanackovic-Markovic, Z., Bjegovic, V., Jankovic, S., et al. The burden
of disease and injury in Serbia. Serbian Burden of Disease Study- an EU
funded project managed by the European Agency for Reconstruction
Belgrade: Ministry of Health of the Republic of Serbia.(2003)
10. Arnesen, T.M. and Norheim, O.F. Disability Adjusted Life Years
possibilities and problems. National Institute of Public Health, Oslo,
Norway. Available from URL:
http://iier.isciii.es/supercourse/lecture/lec2911/index.htm Accessed:
April 8, 2009.

11. World Health Organization. About the Global Burden of Disease (GBD)
project [homepage on the Internet]. Available from URL:
http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/about/en/index.ht
m . Accessed: August 14, 2009.

12. Mathers, C.D., Lopez, A.D., Murray, C.J.L. The burden of disease and
mortality by condition: data, methods and results for 2001. In: Lopez
AD, Mathers CD, Ezzati M, Murray CJL, Jamison DT, eds. Global
burden of disease and risk factors. New York, Oxford University Press;
2006. P.45-240. Available from URL: http://www.dcp2.org/pubs/GBD.
Accessed: August 26, 2009.

13. Lindstrand, A., Bergstrom, S., Rosling, H., Rubenson, B., Stenson, B. and
Tylleskar, T. Global health - an introductory textbook. Copenhagen:
Narayana Press(2008)
14. World Health Organization. Global Burden of Disease 2004 Update.
Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004. Available from
URL:http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/GBD_report
_2004update_full.pdf. Accessed: August 14, 2009
15. World Health Organization. Global burden of disease study. Study
overview. Available from URL:
http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/GBD_2005_stu
dy/en/index.html Accessed: April 16, 2009.



50 | P a g e

16. World Health Organization. About the Global Burden of Disease (GBD)
project [homepage on the Internet]. Available from URL:
http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/about/en/index.htm
l. Accessed: August 14, 2009.

17. Murray, C.J.L., Lopez, A.D., editors. The Global Burden of Disease: a
comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases,
injuries, and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2030. Global Burden of
Disease and Injury Series, Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press (1996).
18. World Health Organization. National tools. National burden of disease
supplementary files. Standard life table. Available from URL:
http://www.who.int/healthinfo/bodreferencestandardlifetable.xls.
Accessed: August 26, 2009.

19. Brecht, D., Scott, M., Juanita, H., Nicolas, P., Arie H. and Niko S.
DALY: The DALY Calculator- A GUI for stochastic DALY calculation
in R.R package version 1.2.0. http://cran.r-project.org/package=DALY
(2013).

20. Zhang, X. Valuing mortality risk reduction using the contingent valuation
methods: evidence from a survey of Beijing Residents in 1999. Beijing:
Centre of Environment and Development, Chinese Academy of Social
Sciences.(2002)

21. Sommer, H., Seethaler, R., Chanel, O., Herry, M., Masson, S. and
Vergnaud, J.C. Economic Evaluation: Technical Report on Economy at
Health Cost due to Road Traffic-related Air Pollution: An impact
assessment project of Austria, France and Switzerland (Prepared for the
WHO Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health, London, June
1999), WHO Regional Office for Europe(1999).
22. The World Bank (2007). Cost of pollution in China: Economic estimates
of physical damages (Con. ed.). Beijing, China: State Environmental
Protection Administration, P.R. China. Available from URL:
www.worldbank.org/eapenvironment.



51 | P a g e

23. Moore, M.J. and Viscusi, W.K. The Quality- Adjusted Value of Life.
Economic Inquiry, 26(3); 369-388(1988).

24. Viscusi, W.K. Product and Occupational Liability. Journal of Economics
Perspectives, 5(3); 71-91(1991).

25. Krupnick, A. and Maureen, C. The Effects of Information on Health Risk
Valuation. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol5; 29-48 (1992).

26. Krupnick, A. and Kopp, R.J. The Health and Agricultural Benefits of
Reductions in Ambient Ozone in the United States. US Congress: Office
of Technology Assessment (1988).

27. Delucchi, M.A. and McCubbin, D. The Health Cost of Motor-Vehicle-
Related Air Pollution. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 33(3)
(1988).

28. Mitchell, R. C., and Carson, R. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods:
The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the
Future.(1989)

29. The World Bank. Clear Water, Blue Skies: Chinas Environment in the
21
st
Century. China and Mongolia Department, East Asia and Pacific
Region, Report No. 16481-CHA (1997).

30. ECON Centre for Economic Analysis. Report: An Environmental Cost
Model. ECON-report no. 16/2000, project no. 32850. Norway (2000)

31. Brandon C. and Hommann K. The cost of Inaction: Valuing the
Economy-Wide Cost of Environmental Degradation in India. UNU/IAS
Working Paper No. 9 (1996).

32. http://www.geohive.com/cntry/india.aspx

33. Mani, M., Markandya, A., Sagar, A. and Strukova, E. An Analysis of
Physical and Monetary Losses of Environmental Health and Natural
Resources in India. Policy Research Working Paper, 6219 (2012).


52 | P a g e


34. Croitoru, L. and Sarraf, M. The Cost of Environmental Degradation- Case
Studies from the Middle East and North Africa. The International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development/ the World Bank (2010)

35. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity)

36. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PPP?page=1

37. http://cadiary.org/cost-inflation-index-capital-gain/

38. http://asa-india.com/COST%20INFLATION%20INDEX.htm

39. http://www.nriinformation.com/nri_guide/calculate_capital_gain.htm