Current Search:  area sources (x)

View All Items

  • CSV Spreadsheet
(1 - 2 of 2)
2008 EMISSIONS INVENTORY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
Title
2008 EMISSIONS INVENTORY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA.
Creator
Ross, Jessica, Cooper, Dr. C. David, University of Central Florida
Abstract / Description
An emissions inventory of VOCs, NOx, and CO2 was conducted for three central Florida counties – Orange, Seminole, and Osceola (OSO) – for calendar year 2008. The inventory utilized three programs: MOBILE6, NONROAD2005, and EDMS (Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System) to model on-road mobile, non-road mobile, and airport emissions, respectively. Remaining point and area source data was estimated from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the U.S. Environmental...
Show moreAn emissions inventory of VOCs, NOx, and CO2 was conducted for three central Florida counties – Orange, Seminole, and Osceola (OSO) – for calendar year 2008. The inventory utilized three programs: MOBILE6, NONROAD2005, and EDMS (Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System) to model on-road mobile, non-road mobile, and airport emissions, respectively. Remaining point and area source data was estimated from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA) 2008 emissions inventory. The previous OSO emissions inventory was done in 2002 and in the six years between inventories, there have been changes in population, commerce, and pollution control technology in central Florida which have affected the region's emissions. It is important to model VOC and NOx emissions to determine from where the largest proportions are coming. VOCs and NOx are ozone precursors, and in the presence of heat and sunlight, they react to form ozone (O3). Ozone is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through the FDEP. The current standard is 75 parts per billion (ppb) and Orange County's average is 71 ppb. A new standard (which will likely be about 65 ppb) is being developed and is scheduled to be announced by July 2011. If OSO goes into non-attainment, it will need to prepare a contingency plan for how to reduce emissions to submit to the FDEP for approval. The 2008 inventory determined that approximately 71,300 tons of VOCs and 59,000 tons of NOx were emitted that year. The majority of VOCs came from on-road mobile sources (33%) and area sources (43%), while the majority of NOx came from on-road mobile sources (64%) and non-road mobile sources (17%). Other major sources of VOCs included gasoline powered non-road mobile equipment (lawn and garden equipment), consumer solvents, cooking, and gasoline distribution. With the numbers that could be determined for CO2 emissions, on-road mobile and point sources were responsible for 93%. Of the point source CO2 emissions, almost all of it (87%) came from one large coal-fired power plant in Orange County.
Show less
Date Issued
2011
Identifier
CFE0003703, ucf:48834
Format
Document (PDF)
PURL
http://purl.flvc.org/ucf/fd/CFE0003703
Identification of Areas of Patient Need Using the Cancer Support Source Program
Title
Identification of Areas of Patient Need Using the Cancer Support Source Program.
Creator
Ross, Emily, Cassisi, Jeffrey, Jensen, Bernard, Robinson, Diane, University of Central Florida
Abstract / Description
Understanding, screening, and providing resources for quality of life factors and psychosocial distress have become an important area of focus in cancer care. Negative consequences of poor quality of life and psychosocial distress have been widely studied in oncological research. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network, or NCCN, defines (")psychosocial distress(") as extending on a continuum, (")ranging from common normal feelings of vulnerability, sadness, and fears to problems that can...
Show moreUnderstanding, screening, and providing resources for quality of life factors and psychosocial distress have become an important area of focus in cancer care. Negative consequences of poor quality of life and psychosocial distress have been widely studied in oncological research. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network, or NCCN, defines (")psychosocial distress(") as extending on a continuum, (")ranging from common normal feelings of vulnerability, sadness, and fears to problems that can become disabling, such as depression, anxiety, panic, social isolation, and existential and spiritual crisis(") ((")National Comprehensive Cancer Network,(") n.d.). Findings have indicated the significant impact of poor quality of life and psychosocial distress in the cancer patient population. Elevated levels of psychosocial distress increases the risk of developing depression, anxiety, immune suppression, and may lead to high levels of stress. Studies have also revealed associations between increased psychosocial distress levels, relapse, treatment and healing outcomes, and survival rates (Anderson, Kiecolt-Glaser, (&) Glaser, 1994; Spiegel (&) Nemeroff, 1997). Evidence also shows that heightened psychosocial distress negatively influences a patient's capability to adhere to their medical plan and treatment (Allison et al., 1995; Pirl et al., 2007; Zabora, Brintzenhofeszoc, Curbow, Hooker, (&) Piantadosi, 2001). Attending to these negative outcomes of psychosocial distress and providing supportive care is a crucial action of oncology practice today. The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer responded to the imperative of addressing psychosocial needs in cancer care by mandating national cancer centers for accreditation purposes to screen for psychosocial distress and provide appropriate referral and resources (Standard 3.2). UF Health Cancer Center (-) Orlando Health began psychosocial distress screening on January 1st, 2015 with the utilization of the Web-based, HIPPA compliant, and action based Cancer Support Source Program. Patient data responses collected with the Cancer Support Source Program over the first calendar year of the implementation of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer standards were analyzed for this research study. A sample of 317 patient data responses was included to conduct an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) on the Cancer Support Source Program test items. Specifically, a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with an oblique rotational procedure (Promax) was conducted on the resulting data set for interpretation. Factorial interpretation was made to ascertain latent dimensions in the Cancer Support Source Program. A five factor structure model was found with adequate discriminant and face validity. Factors were grouped by conceptual basis and item-loading composition: Distress, Treatment Management and Decisions, Lifestyle, Relationship, and Substance Use. These factors were collectively termed the Concern Subscales. The Distress, Treatment Management and Decisions, and Lifestyle Factors were found to present the most psychometrically sound and internally consistent model. Further analysis was conducted to examine the resulting factorial structure model on four cancer location groups: breast, head and neck, lung, and gynecological cancer. Results displayed that no significant differences were found between cancer location groups and the five extracted factors. However, an ad hoc test (Tukey's HSD) revealed two significant differences between the Lifestyle Factor and cancer location groups at the p (<) 0.05 level. The Breast Cancer group's Lifestyle scores were higher than the Gynecologic Cancer group, and the Breast Cancer group scores were lower than the Lung Cancer group. Additionally, the action scores were summed to examine correlation between the five extracted Concern Subscales. A high correlation was found, indicating that the action items in the Cancer Support Source questionnaire correspond with the extracted Concern Subscales and do not need to undergo dimension reduction. Furthermore, a high correlation was also found with the extracted Distress Concern Subscale and the existing depression subscale in the Cancer Support Source Program.Results indicated that the Cancer Support Source Program could indeed benefit from dimension reduction to ascertain more parsimonious areas of need presented by the cancer patient population. The 25 single-items in the Cancer Support Source questionnaire may inhibit the ability to indicate other concerns that may be expressed by the patient. By identifying the latent dimensions in this exploratory endeavor, we were able to demonstrate how the Cancer Support Source questionnaire could be refined to include easily scored Concern subscales to better identify areas of need for each individual patient that is screened for psychosocial distress. These findings provide an opportunity to impact patient care, opportunities for referral, and resources for cancer care in a hospital setting using this psychosocial distress screening instrument.
Show less
Date Issued
2017
Identifier
CFE0006650, ucf:51254
Format
Document (PDF)
PURL
http://purl.flvc.org/ucf/fd/CFE0006650