shapironick
commented
4 years ago LP: What would be considered "in proximity"?
NS: this article might be a good starting place https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/pdf/10.1289/ehp.02110s2183
it looks like the number of BFs per census track and also acreage are important analytical frames. So this might be a bit beyond just straight proximity. (in one study I saw low birth weights were associated with concentrations of BFs but not necessarily proximity)
for superfund sites I keep seeing 4 miles.
I think for our spatial analysis we will want to think about total exposures and not break down each potential exposure pathway, as that's not how they hit the flesh. the question to me is: how do we assess the exposome in total via data?
Does it make sense to start aggregating multiple variables first and conducting some proximity and census concentration/acreage analysis after we've built up all the exposure routes more?
lindsaypoirier
I made a quick outline of spatial data analysis that could be performed now (i.e. before manual coding is completed) using HIFLD. While the ECHO data provides valuable information about the hazards produced by the prisons, we also need to assess exposures coming from proximate sources of exposure.
In terms of geography, we're interested in understanding two things: 1) are prisons, on a national level, more likely to be located in proximity to hazardous sites? This analysis would work towards a journal article on the state of toxic prisons. 2) which prisons specifically are close to toxic infrastructure? so that we can: a) cross check them with their status in the ECHO database to potentially demonstrate the limitations of using ECHO alone to assess exposure b) to create a list of prisons where we might want to do in-situ environmental monitoring to ground-truth exposure and to potentially reach out to incarcerated people in those prisons.
The variables to compare the prison location data with are (I wonder how much of this would be easier accessed through EJ screen): 1) Airport locations here (this will help us understand three exposures 1) lead from avgas 2) PFOS from AFFF firefighting foam 3) noise (which relates to both mental and cardiac health). We could filter for only airports in the Fac_Type column. 2) Military facilities. I had some trouble finding this data. But here is the best I could do. Its an archived version of military data. You can scroll down to the bottom where it says "Downolad [sic] Geospatial Information for U.S. Military Installations, Ranges, and Training Areas" zipped shapefile 6.5 MB) or just click here. 3) Brownfield locations. Which can be found here. 4) Superfund locations. Which can be found here. 5) There is no authoritative map of PFAS contamination but colleagues at northeastern have put together this list. But its not geocoded