Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 13


Annotated Bibliography

Jami Chung

Arizona State University


Entry #1:​ Quarsi-Experimental Studies Suggest That Lowering Air Pollution Levels Benefits
Infants’ and Children’s Health ​(scholarly source)

APA Citation:
Currie, J., Ray, S., & Neidell, M. (2011, Dec.). Quasi-experimental studies suggest that lowering
air pollution levels benefits infants' and children's health. ​Health Affairs (Project Hope),
30​(12), 2391-9. Retrieved from

Summary (100 words):

There have been many studies connecting air pollution and children with poor health. The
quarsi-experimental study addresses effects to isolate risks of pollution and adds additional
support to prove that minimizing the causes of air pollution can become a necessary step toward
improving population health, especially for children. By reducing air pollution, children’s health
can be improved and the costs for health can be lowered. The study finds that children who are
exposed to high levels of pollution receive poorer outcomes than those exposed to lower levels.
Health issues due to harmful pollution can be reduced simply by providing information to
parents and children about the dangerous risks of air pollution. ​Researchers have unearthed a
wide array of health effects, which are believed to be associated with air pollution exposure.
Among them are respiratory diseases (including asthma and changes in lung function),
cardiovascular diseases, adverse pregnancy outcomes (such as pre-term birth), and even death.

Evaluation (100 words):

Currie is an economics professor from Princeton University, Ray is an analyst in Cornerstone
Research, and Neidell is a professor at Colombia University who researches changes in
environmental and health conditions. Currie, Ray, and Neidell have written many scholarly
articles that have been published in the ​Canadian Journal of Economics a​ nd ​American Journal of
Sociology. T ​ hese three people are credible sources because they focus their work on health and
environment while studying the effects of pollution to poor health in certain populations for
months. This article referenced 13 different sources, which is judged to be reliable. They use
legitimate research to support the suggestion that lowering high levels of pollutants can have a
positive effect on the population’s health.

Reflection (100 words):

As a result, this peer-reviewed source can be helpful to my paper because it explains the effects
of air pollution on different populations. Air pollution is extremely harmful to children’s health.
This study supports the fact that reducing equipment or products that form air pollution can

lower the amount of pollution spreading in the air. The authors claim about taking a simple step
to provide information to the population can make a difference in the environment. Their
suggestion provides the paper with more credibility and logic. This will help my writing process
to explain the dangerous risks air pollution can bring to our health.

Significant Quotes:
● “…i​nfants born in higher-pollution areas are more likely to have less-educated, minority
mothers, who are less likely to have private health insurance, than children in
lower-pollution areas.” (Currie, Neidell, Ray, para. 2)
● “…children exposed to high levels of pollution also have poorer outcomes than children
exposed to lower levels of pollution.” (Currie, Neidell, Ray, 2011, para. 2).
● “…airborne pollutants are difficult to track in the United States. This makes it difficult to
determine precisely the amount of air pollution to which an individual has been exposed.
Ideally, researchers would like to know both contemporaneous and cumulative exposure
over a lifetime.” (Currie, Neidell, Ray, para. 4)
● “Providing information encourages people to engage in avoidance behavior in order to
minimize their exposure to pollution. For example, parents can, and do, act to limit their
children's exposure to air pollution on high-pollution days. Federal and state public
information about health hazards has increased dramatically over time.” (Currie, Neidell,
Ray, para. 5)

Entry #2: ​Ammonia Pollution from Farming May Exactly Harm Health Costs ​(scholarly

APA Citation:
Stokstad, E. (2014, Jan. 17). Air pollution. Ammonia pollution from farming may exact hefty
health costs. ​Science (New York, N.Y.),​ ​343​(6168), 238. Retrieved from

Summary (100 words):

Ammonia can enter the air through agriculture, vehicles, and wildfires. When this substance
mixes with other air pollutants, it can create harmful substances, which people could breathe into
their lungs. There is a problem with ammonia air pollution that is causing major health issues,
including asthma attacks, bronchitis, and heart attacks. Ammonia air pollution can come from
all sorts of matter, but mostly from livestock. For a solution, U.S. regulators encourage farmers
to capture ammonia to use the power for manure or as fertilizer. This will reduce the amount of
harmful pollution in the air and improve the health of others.

Evaluation (100 words):

Erik Stokstad is a reporter at ​Science Magazine​, who covers environmental research and focuses
on natural resources and sustainability. ​He covers environmental research and policy with a
focus on natural resources and sustainability. His beat includes agriculture, forestry, fisheries,
conservation biology, and related topics. ​ He has written many articles about changes in the
environment, including a ​feature story about plant breeder Norman Borlaug that appears ​in ​Best
American Science Writing 2010​. Since he has written many science articles about environmental
research and natural resources, Stokstad is considered a reliable source. He provides factual
reasons about the problems of ammonia air pollution and solutions for it. His arguments are
valid because they support the claim as a whole.

Reflection (100 words):

This peer-reviewed source can be helpful to present where the air pollution comes from, how it
harms people, with a solution to reduce it. Ammonia is a factor that mixes with the air to create
a sort of pollution that can be extremely dangerous. People can become sick from getting this
substance in their lungs. This source is credible because the author provides research results on
air pollution studies and important ways to improve the environment. His solution to reduce
ammonia air pollution is to encourage farmers to use ammonia as fertilizer instead of letting it go
in the air. I can use these reasons in my paper to make it more informative.

Significant Quotes:
● “Ammonia reacts with other air pollutants to create tiny particles that can lodge deep in
the lungs, causing asthma attacks, bronchitis, and heart attacks.” (Stokstad, 2017, para.1)
● “The biggest gains could be made by keeping livestock and dairy operations away from
cities. Best management practices can also reduce losses from fertilizer and livestock. In
North Carolina, Williams says he's encouraged that many hog farmers are thinking about
generating power from manure, which could reduce ammonia emissions. Other research
is investigating how to capture ammonia for use as fertilizer.” (Stokstad, 2017, para. 9)

Entry #3: ​Validate personal air-pollution sensors ​(scholarly source)

APA Citation:
Edwards, P., Lewis, A. (2016, July 06). Validate personal air-pollution sensors. ​Nature,
535​(7610), 29-31. Retrieved from

Summary (100 words):

Since air pollution is spreading to many areas, causing 96% of people in cities to be exposed to
pollutant levels, companies are inventing resources to tackle air pollution. Technology
inventions are being placed to sensor air pollution and stop it from harming people’s lungs. Air
pollution sensors claim to measure pollution levels in the air and is best performed at high levels
of air pollution. These sensors are not meant to medically relieve asthma. However, people with
asthma discovered a way for the device to have the ability to function like a medical device. The
device detects air pollution minute by minute.

Evaluation (100 words):

Alastair Lewis is a researcher and professor of atmospheric chemistry in New York and a science
director at the National Centre for Atmospheric Science. He has been a member of the Defra Air
Quality Expert Group since 2012 and has produced many articles about air pollution and science.
Like Lewis, Peter Edwards is another researcher. For many years, they have researched and
written about risks and solutions for air pollution. Lewis and Edwards have conducted many
activities relating to air pollution, which shows that he is reliable. Their topic is valid because his
statements support the claim and are factual reasons.

Reflection (100 words):

Since air pollution is damaging many populations, some people have developed methods and
control equipment to try to reduce the pollution. Companies have created technological devices
to reduce air pollution from harming people’s lungs. This peer-reviewed source can be useful to
portray a solution for air pollution and how it can help the environment. The authors explain
strong reasons to present reliable support for the paper. They have performed many activities
involving air pollution research, which provides evidence that the device can be useful. With the
facts in the article, the source can give informative details to add to the paper.

Significant Quotes:

● “​Poor air quality is linked to over three million deaths each year, and 96% of people in
large cities are exposed to pollutant levels that are above recommended limits1. The costs
of urban air pollution amount to 2% of gross domestic product in developed countries and
5% in developing countries.” (Edwards, Lewis, 2016, para. 1)
● “start-up companies are rushing to produce cheap air-monitoring sensors, costing
hundreds rather than tens of thousands of pounds. Such devices bridge gaps between
sparse government measurements and individuals' wishes to track their personal
exposures.” (Edwards, Lewis, 2016, para. 3)

Entry #4: ​EPA Chief Scott Pruitt Questions Basic Facts About Climate Change ​(popular

APA Citation:
Brumfiel, G. (2017, March 09) National Public Radio –

Summary (100 words):

The former head of the Environmental Protection Agency does not believe that carbon dioxide is
a major cause of global warming. This was reported by a number of newspapers, online news
site, radio and television stations. When he was the EPA leader, Scott Pruitt often claimed that
there was scientific uncertainty over whether humans are changing the climate. The EPA
regulates CO​2​ and other greenhouse gases as pollutants. The EPA and the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration also set CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards,
which set fuel efficiency goals for cars and trucks. In August 2018, the EPA is proposing a Safer
Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule that would amend the CAFE 54.5 mile per
gallon car fuel economy standards and establish new standards of 37 mpg covering vehicle
model years 2021 to 2026.

Evaluation (100 words):

National Public Radio Writer Geoff Brumfiel​ ​reports on former EPA Chief Scott Pruitt’s belief
that CO​2​ is not a contributing factor in global warming. The news article includes statements by
Pruitt about the tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact on changing climate.
Providing a platform for Pruitt to voice his beliefs lend some credibility to NPR for presenting
the government’s current position on global warming. The statements that Pruitt makes are at
odds with an overwhelming body of scientific evidence showing that humans are causing the
climate to warm by releasing CO​2​ into the atmosphere. The view that CO2 is a major cause of
global warming includes data collected by other government agencies such as NASA and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Reflection (100 words):

NPR and its writer Geoff Brumfiel provide credible sources of objective information. In his
article about the former EPA Chief Scott Pruitt’s beliefs on global warming, he presents both
sides of the issue for the causes of greenhouse gases. By including quotes from Pruitt, it
provides the reader information to consider both sides of the pollution debate. His comments
appear more valid when Brumfiel shares the EPA Chief’s beliefs in the news report. The source
is helpful in providing an alternative side of the issue, opposing scientists and environmentalists
who argue that air pollution is causing harmful effects on health and climate change.

Significant Quotes:
● "I believe that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something
very challenging to do, and there's tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact,"
(Brumfiel, Pruitt, 2017, para. 3)
● Pruitt also said he believed that a major climate agreement reached in Paris was "a bad
deal," and that he would soon be making an announcement about changes to so-called
CAFE standards, which set fuel efficiency goals for cars and trucks. (Brumfiel,Pruitt,
2017, para. 8)

Entry #5: ​Air Pollution: Everything You Need to Know ​(popular source)

APA Citation:
Mackenzie, J. (2019, February 13). Air Pollution: Everything You Need to Know. Retrieved
from​ ​https://www.nrdc.org/stories/air-pollution-everything-you-need-know

Summary (100 words):

Air pollution is the release of substances with harmful or poisonous effects into the air. It is
caused by energy use and production, including fossil fuels that release gases and chemicals,
smog that forms when the weather is warm, climate changes, and pollen. To reduce air
pollution, people can burn less gasoline, supply electricity by wind or solar, and support clean air
by informing others about air pollution. The main goal for people is to protect their health from
air pollution because it can cause diseases and sickness as it enters people’s lungs. There are
many risks involving air pollution, so people need to find ways to protect their health.

Evaluation (100 words):

Jillian Mackenzie​ ​is and editor and writer, who has been writing about the environment for 20
years. She is an author, who provides factual details about air pollution that I can use in my
paper. Mackenzie can be a reliable source because she has written many logical articles for two
decades. In addition, she writes for NRDC (National Resources Defense Council), a network
that protects rights of people to clean air. This popular source is credible because the author uses
evidence and reason to support the claim. With the details provided in the source, I can show the
negative impact on health from outdoor pollution, such as particles produced by burning fossil
fuels and noxious gases, and indoor pollution, like mold and tobacco smoke.

Reflection (100 words):

In conclusion, air pollution can come from all sorts of factors that can harm people’s health.
Each cause is explained in great detail to show how impactful the problem with air pollution can
be. This popular source provides important facts describing the causes of air pollution. It can be
helpful to include in my essay because the research supports many factors in explaining the
harmful effect of pollution. The source gives reasonable explanations for the causes of air
pollution and offers solutions for people to maintain their health. This activist provides
recommendations to protect our air from hazardous substances spreading throughout the planet.

Significant Quotes:
● “The less gasoline we burn, the better we’re doing to reduce air pollution and harmful
effects of climate change.” (Mackenzie, 2019, para. 12)
● “Another type of air pollution is then worsened by that increased heat: Smog forms when
the weather is warmer and there’s more ultraviolet radiation.” Climate change also
increases the production of allergenic air pollutants including mold (thanks to damp
conditions caused by extreme weather and increased flooding) and pollen (due to a longer
pollen season and more pollen production).” (Mackenzie, 2019, para. 3)

Entry #6: ​Interview with Robert Bienenfeld, Assistant Vice President for American Honda
Motor Co., Inc. ​(primary source)

APA Citation:
Bienenfeld, R. (2019, March). Interview and (2014, F​ebruary 14). Rearview Report. Retrieved

Summary (100 words):

I wrote several questions for Robert Bienenfeld, and he answered them with informational facts
about air pollution. In addition, he created a video about air pollution which he reflects on the
cause and effect of California clean air legislation on the auto industry. He is Honda’s leading
U.S. expert on energy and the environment. ​The short film depicts Honda's efforts to respond to
the far stricter federal and state environmental legislation in the 1970s that resulted from efforts
to improve the heavy air pollution in Los Angeles and elsewhere. ​While many other automakers
balked at the idea of cleaning up vehicle emissions, Honda's engineers launched the CVCC
engine in 1975, which met California emission standards. But, Bienenfeld points out the race for
clean air continues as high levels of airborne contamination are still a problem today. He
promotes California Clean Air Day, a program to encourage people on October 9​th​ to do their
part to product public health by improving air quality and preventing climate change.

Evaluation (100 words):

The auto industry was the first to be regulated for greenhouse emissions in the United States.
Experts, such as Robert Bienenfeld, worked with the White House with top people at the
Environmental Protection Agency​ and others in the auto industry to come up with reasonable
standards. During an interview with Bienenfeld, he says the auto industry as a whole is getting
cleaner all the time, with automotive contribution to air quality problems reducing to less than
10% from 80% years ago. Although we may think cars are the main cause of the pollutants,
Bienenfeld says diesel trucks, ships rails and airplanes are the big contributors to air pollutions.
He has been quoted in several news articles and is responsible for policy as it relates to the
automobile and its impact on the environment, as well as long-term strategies to address
greenhouse gas, energy security and air quality issues.

Reflection (100 words):

Air pollutants emitted from cars are believed to cause cancer and contribute to such problems as
asthma, heart disease, birth defects and eye irritation. Emissions from cars increase the levels of
carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, leading to global warming.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, today’s cars emit 75 to 90% less pollution

per mile driven than cars made in 1970 did. Hybrid cars, electric cars and alternative fuels will
continue to help, but the growth in the number of people -- and cars -- on the roads today
continues to pose a problem for air pollution. Bienenfeld and other sources in the video share
insight and knowledge into reducing vehicle emissions ​to reduce air pollution and impact global
climate change.

Significant Quotes:
● “We’ve always had a very clean fleet and been at the leading edge of reducing smog
forming emissions from tailpipe. Now the auto industry as a whole is really clean and
getting cleaner all the time.” (Bienenfeld, 2019)
● “The automotive contribution to air quality problems has gone from 70-80% of the
problem to less than 10%. Now the big contributor is diesel trucks, ships, rail and
airplanes.” (Bienenfeld, 2019)