NewEnergyNews: CLIMATE CHANGE & PUBLIC HEALTH/

NewEnergyNews

Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

The challenge now: To make every day Earth Day.

YESTERDAY

THINGS-TO-THINK-ABOUT WEDNESDAY, August 23:

  • TTTA Wednesday-ORIGINAL REPORTING: The IRA And The New Energy Boom
  • TTTA Wednesday-ORIGINAL REPORTING: The IRA And the EV Revolution
  • THE DAY BEFORE

  • Weekend Video: Coming Ocean Current Collapse Could Up Climate Crisis
  • Weekend Video: Impacts Of The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current Collapse
  • Weekend Video: More Facts On The AMOC
  • THE DAY BEFORE THE DAY BEFORE

    WEEKEND VIDEOS, July 15-16:

  • Weekend Video: The Truth About China And The Climate Crisis
  • Weekend Video: Florida Insurance At The Climate Crisis Storm’s Eye
  • Weekend Video: The 9-1-1 On Rooftop Solar
  • THE DAY BEFORE THAT

    WEEKEND VIDEOS, July 8-9:

  • Weekend Video: Bill Nye Science Guy On The Climate Crisis
  • Weekend Video: The Changes Causing The Crisis
  • Weekend Video: A “Massive Global Solar Boom” Now
  • THE LAST DAY UP HERE

    WEEKEND VIDEOS, July 1-2:

  • The Global New Energy Boom Accelerates
  • Ukraine Faces The Climate Crisis While Fighting To Survive
  • Texas Heat And Politics Of Denial
  • --------------------------

    --------------------------

    Founding Editor Herman K. Trabish

    --------------------------

    --------------------------

    WEEKEND VIDEOS, June 17-18

  • Fixing The Power System
  • The Energy Storage Solution
  • New Energy Equity With Community Solar
  • Weekend Video: The Way Wind Can Help Win Wars
  • Weekend Video: New Support For Hydropower
  • Some details about NewEnergyNews and the man behind the curtain: Herman K. Trabish, Agua Dulce, CA., Doctor with my hands, Writer with my head, Student of New Energy and Human Experience with my heart

    email: herman@NewEnergyNews.net

    -------------------

    -------------------

      A tip of the NewEnergyNews cap to Phillip Garcia for crucial assistance in the design implementation of this site. Thanks, Phillip.

    -------------------

    Pay a visit to the HARRY BOYKOFF page at Basketball Reference, sponsored by NewEnergyNews and Oil In Their Blood.

  • ---------------
  • WEEKEND VIDEOS, August 24-26:
  • Happy One-Year Birthday, Inflation Reduction Act
  • The Virtual Power Plant Boom, Part 1
  • The Virtual Power Plant Boom, Part 2

    Thursday, December 03, 2009

    CLIMATE CHANGE & PUBLIC HEALTH

    NIH Teams Up With The Lancet and Leading International Organizations to Address Public Health Impacts of Climate Change: New Strategies Promote Health and Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
    25 November 2009 (National Institute of Environmental Sciences/Health National Institutes of Health)

    SUMMARY
    Want to break health insurance reform gridlock and stop soaring health care costs? Reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

    The distinguished British medical journal Lancet dedicated a recent issue to the health benefits that will result from eliminating the greenhouse gas emissions (GhGs) that cause global climate change. Like GhG cuts, health benefits can be obtained through action in the buildings, transport, power generation and agricultural sectors. Furthermore, health benefits can be maximized through effective climate change policies. And cost savings from improved public health will help pay for the fight against climate change.

    To study benefits possible in household energy, researchers studied Energy Efficiency in UK residences and the hypothetical use of 150 million low-emission cookstoves in India. They found enormous reduced disease and death, especially in women and children, from the cookstoves. They also identified a constellation of UK building efficiencies that offer health and emissions reductions benefits.

    click to enlarge

    To study urban land transport, researchers compared impacts in London, England, and Delhi, India, of business-as-usual vehicles, reduced emissions vehicles and "active" transport (walking, cycling, etc.). They found active transport to offer some of the biggest and least costly health benefits along with emissions reductions.

    Researchers found significant cost savings from reduced morbidity and mortality through a hypothetical move to a New Energy economy by 2050 and the resultant 50% electricity generation sector emissions reduction in the UK, China and India. The most benefits and savings were in India, where particulate matter is worst.

    Researchers found there could be a 15% decrease in heart disease in the UK and a 16% reduction in Sao Paulo, Brazil, from a policy aimed at cutting GhGs 50% by 2030 and 80% by 2050 that reduces livestock production 30% and thereby reduces dietary saturated fats.

    Researchers looked at data on 352 000 people in 66 U.S. cities over 18 years to see what health benefits might come from the elimination of black carbon, ozone, and sulphates, GhGs that stay in the atmosphere far less time than CO2 but have more complicated and serious health impacts.

    And researchers considered the data from all the studies to see what the implications were and what policies arose as advisable from the research. They concluded that policies aimed at fighting global climate change were good for public health and reduced the overall costs of healthcare.

    Excited about this subject? Watch the entire international webcast presentation by U.S. and UK doctors and public health officials.

    click to enlarge

    COMMENTARY
    The Lancet articles:
    (1) Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: household energy
    (2) Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: urban land transport
    (3) Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: low-carbon electricity generation
    (4) Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: food and agriculture
    (5) Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: health implications of short-lived greenhouse pollutants
    (6) Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: overview and implications for policy makers

    click to enlarge

    Re Residential Energy:
    To investigate the subject of residential energy use, researchers studied hypothetical energy efficiency strategies in UK housing and the hypothetical introduction of 150 million low-emission cookstoves in India. The UK outcomes varied with the strategies but were generally favorable.

    A “combined fabric, ventilation, fuel switching, and behavioural changes” plan resulted in 850 fewer disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) and a saving of 0.6 megatonnes (metric megatons) of carbon dioxide (CO2), per million population per year. The India cookstove program resulted in less acute lower respiratory infection (ALRI) in children, as well as less chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and ischemic heart disease (IHD), and a hypothetical 12,500 fewer DALYs and a saving of 0.1—to-0.2 megatonnes CO2-equivalent per million population per year. Researchers reported these changes were the most cost-effective climate-health linkages they found.

    click to enlarge

    Of the individual UK residential efficiency strategies, the most beneficial to health was fuel switching to eliminate indoor fine particulate matter. This also explains the enormous benefits from the low emissions cookstoves in India.

    The completed hypothetical program would put cleaner cooking in 87% of Indian households. Total averted premature deaths from ALRI would reach ~240,000 children aged 5 and younger and 1.8 million premature adult deaths from IHD and COPD by 2020.

    click to enlarge

    Re: Transport
    To study the health effects of alternative urban land transport, researchers hypothesized scenarios in London and Delhi in which emissions reductions were and were not required and where they were and considered the increased use of reduced-emission vehicles, increased active travel (walking, cycling, public transport) and a combination of both in each scenario. They looked at physical activity, air pollution, and the risk of traffic injury.

    In both cities, increased active travel and less use of motor vehicles produced decreased emissions and larger health benefits per million population (7,332 disability-adjusted life-years [DALYs] in London, and 12,516 in Delhi per year) than from the increased use of low-emission motor vehicles (160 DALYs in London and 1,696 in Delhi). The combination of both, however, provided the biggest benefits (7,439 DALYs in London, 12,995 in Delhi).

    click to enlarge

    The most notable impact was less years of life lost from IHD (10-to-19% in London, 11-to-25% in Delhi). There was also overall decreased dementia (8%) and depression (5%). The study showed clear benefits to health from climate change mitigation in transport. Increasing the “acceptability, appeal, and safety of active urban travel” AND discouraging private motor vehicles would be the most benefiical aims of public policy.

    Re: Electricity Generation
    To study the effects on health of a shift to New Energy, researchers studied the hypothetical 2030 impacts in the European Union (EU), China, and India of policies requiring a 50% reduction in GhGs from 1990 levels by 2050. The study modeled the resultant reduction in fine particulate matter from building only the New Energies that are presently economically viable.

    click to enlarge

    They found a significant reduction in mortality, especially in China and India. The reduced health impact costs “greatly offset” the costs of building a New Energy infrastructure to cut GhGs, especially in India and China, where the fine particulate matter concentrations are great and the cost of building New Energy remains low. New Energy is already part of business-as-usual in Europe. A mitigation strategy would, therefore, show less of an impact on health over what will occur anyway.

    Re: Agriculture and Food Production
    To study the health impacts of GhG reductions in the agricultural sector, which generates about 1/5 of the world’s emissions, researchers considered policies that would reduce livestock production. Livestock production generates 4/5 of agriculture’s emissions and dramatically adds saturated fats to the world’s diet, a part of the diet that directly relates to cardiovascular disease.

    click to enlarge

    The researchers hypothesized a policy requiring a 50% cut in GhGs from 1990 levels by 2030 and an 80% cut in 2050 in the UK and in Sao Paulo, Brazil. This would theoretically result in a series of improved agricultural technologies and a 30% reduction in livestock production. This, in turn, would bring about a decrease in heart disease of 15% in the UK (2,850 DALYs per million population per year) and of 16% in São Paulo (2,180 DALYs per million population per year). The researchers noted such a change would bring health benefits but meet “cultural, political, and commercial resistance, and face technical challenges.”

    Re: Short-lived GhGs
    Researchers looked at the data on 352,000 people in 66 U.S. cities over 18 years to examine the health effects of 3 GhGs, black carbon, ozone and sulphates, that remain in the atmosphere for only a short term but significantly affect respiratory function. Identifying and implementing methods of cutting the short-lived GhGs is especially useful because it will have a faster impact on GhG concentrations at a potentially lower cost.

    click to enlarge

    Managing reductions in these short-lived GhGs is complicated, however. Sulphate is an atmospheric cooling agent but black carbon and ozone together exert almost 50% the warming as CO2. Yet the substances co-exist so that cutting the warming substances may also cut some cooling sulphates and it is uncertain what the net result would be.

    The toxicology of the pure compounds is also unclear because they have stronger effects in combination and are found in the atmosphere together. The researchers’ primary conclusion was that the complex interaction must be carefully considered.

    click to enlarge

    Re: Health and Cutting Emissions
    The final paper assimilated the diverse conclusions of the first 5 and stressed that actions to cut GhGs often, but not always, offer net and sometimes substantial health benefits.

    The greatest health improvements, though not the greatest GhG-reductions, come from (1) a shift to active transport and (2) a shift to reduced livestock production and a low saturated fat diet. Both of these changes in habits are likely to meet significant resistance. There is also some concern that these shifts could lead to malnutrition and pedestrian vulnerability to vehicle traffic. Further study to evaluate the possibility of unintended consequences is recommended.

    click to enlarge

    The cookstove program for India is perhaps the best buy in the entire study. Unlike the changes in habit, the cookstoves are likely to be quickly put to work and have rapid favorable health impacts. Results can be expected to be the same in China, South Asia, and much of sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. On the other hand, there will be little impact on GhG generation and especially little on CO2 because the primary spew from primitive biomass cooking is methane, carbon monoxide, and black and organic carbon.

    On the whole, however, positive health benefits are, the researchers point out, another good reason to work for GhG controls, offer a good reason for those who are uncertain or ambivalent about climate change to participate and offer a way to rationalize the costs of climate change mitigation.

    click to enlarge

    Because the building of New Energy infrastructure, from large-scale electricity generation to simple low-emissions cookstoves, has such a favorable effect on health and climate, a much greater effort is warranted for transferring New Energy technology from the developed to the developing world and for finding the funding to do so. At the same time, the need for funding more research on all ways to cut GhGs remains. The community of nations really does not have the luxury of picking and choosing between methods for GhG reductions.

    The bad news is that the international community must urgently identify every good opportunity and implement it. The good news is that it will benefit the health of the population and the health of this good earth and is therefore the best 2-for-1 sale anywhere, ever.

    click to enlarge

    QUOTES
    - U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius: "We are learning that the health of our planet and the health of our people are tied together. It's difficult for one to thrive without the other…Climate change is not a problem that one country or one organization can solve on its own…It's a problem that affects us all. If we work to reduce pollution…we will also reduce deaths from respiratory and cardiovascular diseases."

    click to enlarge

    - Linda Birnbaum, Ph.D., director, NIEHS/National Toxicology Program: "These papers demonstrate there are clear and substantive improvements for health if we choose the right mitigation strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions…We now have real-life examples of how we can save the environment, reduce air pollution and decrease related health effects; it's really a win-win situation for everyone."
    Kirk R. Smith, Ph.D., lead researcher and Lancet paper author, University of California, Berkeley: "Climate change threatens us all, but its impact will likely be greatest on the poorest communities in every country…Carefully choosing how we reduce greenhouse gas emissions will have the added benefit of reducing global health inequities."
    - From the studies: “Climate change is an increasing and evolving threat to the health of populations worldwide. At the same time, major public health burdens remain in many regions. Climate change therefore adds further urgency to the task of addressing international health priorities, such as the UN Millennium Development Goals. Recognition that mitigation strategies can have substantial benefits for both health and climate protection offers the possibility of policy choices that are potentially both more cost effective and socially attractive than are those that address these priorities independently.”

    click to enlarge

    - From the studies: “Climate change threatens the health of human populations worldwide, but particularly in low-income countries..These adverse health consequences are among the many important reasons why governments need collectively to act with resolution and urgency to reduce global greenhouse-gas emissions. What has been less widely understood, however, is that policies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions (climate change mitigation policies) could often have more immediate and potentially large effects on population health. These ancillary effects are important not only because they can provide an additional rationale to pursue mitigation strategies, but also because progress has been slow to address international health priorities…Mitigation measures can thus offer an opportunity not only to reduce the risks of climate change but also, if well chosen and implemented, to deliver improvements in health—the so-called co-benefits of mitigation…”

    0 Comments:

    Post a Comment

    << Home