A new study has raised the disturbing question of whether we are substantially under-estiminating the annual death toll from air pollution, which currently stands at around 3.4 million a year. The reason is the failure to measure the lethality of nitrogen dioxide (NO2), emitted during fossil fuel burning.
The fact that we underestimate the deaths seems clear. Current estimates focus on deaths linked to fine particles, less than 2.5mm in diameter (PM2.5) have been estimated.
I have discussed before how people still do not associate air pollution with real numbers of fatalities. When we debate pollution controls, we measure concrete numbers of jobs and taxes but rarely put a figure on the resulting deaths associated with rising pollution. Indeed, those numbers are rising. The 3.4 million deaths found by the Global Burden of Disease study from the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington in Seattle was an increase from 3 million in 1990. That is just from outdoor pollution. When you add indoor pollution, the number rises to seven million a year according to the World Health Organisation (WHO).
In Europe alone, some 500,000 people die prematurely as a result of air pollution every year without even considering N02. It seems to me that, whatever we decided about the acceptable levels of pollution, we should be unified in our demand for more accurate and holistic figures of the estimated cost in health and fatalities. There are real health impacts associated with air pollution that are left as mere generalities in our public debate. The lack of solid figures makes the cost-benefit arguments rather artificial and superficial. It also suggests that, putting aside the need to address global warming, pollution abatement has direct, measurable and immediate benefits for the population at large.
Source: Guardian
Oh and Isaac, you have the worst case of BDS and the related CDS of anyone I have ever seen. Get some help. Maybe hypnosis? It has helped some friends get over their tobacco addiction.
No, the STUPIDEST arguments are the ones to JT when you and other whiners ask “Why aren’t you doing a post on [pet issue].” And, in your inimitable fashion, you misrepresented what I said. I was indeed pointing out the infinite number of contributing factors to death. But, that was not the argument. As stated, What are you going to do to mitigate these causes? THAT is the question. Mayor Bloomberg bans soft drinks. Fat Al Gore proposes huge taxes and boondoggle alternative energy. If the issue is health, then pollution is down on the list of causes. But, the cult leaders try to push every emotional button in their bid to control us. The newest one, IT’S KILLING PEOPLE BY THE MILLIONS DAILY!! To that I say, BS!
Paul – so true. We suffer from smog in CA, too, although thankfully it is less horrible than it was during the 70s. We’ve had that, too, where utilities just raise their rates to compensate for solar draining away their customers.
We’ve had that problem with gas taxes, too. All that better fuel economy is actually working, so people buy less gas. And politicians could never, gasp, make do with less taxes, so they keep raising taxes. There are currently discussions to tax people per mile, which would require a GPS installed to prove those miles were driven in CA. Because apparently people never buy anything in any grocery store, and are completely innocent of any miles those trucks drive. The produce just magically appears. And all those new taxes couldn’t possibly raise the prices on absolutely everything in a bad economy, now would it? I think our politicians failed algebra. People don’t talk about that – how if we all conserve, the prices of utilities and taxes keep going up. Utility companies and politicians have something in common, there.
It would be suicide for me to travel to China with that air. I pity the people condemned to live in it. Many of the wealthy emigrate. Change needs to come from within in that country. The best thing that ever happened was our embassy posting the air quality online. They couldn’t call it “fog” anymore. Maybe the people will get good and mad, finally, and stand up for themselves. Considering how the current regime came to power, I think they would have a healthy respect for a really angry population.
The large scale failures of domestic solar energy manufacturers is particularly distressing. We just can’t compete with China’s wages. When it comes to the price of solar, most people just cannot afford to pay for American made. It’s buy cheaply made Chinese, where they probably dump the toxic waste from its manufacture into bathing pools, or not go solar at all.
So what’s a solution? I would prefer American made, and support local jobs. And I do not relish the idea of renting such equipment. Perhaps we will rework the grid, and become mini energy producers ourselves, the funds of which would pay for the solar panels, pay for fair wages to Americans, and yet make the price workable. Perhaps there is some out of the box solution yet to be proposed.
I rather dislike subsidizing the toxic soup roiling over China and drifting towards us.
Nick
The stupidest argument concerning any subject is when someone states, “Yeah well this other stuff is bad too.” Problems are rarely solved in one fell swoop, unless of course you are Dick Cheney and his midget cowboy, then a simple invasion and occupation will solve the problem.
Problems are more often than not, multilayered and must be dealt with as such. If you want to lose weight and be healthy you will be more successful if you: study about foods and adapt to healthier diets, reduce the quantity, start exercising, develop disciplines that help curb the cravings that so often sink a regimen, etc. When I was in my thirties my metabolism changed. I used to run twenty-five to thirty miles a week, work out three or four times a week, play basketball twice a week. I still ate at my favorite cafe, wine, cheese, all the best French cooking. I still drank beer when I so desired. I found myself gaining weight and wondering why. Almost all of what figures in losing weight and maintaining weight, after a certain age, is dependent on what you put in your body. One fix doesn’t work.
So, why not get behind alternative energy, creating millions of new jobs, reducing pollution, etc? If you reduce the problem by twenty percent that means that the force applied against the remaining facets of the problem is 100% against 80%, then 100% against 60%, and so on.
This head in the warm beach sand is not a part of evolution.
nettles:
You’re talking about efforts against subsidizing alternative energy, something I haven’t followed.
A subsidized energy source is not cheap, because taxpayers pay for it. If you raise taxes and lower energy costs to make it equivalent to conventional sources, you are not actually saving anyone money. It is a net loss for a squeezed populace, and you will still have people unable to afford their bills.
“Well just raise taxes” is actually not a solution to every single problem.
By lowering costs, I specifically indicated unsubsidized for a reason. It actually has to be affordable to produce, not just require higher taxes to make it cost only a little more than conventional.
Here in CA, solar is king. Many companies, such as Walmart, employ quite a bit of solar, so not sure how Koch is preventing businesses from going solar. What has happened is that the utilities want to charge homeowners who are solar. Their stated reason is that the grid takes such vast amounts of funds to maintain that they need more than the few months in winter that solar customers actually buy energy. I think losing profits probably also drive those efforts.
What is an interesting phenomenon is that solar companies increase their prices to compensate for the tax rebate customers receive. The rebate makes solar more affordable, which gives more room for price increases. Very frustrating.
How I foresee the grid is more private homes generating their own energy, and funneling the excess into the grid. What is distressing is that it is illegal, at least in CA, to build a home completely off-grid. Even if you can prove you can produce all the energy you need, 365 days a year, you are still required to connect to electricity, and I think gas as well. And grey water systems need an expensive permit. I think grey water permits are a good idea to prevent people from setting up what is actually a black water system, but they should make it easily affordable. The cost of inspection does not justify spiraling permit costs, in general.
If people keep blaming the Koch brothers or Bush, then they fail to make the requisite changes we need to make clean renewables better, and more accessible. If you keep blaming Koch, you’ll be very popular in certain cocktail parties, but the environment won’t actually improve.
Actually solar has now reached costs comparable to fossil fuels. The interesting aspect of solar is that there are trillions of dollars waiting to be invested but the use of the grid-controlled by the more traditional energy producers: coal, gas, oil, nuclear, hydro, etc will not facilitate large solar plants being linked up to it. The access to the grid by wind and solar has been kept in dribs and drabs. In more advanced nations renewable energy sources are integrated into the grid more easily.
In the North Sea a Canadian branch of a global oil and gas company, one that buys the wells when they are sixty to seventy percent tapped out and need specialized methods to force out the rest of the oil and gas, is developing the rigs/platforms to service 10 megawatt wind turbines that will eventually power 20% of the homes in Scotland. Two of these turbines, each of which is seven to ten times as efficient as those being installed most places today, are already up and running. This is due to the fact that Scottish Power is owned by the large conglomerate out of Spain which gets all the government help it needs and the oil and gas company is innovative and looking to extend the profits from the rigs they buy, i.e.. pump out the remaining 40% then integrate the investment into a wind farm out in the North Sea. Now the Koch brothers would be front and center fighting that if that were tried here. They are the status quo, make their money the way things are, not the way they should be.
The Koch brothers are my pet representation for all that is backward in the US vis a vis the switch from fossil fuels to alternative energy. This transition is responsible for millions of jobs and trillions of dollars earned, but not so much in the US, yet.
Barkindog
The answer to your question earlier today is, 5. Five of those statistics were life long smokers.
slohrss, I will certainly concede pollution is a contributing cause of deaths. So is alcohol, drugs,animal fat, trans fats, sugar, chemicals, texting and talking while driving, stress, bee stings, falling, drowning, speeding, choking, shark attacks, homicidal nurses, homicidal pilots, I could go on. It is the draconian, taxing, and controlling steps advocated by Fat Al Gore and his cult followers that are the problem.
Given where I live and have lived most of my life, Detroit or close in, I should be dead by now. Living down stream (as I do today) from steel mills, foundries, glass plants, and sundry factories makes for some crappy air. It beats being impoverished, however.
Check out that chart “Squeeky” posted. What puzzles me is why all this “clean energy” has to be massively subsidized? And solar panels are hardly eco-friendly in their manufacture, nor are those giant wind-mills….just like e-cars who relay on good old coal fired electricity to operate in most places. Did anyone subsidize Henry Ford’s first assembly line? Or did he just have a good idea and made it work? Hi, Elon Musk…now go invent a whole something, not just part of it.
They day will come when clean energy is real, and not dependent upon government subsidy. Blasphemy, right?
Couple of things – I live in an area where they are starting to add solar to new homes. Because they are screwing the power companies out of their hard earned money, the power companies are not raising the monthly rate to be connected to their meter.
Local air pollution can be bad because we live in a valley. On those days I stay indoors or only go out when necessary. However, it is much better than it was 20 years ago and way better than L.A. Most days it is very nice.
I have been invited to China several times and will not go because the pollution will shorten my life. Actually the pollution in Beijing is so bad I probably would just die there.
I still like energy from thorium. Would have to cut through the government regulations that keep the current nuclear power systems in control.
Well, speaking of Nitrogen Dioxide, if there are any science or chemistry nerds here, this Irish Poem might be funny to them:
No. 2???
An Irish Poem by Squeeky Fromm
There once were some druggies I know
Who were jonesing for some N 2 O. . .
Then dyslexic karma
Combined with Big Pharma!
Holy Crap! What a bad way to go!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
OK, sooo for the non-nerds, nitrous oxide or laughing gas has a chemical formula of N20. If you were dyslexic and instead picked up NO2, and inhaled it, then it would combine with the moisture in your lungs and form nitric acid and you would most likely croak in an unpleasant fashion. As a side word play, No.2 is also a euphemism for poopie.
The Koch Brothers started a new energy farm down here in North Carolina. It is called Fart Lighters Anonymous.
Solar energy is the biggest Ponzi scheme since those Dutch dudes started planting tulips.
Nettles you were a great third baseman but you don’t know squat about science.
But I will always be a fan because you popped Reggie in the noggin. I salute you.
Our society measures everything in money. We primarily do not recognize the concept of living a good life. In this culture it’s all about money. So it is strange that we don’t have accurate calculations on any number of issues we face. We have 1/4 to 1/2 of the numbers and that is all.
We haven’t monetized death and disease from air pollution. Let’s do so. In the meantime I categorically reject that we can not be a technologically advanced society while also promoting clean air, water and soil. In fact, if we took on these problems and plowed money into them, we could turn this economy around.
Right now, the govt. subsidizes oil, nuclear power and gas. So why not take that money and invest in the best possible clean energy we can produce? Karen is correct to point out that wind turbines kill birds. They also suck the lungs out of bats. As an environmentalist, I resent people lying about what turbines do. There are alternatives called wind tubes. If those don’t work correctly, I’m sure we can find other alternatives that do.
As to solar, yes, there are toxic products which go into making solar panels. Yet there are companies trying to not use toxic products and there have been successes.
This is a bizarre nation. We rarely look at things scientifically. We have largely stopped being innovators. Yet we know for a fact, that we are capable of these things. Since we quantify what we value, let’s quantify the effects of air pollution. It’s not impossible to understand that air pollution makes people sick and kills them. These may be difficult calculations but they are not beyond the ability of our people to make them. And it is self destructive to argue that we should not have clear air, water and soil. I say, let’s get cracking.
The economy is in the tank. We could have jobs and there’s tons of money to be made in cleaning up the environment and working on clean energy. Why don’t we do so?
Trooper, I’d take you up on that bet if:
I wasn’t sure you were trying to be facetious, and I thought you’d ever pay up.
Karen, one has to wonder what are you talking about.
Actually, the Koch Bros are responsible for keeping alternative energy choices more expensive. They have been forcing state government to not only strip away tax incentives for installing alternative energy technologies, they’ve essentially made it illegal for people to install things like solar panels by prohibiting the conventional utility supplying energy to homes and businesses that have them.