Curbing global warming saves lives, studies say

Seth Borenstein, Associated Press 25 Nov 09;

WASHINGTON – Cutting global warming pollution would not only make the planet healthier, it would make people healthier too, new research suggests.

Slashing carbon dioxide emissions could save millions of lives, mostly by reducing preventable deaths from heart and lung diseases, according to studies released Wednesday and published in a special issue of The Lancet British medical journal.

Global and U.S. health officials unveiled the results as they pushed for health issues to take a more prominent role at upcoming climate change negotiations in Copenhagen. Also on Wednesday, President Barack Obama announced that he would go to Copenhagen at the start of international climate talks. U.S. health officials said the timing was not planned.

"Relying on fossil fuels leads to unhealthy lifestyles, increasing our chances for getting sick and in some cases takes years from our lives," U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a telecast briefing from her home state of Kansas. "As greenhouse gas emissions go down, so do deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. This is not a small effect."

Sebelius, British health officials, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and the head of the World Health Organization all took part in briefings based in Washington and London.

The journal Lancet took an advocacy role in commissioning the studies and timing their release before the Copenhagen summit, but the science was not affected by the intent, said journal editor Dr. Richard Horton.

Instead of looking at the health ills caused by future global warming, as past studies have done, this research looks at the immediate benefits of doing something about the problem, said Linda Birnbaum, director of the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. That agency helped fund the studies along with the Wellcome Trust and several other international public health groups.

The calculations of lives saved were based on computer models that looked at pollution-caused illnesses in certain cities. The figures are also based on the world making dramatic changes in daily life that may at first seem too hard and costly to do, researchers conceded.

Some possible benefits seemed highly speculative, the researchers conceded, based on people driving less and walking and cycling more. Other proposals studied were more concrete and achievable, such as eliminating cook stoves that burn dung, charcoal and other polluting fuels in the developing world.

And cutting carbon dioxide emissions also makes the air cleaner, reducing lung damage for millions of people, doctors said.

"Here are ways you can attack major health problems at the same time as dealing with climate change," said lead author Dr. Paul Wilkinson, an environmental epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

The calculations are based on proposals that would cut global greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent by 2050. To accomplish that, industrialized countries have to cut emissions by 83 percent. Obama's proposal, also unveiled Wednesday with his Copenhagen announcement, is in sync with that.

Wilkinson said the individual studies came up with numbers of premature deaths prevented or extra years of life added for certain locales.

For example, switching to low-polluting cars in London and Delhi, India, would save 160 lost years of life in London and nearly 1,700 in Delhi for every million residents, one study found. But if people also drove less and walked or biked more, those extra saved years would soar to more than 7,300 years in London and 12,500 years in Delhi because of less heart disease.

Outside scientists praised the studies and said the research was sound.

"The science is really excellent; the modeling is quite good," said Dr. Paul Epstein of the Harvard School of Medicine's Center for Health and the Global Environment. "It really takes the whole field a step farther."

___

On the Net:

The Lancet: http://www.lancet.com/

Clean Energy, Better Homes Cut Pollution, Save Lives
Tan Ee Lyn, PlanetArk 26 Nov 09;

HONG KONG - Better home insulation and ventilation and using electricity instead of fossil fuels could reduce indoor pollution and save thousands of lives, especially in low-income countries like India, a study has found.

Using mathematical modeling and case studies, researchers said such strategies could avert 5,500 premature deaths and reduce carbon dioxide emission by up to 41 megatonnes, or 41 million tonnes, per year in a country like Britain.

"Indoor household fuel pollutants would be removed by switching all household fossil fuels to electricity, and energy could be saved by reducing thermostat temperatures," the researchers said in a paper published in The Lancet Series on Health and Climate Change

Led by Paul Wilkinson at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the researchers said the costs of such energy-efficient improvements would be substantial but would be offset by significant savings on fuel.

The researchers examined the benefits of introducing cleaner cooking stoves in a low-income country like India, where burning of biomass results in lung and heart disease.

Assuming that 150 million efficient low-emission household cooking stoves were installed, the authors said: "By 2020, 87 percent of Indian households would have very much cleaner combustion and air."

"The total number of averted premature deaths from acute lower respiratory infections will have reached about 240,000 children aged younger than 5 years, and more than 18 million premature adult deaths from ischemic heart disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease will have been averted."

In another paper in the same series, researchers said reducing carbon-based electricity generation would lead to significant health benefits worldwide, particularly in countries like India and China.

Led by Anil Markandya at the BC3 Basque Center for Climate Change in Spain, the researchers calculated the benefits of reducing total carbon dioxide emissions by 50 percent in 2030.

"The best-case scenario would, in India, avert 93,000 premature deaths in 2030 compared with business as usual," the researchers wrote.

"In the EU, 5,000 deaths would be averted and in China the number would be 57,000."

(Editing by Paul Tait)

Climate policies 'improve health'
BBC News 25 Nov 09;

Cutting emissions to mitigate climate change will also make people healthier, according to research.

A special series of articles, published in medical journal, the Lancet, outlines how such policies could have a direct impact on global health.

The series has been released ahead of the UN climate summit in Copenhagen.

World Health Organization (WHO) director, Margaret Chan, said health protection should be a criterion by which mitigation measures were judged.

Dr Chan was just one of the key figures in global health research who wrote a comment article that was published alongside the Lancet reports.

Another was Professor Sir Andrew Haines, director of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who is chair of the international task force of scientists that wrote the series.

He said that the public health benefits of mitigation policies had not had "sufficient prominence" in international negotiations.

Dr Chan commented: "As this series shows, cutting greenhouse gas emissions can represent a mutually reinforcing opportunity to reduce climate change and improve public health."

Some of the key findings presented in the reports included evidence that moving towards low carbon transport systems could reduce the health impacts of urban air pollution and physical inactivity.

Researchers also found that changes in farming practice to reduce livestock and meat consumption could improve health by lowering the intake of saturated fat.

And in poor countries, reducing the need to burn solid fuel indoors could have a significant impact on child and maternal health by cutting indoor air pollution.

Dr Chan pointed out that the poorest countries were the most vulnerable to the health impacts of climate change.

Cleaner energy

In one of the articles, scientists from the Basque Centre for Climate Change in Bilbao, Spain, showed how decreasing fossil-fuel-dependent electricity generation could have significant health benefits worldwide.

The researchers said that the middle-income countries such as India and China would benefit most. A reduction in pollution there could prevent many of the premature deaths that are associated with heart and lung damage caused by inhaling the polluting particles.

But the researchers also examined the health impacts in wealthier countries.

One group of researchers described the results of an 18-year study of the long-term health effects of pollution in the US.

The team, led by Professor Kirk Smith from the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley, US, pointed out that "short-lived" greenhouse pollutants, such as particles of black carbon and ozone, can directly damage the heart and lungs.

They said that "separate climate change agreements" might be needed for these pollutants.

In another paper, scientists quantified changes that were needed in the agricultural sector, which contributes 10-12% of total greenhouse gas emissions worldwide.

They wrote that "high-producing countries" should reduce livestock production by 30% to slow climate change. Should this translate into a reduction in the consumption of meat, the scientists say that it could also reduce heart disease.

Researchers called for health and climate change scientists to work together and for more funding for such interdisciplinary projects.

Copenhagen hope

The editor of the Lancet, Dr Richard Horton cautioned against putting too much pressure on the Copenhagen meeting.

He said: "By suggesting that Copenhagen is the 'last chance' for a binding international climate change agreement, anything less will seem a failure.

"Copenhagen is a beginning, not the end."

Professor Haines said: "The Copenhagen conference presents an important opportunity to choose those policies that can not only achieve needed reductions in greenhouse gases, but also move toward development and health goals."

KEY FINDINGS
# Food: High-producing countries should reduce livestock production by 30%. If this translated into reduced meat consumption, the amount of saturated fat consumed would drop sharply, which could reduce heart disease
# Transport: Cutting emissions through walking and cycling and reducing use of motor vehicles would bring health benefits including reduced cardiovascular disease, depression and dementia
# Household: In low-income countries, solid fuel stoves create indoor air pollution. National programmes to introduce low-emission stoves could avert millions of premature deaths and reduce greenhouse gas emissions
# Pollution: Short-lived pollutants including ozone and black carbon contribute to climate change and damage health. Reducing emissions of these would offer immediate benefits
# Energy: Decreasing the proportion of carbon-based electricity generation would give health benefits worldwide, particularly in middle-income countries such as India and China