Climate and health impacts of US emissions reductions consistent with 2 °C

Shindell, D. T.; Lee, Yunha; Faluvegi, G.

doi:10.1038/nclimate2935

Cited by 88 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This effect estimate derives from a single-pollutant model, without adjustment for PM 2.5 concentration, and has also been applied in the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) project (Forouzanfar et al, 2016), albeit using the annual maximum of the three-month running mean of the daily maximum 1-hour ozone concentration, rather than the corresponding six-month metric, to account for global variation in the timing of the peak ozone season (Brauer et al, 2016, Cohen et al, 2017. A large number of studies have used exposure-response coefficients derived by Jerrett et al (2009) for estimating global and regional respiratory-related mortality associated with long-term exposure to ozone Anenberg et al, 2010Anenberg et al, , 2012Lim et al, 2012;Fang et al, 2013;Silva et al, 2013Silva et al, , 2016Forouzanfar et al, 2015Forouzanfar et al, , 2016Shindell et al, 2012Shindell et al, , 2016. For example, the most recent GBD Study (Forouzanfar et al, 2016) estimated that 254,000 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)-related deaths globally were attributable to ambient ozone exposure in 2015, an increase of 19% since 2005.…”

Section: Short and Long-term Ozone Exposure Mortality Risk Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: Present-day ozone distribution and trends relevant to human health

Fleming

Doherty

Schneidemesser³

et al. 2018

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene

256

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study quantifies the present-day global and regional distributions (2010–2014) and trends (2000–2014) for five ozone metrics relevant for short-term and long-term human exposure. These metrics, calculated by the Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report, are: 4thhighest daily maximum 8-hour ozone (4MDA8); number of days with MDA8 > 70 ppb (NDGT70), SOMO35 (annual Sum of Ozone Means Over 35 ppb) and two seasonally averaged metrics (3MMDA1; AVGMDA8). These metrics were explored at ozone monitoring sites worldwide, which were classified as urban or non-urban based on population and nighttime lights data.Present-day distributions of 4MDA8 and NDGT70, determined predominantly by peak values, are similar with highest levels in western North America, southern Europe and East Asia. For the other three metrics, distributions are similar with North–South gradients more prominent across Europe and Japan. Between 2000 and 2014, significant negative trends in 4MDA8 and NDGT70 occur at most US and some European sites. In contrast, significant positive trends are found at many sites in South Korea and Hong Kong, with mixed trends across Japan. The other three metrics have similar, negative trends for many non-urban North American and some European and Japanese sites, and positive trends across much of East Asia. Globally, metrics at many sites exhibit non-significant trends. At 59% of all sites there is a common direction and significance in the trend across all five metrics, whilst 4MDA8 and NDGT70 have a common trend at ~80% of all sites. Sensitivity analysis shows AVGMDA8 trends differ with averaging period (warm season or annual). Trends are unchanged at many sites when a 1995–2014 period is used; although fewer sites exhibit non-significant trends. Over the longer period 1970–2014, most Japanese sites exhibit positive 4MDA8/SOMO35 trends. Insufficient data exist to characterize ozone trends for the rest of Asia and other world regions.

show abstract

Section: Short and Long-term Ozone Exposure Mortality Risk Estimatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: Present-day ozone distribution and trends relevant to human health

Fleming

Doherty

Schneidemesser³

et al. 2018

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene

256

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One study (Shindell et al 2016) projected health co-benefits to the end of the century, but the majority presented results for a decade in the first half of the century. The baselines were generally present day or a recent period.…”

Section: Temporal Scalesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Creutzig et al 2012, Woodcock et al 2009. Shindell et al (2016) estimated the climate and health benefits of reducing US emissions consistent with a 2 • C increase in global mean surface temperature; these analyses assumed transportation reductions avoiding 0.03 • C warming in 2030 and 0.15 • C in 2100.…”

Section: Policy Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ancillary health effects of climate mitigation scenarios as drivers of policy uptake: a review of air quality, transportation and diet co-benefits modeling studies

Chang

Hess

Balbus

et al. 2017

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Significant mitigation efforts beyond the Nationally Determined Commitments (NDCs) coming out of the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement are required to avoid warming of 2°C above pre-industrial temperatures. Health co-benefits represent selected near term, positive consequences of climate policies that can offset mitigation costs in the short term before the beneficial impacts of those policies on the magnitude of climate change are evident. The diversity of approaches to modeling mitigation options and their health effects inhibits meta-analyses and syntheses of results useful in policy-making. Methods/Design: We evaluated the range of methods and choices in modeling health co-benefits of climate mitigation to identify opportunities for increased consistency and collaboration that could better inform policy-making. We reviewed studies quantifying the health co-benefits of climate change mitigation related to air quality, transportation, and diet published since the 2009 Lancet Commission ‘Managing the health effects of climate change’ through January 2017. We documented approaches, methods, scenarios, health-related exposures, and health outcomes. Results/Synthesis: Forty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Air quality, transportation, and diet scenarios ranged from specific policy proposals to hypothetical scenarios, and from global recommendations to stakeholder-informed local guidance. Geographic and temporal scope as well as validity of scenarios determined policy relevance. More recent studies tended to use more sophisticated methods to address complexity in the relevant policy system. Discussion: Most studies indicated significant, nearer term, local ancillary health benefits providing impetus for policy uptake and net cost savings. However, studies were more suited to describing the interaction of climate policy and health and the magnitude of potential outcomes than to providing specific accurate estimates of health co-benefits. Modeling the health co-benefits of climate policy provides policy-relevant information when the scenarios are reasonable, relevant, and thorough, and the model adequately addresses complexity. Greater consistency in selected modeling choices across the health co-benefits of climate mitigation research would facilitate evaluation of mitigation options particularly as they apply to the NDCs and promote policy uptake.

show abstract

“…Indeed, it has been estimated that clean energy policies in the United States could prevent 175,000 premature deaths by 2030, and 22,000 fewer annually thereafter, and clean transportation could prevent 120,000 U.S. premature deaths by 2030, followed by about 14,000 annually thereafter (45). Implementation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan has been estimated to provide every American family with up to $7 in health benefits for every $1 dollar invested in reducing GHGs (46).…”

Section: Clean Air Health Co-benefits Of Climate Mitigation Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environment, Global Climate Change, and Cardiopulmonary Health

Bayram

Bauer

Abdalati

et al. 2017

Am J Respir Crit Care Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate and health impacts of US emissions reductions consistent with 2 °C

Cited by 88 publications

References 31 publications

Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: Present-day ozone distribution and trends relevant to human health

Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: Present-day ozone distribution and trends relevant to human health

Ancillary health effects of climate mitigation scenarios as drivers of policy uptake: a review of air quality, transportation and diet co-benefits modeling studies

Environment, Global Climate Change, and Cardiopulmonary Health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About