Aerosol exposure versus aerosol cooling of climate: What is the optimal emission reduction strategy for human health?

27Citations
Citations of this article
61Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Particles, climate change, and health have thought-provoking interactions. Air pollution is one of the largest environmental problems concerning human health. On the other hand, aerosol particles can have a cooling effect on climate and a reduction of those emissions may result in an increased temperature globally, which in turn may have negative health effects. The objective of this work was to investigate the "total health effects" of aerosol emissions, which include both exposure to particles and consequences for climate change initiated by particles. As a case study the "total health effect" from ship emissions was derived by subtracting the number of deaths caused by exposure with the estimated number of lives saved from the cooling effect of the emissions. The analysis showed that, with current level of scientific understanding, it could not be determined whether ship emissions are negative or positive for human health on a short time scale. This first attempt to approximate the combined effect of particle emissions on health shows that reductions of particulate air pollution will in some cases (black carbon) have win-win effects on health and climate, but sometimes also cause a shift from particle exposure-related health effects towards an increasing risk of health consequences from climate change. Thus, measures to reduce aerosol emissions have to be coupled with climate change mitigation actions to achieve a full health benefit on a global level. © 2010 Author(s).

Figures

  • Table 1. Climate change, health, and aerosol effects (modified from McMichael et al. (2006) by adding the right column).
  • Fig. 1. The “total health” outcome in terms of mortality of ship emissions. White bars (Case A) use the temperature change calculated by Skeie et al. (2009), yellow bars (Case B) is the same scenario but with the warming from CO2 omitted in the calculation and blue bars (Case C) are derived from the radiative forcing (RF) provided by Eyring et al. (2010). The difference in health outcomes between case B and C is mainly attributable to varying parameterizations of the aerosol indirect effect. The shown standard deviation does not include the uncertainty of the constant θ1T , which is the number of deaths caused by one degree Celsius warming.

References Powered by Scopus

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Get full text

Black carbon aerosols in urban central China

76Citations
58Readers
Get full text
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Löndahl, J., Swietlicki, E., Lindgren, E., & Loft, S. (2010). Aerosol exposure versus aerosol cooling of climate: What is the optimal emission reduction strategy for human health? Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 10(19), 9441–9449. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-9441-2010

Readers over time

‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2502468

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 24

57%

Researcher 11

26%

Professor / Associate Prof. 7

17%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Environmental Science 20

51%

Earth and Planetary Sciences 12

31%

Chemistry 5

13%

Chemical Engineering 2

5%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0