Advertisement

Grim First: Air Pollution Makes Top 10 List Of Disease Risk Factors

Follow Richard

Beijing smog

Beijing smog

Enlarge Photo

According to the 2010 Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study published this month in The Lancet, high blood pressure, tobacco smoke, and alcohol abuse are the world's most dangerous risk factors for disease. Among the other top-ten items on that grim list, we also find air pollution -- largely ambient particulate matter from auto emissions. 

That's the first time that air pollution has made the global top-ten list of disease risk factors. Its rise in prominence seems linked to increased vehicle usage (as well as construction and commerce) in emerging economies, since the study notes that air pollution is especially bad in countries like China and India.

FINDINGS

The GBD study shows that in 2010, 3.2 million people around the globe died from diseases caused by air pollution. Of those 3.2 million fatalities, over 2 million were in Asia, with the bulk in east Asia and China (1.2 million deaths) and south Asia and India (712,000).

As if that weren't bad enough, those 3.2 million fatalities represent a 400% increase in air-pollution-related disease since 2000, when 800,000 deaths were linked to the problem. However, David Pettit, director of the Southern California Air Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, says that the 2010 figures may simply reflect more accurate tracking methods. Speaking to Climate Central, Pettit says that previous studies like the one carried out in 2000 measured only coarse particulate matter and were limited to urban areas. In other words, the problem may have been growing for some time, scientists just haven't had the tools to measure it properly.

RESPONSE

The Centre for Science and the Environment (CSE) says that the GBD report is based on a complex study of "ground-level measurements, satellite remote sensing and global chemical transport models to capture population exposure". According to the CSE's executive director for research and advocacy and head of air pollution issues, Anumita Roychowdhury, the study's findings point to a grim future, plagued by a soaring number of premature deaths caused by air pollution:

Days of doubts and complacency are over. There is hard enough evidence now to act urgently to reduce the public health risks to all, particularly the children, elderly, and poor. No one can escape toxic air. India will have to take aggressive action to reverse the trend of short term respiratory and cardiac effects as well as the long term cancer and other metabolic and cellular effects. Remember – toxic effects like cancer surface after a long latency period. Therefore, exposure to air pollution will have to be reduced today to reduce the burden of dieses [sic].

In a brief plan, Roychowdhury lists six action items to address the problem of air pollution, two of which are directly related to India's auto industry. She would like to identify a "stringent vehicle technology and fuel quality roadmap and in-use vehicle management to cut health impact of motorization" and to "[c]ontrol and cut explosive increase in vehicle numbers by scaling up public transport, non-motorised transport and compact city planning".

Of course India isn't alone in facing exponentially greater health problems due to air pollution. The issue will have a huge impact across Asia and elsewhere in the world. The question is: will Roychowdhury and her like-minded colleagues convince politicians and government agencies to act before the problem gets completely out of hand?

Posted in:
Advertisement
 
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • Notify me when there are more comments
Comments (7)
  1. Focusing on cars only to reduce pollution levels is like watching a dog chase his tail. Rather stupid.

    With millions of people burning wood every day and with the air pollution from a single wood stove burning for nine hours is equivalent to a medium sized car running for an entire year, to ignore wood and charcoal smoke pollution especially in an urban setting is a dishonest and inadequate approach to providing healthy breathing air.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     
  2. Although your point makes a lot of sense, the article specifically states that most of the air pollution is from autos.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     
  3. Response in two parts.

    Cleaner auto exhaust will help, but will never ever provide healthy breathing air for anyone who lives in a city with unlimited charcoal and wood burning such as Los Angeles, where hundreds of thousands of people cook their meals with wood in a city with some of the most unhealthy breathing air in the world already. Wood smoke pollution in LA at times accounts for 25 per cent and more of total air pollution, and for someone unfortunate enough to live next to one of these hot spots, accounts for over 50 per cent of total pollution levels measured.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  4. Response in two parts.

    That is what I am pointing out. The people in charge of air quality are basically lazy bureaucrats always looking for an easy way out. It is far easier for them to demand cleaner burning autos and let somebody else do the work, than it is for THEM to enforce local burning restrictions. Therefore, they routinely fail to mention wood and charcoal pollution hoping nobody notices their gross omission. Besides, that is how many of them cook and heat their own homes, including the politicians who write the laws.

    Also, living next to someone who burns charcoal and wood exposes one to hot spot pollution levels that far exceed pollution levels that air quality bureaucrats are willing to measure or admit.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  5. Am I right in assuming that the cars in Asia do not have the same stringent pollution controls that exist in North America and Europe? Since these technologies have been available for many years and are in high production, it shouldn't be too difficult or costly for these countries to adopt higher standards.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     
  6. It is NOT just technology but also cost. Those countries are extremely price sensitive in auto market. Extra cleaner emission control add cost to the car but buyers don't see direct return such as more powerful engine or more luxury interior. Less likely to pay for those extra emission improvement. That is especially true for rural and farm related machines and transportation.

    Also, those 3rd world nations have dirtier fuels. Dirty fuels also increase the emission level. Especially with cheap and low tech diesels in those nations.

    Excessive idling and traffic jams don't help either.
     
    Post Reply
    +2
    Bad stuff?

  7. This article is based on data that has nothing to compare to, David from the S. California air program says this in this article. Also Look at the 3 other problems in front of this Maybe cause for death. The US, Japan, and European countries are already taking steps with regulation and are putting out less than 1/10 of the emissions out of our heaviest road vehicles, with clean diesel technology.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion? Join the conversation!

Advertisement
Advertisement

Get FREE Dealer Quotes

From dealers near you
Go!

Find Green Cars

Go!

Advertisement

 
© 2014 Green Car Reports. All Rights Reserved. Green Car Reports is published by High Gear Media. Send us feedback. Stock photography by izmo, Inc.
Advertisement