Abstract:Research on air quality and human health "co-benefits" from climate mitigation strategies represents a growing area of policy-relevant scholarship. Compared to other aspects of climate and energy policy evaluation, however, there are still relatively few of these co-benefits analyses. This sparsity reflects a historical disconnect between research quantifying energy and climate, and research dealing with air quality and health. The air quality co-benefits of climate, clean energy, and transportation electrific… Show more
“…A recent literature review in 2020, by Gallagher and Holloway, presents evidence from available studies, highlighting that GHG reduction has synergistic benefits of decreasing air pollution and protecting public health (Gallagher and Holloway, 2020). They note that "compared to other aspects of climate and energy policy evaluation, however, there are still relatively few of these cobenefits analyses".…”
Section: Co-benefits and Possible Tensions Of Decarbonization Of The Energy Sectormentioning
This rapid literature review explores the interactions between climate change and air pollution, with a focus on human health impacts. In particular, the report explores potential synergies in tackling climate change and air pollution together. The impacts and implications of the transition from a carbon-intensive economy upon air quality and consequently human health are examined. Discussing climate change without air pollution can lead to risks. For example, strategies that focus on electrification and transition to renewable energy achieve maximum health and air quality benefits compared to strategies that focus mainly on combustible renewable fuels (biofuel and biomass) with some electrification. Addressing climate change necessitates a shift towards a new low carbon era. This involves stringent and innovative changes in behaviour, technology, and policy. There are distinct benefits of considering climate change and air pollution together. Many of the processes that cause climate change also cause air pollution, and hence reductions in these processes will generate cleaner air and less global warming. Politically, the consideration of the two issues in tandem can be beneficial because of the time-inconsistency problems of climate change. Air pollution improvements can offer politicians victories, on a useful timescale, to help in their aims of reversing climate change. By coupling air pollution and air pollution agendas together, it will increase the media and political attention both environmental causes receive. Policies should involve the integration of climate change, air quality, and health benefits to create win-win situations. The success of the strategies requires financial and technical capacity building, commitment, transparency, and multidisciplinary collaboration, including governance stakeholders at multiple levels, in both a top-down and bottom-up manner.
“…A recent literature review in 2020, by Gallagher and Holloway, presents evidence from available studies, highlighting that GHG reduction has synergistic benefits of decreasing air pollution and protecting public health (Gallagher and Holloway, 2020). They note that "compared to other aspects of climate and energy policy evaluation, however, there are still relatively few of these cobenefits analyses".…”
Section: Co-benefits and Possible Tensions Of Decarbonization Of The Energy Sectormentioning
This rapid literature review explores the interactions between climate change and air pollution, with a focus on human health impacts. In particular, the report explores potential synergies in tackling climate change and air pollution together. The impacts and implications of the transition from a carbon-intensive economy upon air quality and consequently human health are examined. Discussing climate change without air pollution can lead to risks. For example, strategies that focus on electrification and transition to renewable energy achieve maximum health and air quality benefits compared to strategies that focus mainly on combustible renewable fuels (biofuel and biomass) with some electrification. Addressing climate change necessitates a shift towards a new low carbon era. This involves stringent and innovative changes in behaviour, technology, and policy. There are distinct benefits of considering climate change and air pollution together. Many of the processes that cause climate change also cause air pollution, and hence reductions in these processes will generate cleaner air and less global warming. Politically, the consideration of the two issues in tandem can be beneficial because of the time-inconsistency problems of climate change. Air pollution improvements can offer politicians victories, on a useful timescale, to help in their aims of reversing climate change. By coupling air pollution and air pollution agendas together, it will increase the media and political attention both environmental causes receive. Policies should involve the integration of climate change, air quality, and health benefits to create win-win situations. The success of the strategies requires financial and technical capacity building, commitment, transparency, and multidisciplinary collaboration, including governance stakeholders at multiple levels, in both a top-down and bottom-up manner.
“…On the other side, especially in low-income countries, the non-CO 2 climate-altering pollutants, also called "traditional air pollutants" [5] (e.g., Ozone (O 3 ), Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 ), Nitrogen Oxide (NO x ), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO 2 ), Particulate Matter (PM), and Benzene), directly harm human health. According to Smith et al [6], two-fifths of the human population are subject to household air pollution due to inefficient and poor combustion of solid fuels used for cooking and heating.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Smith et al [6], two-fifths of the human population are subject to household air pollution due to inefficient and poor combustion of solid fuels used for cooking and heating. Gallagher and Holloway [5] point out that exposure to health-damaging air pollution is responsible for roughly 4.2 million deaths per year, being the largest environmental impact on human health. These impacts are mainly due to heart attacks, strokes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer, and acute lower respiratory infections in children [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chang et al [16] reviewed papers covering modelization of air quality, transportation, and diet co-benefits of climate mitigation. Recently, Gallagher and Holloway [5] reviewed the literature on health quality and health co-benefits of decarbonization strategies in the United States (US) including RES deployment. Climate mitigation strategies can be of several types.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Covering all options has its advantages, but an in-depth analysis does not exist. Hence, we build on the work of Gallagher and Holloway [5], extending and complementing the analysis. Our contribution to the literature includes several aspects.…”
Energy generation has had several negative health impacts over the last few decades, mainly due to air pollution. One of the ways to decrease such impacts is to increase energy generation through renewable energy sources (RESs). These sources have important health co-benefits that need to be taken into consideration. This topic has been included in the literature, but research is scattered. The goal of this article is to show the status of the literature on this topic. We performed a systematic literature review on the health co-benefits of RES use, depicting the state of the art of this literature, some common findings, limitations, and lines for future research. It is clear from our analysis that this literature remains scarce. We found 28 studies fitting the inclusion criteria. Results can be summed as follows: (1) wind and solar power are the most studied RES sources; (2) most studies are for the United States and developing countries are largely understudied; and (3) health benefit results vary widely according to site-specific conditions. Overall, the existing studies show significant health co-benefits from RES use, which are important to consider when performing cost–benefit analysis for energy projects. This is particularly relevant for policy-makers and energy investors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.