bookmark_borderLiving Planet Report: the Decline of Wildlife

The World Wildlife Fund Reports — Global wildlife could plunge to a 67 per cent level of decline in just the fifty-year period ending this decade as a result of human activities, according to WWF’s Living Planet Report 2016. The report shows how people are overpowering the planet for the first time in Earth’s history and highlights the changes needed in the way society is fed and fuelled.

According to the report, global populations of fish, birds, mammals, amphibians and reptiles have already declined by 58 per cent between 1970 and 2012, the most recent year with available data. This places the world on a trajectory of a potential two-thirds decline within a span of the half-century ending in 2020.

Fortunately, 2020 is also a year of great promise. In that same year, commitments made under the Paris climate deal will kick in, and the first environmental actions under the globe’s new sustainable development plan are due. If implemented, these measures, along with meeting international biodiversity targets set for 2020, can help achieve the reforms needed in the world’s food and energy systems to protect wildlife across the globe.

“Wildlife is disappearing within our lifetimes at an unprecedented rate,” said Marco Lambertini, Director General of WWF International. “This is not just about the wonderful species we all love; biodiversity forms the foundation of healthy forests, rivers and oceans. Take away species, and these ecosystems will collapse along with the clean air, water, food and climate services that they provide us. We have the tools to fix this problem and we need to start using them now if we are serious about preserving a living planet for our own survival and prosperity.”

The WWF report uses the Living Planet Index, provided by the Zoological Society of London (ZSL), to monitor trends in wildlife abundance. This index reports how wildlife populations have changed in size, rather than the specific number of animals that have been lost or gained.

“Human behaviour continues to drive the decline of wildlife populations globally, with particular impact in freshwater habitats. Importantly however, these are declines, they are not yet extinctions – and this should be a wake-up call to marshal efforts to promote the recovery of these populations,” said Professor Ken Norris, Director of Science at ZSL.

Additional evidence of a man-made era
The top threats to species identified in the report are directly linked to human activities, including habitat loss, degradation and overexploitation of wildlife.

The report’s findings provide additional evidence that the planet is entering completely unchartered territory in its history in which humanity is shaping changes on the Earth, including a possible sixth mass extinction. Researchers are already calling this period the Anthropocene. Understanding why we are moving into this new epoch enables us to identify solutions for restoring the ecosystems we depend upon.

According to the report, food production to meet the complex demands of an expanding human population is leading the race in the destruction of habitats and overexploitation of wildlife. At present, agriculture occupies about one-third of the Earth’s total land area and accounts for almost 70 per cent of water use.

The Living Planet Report 2016 outlines solutions to reform the way we produce and consume food to help ensure that the world is well-fed in a sustainable way. The report also focuses on the fundamental changes required in the global energy and finance systems to meet the sustainability needs of future generations.

Pushing the planet to its limits
Living Planet Report 2016 draws on leading research about the scale and impact of human activity on our planet. One such framework, developed by the Stockholm Resilience Centre in collaboration with partners, demonstrates that humanity has surpassed four out of nine Planetary Boundaries – safe thresholds for critical Earth system processes that maintain life on the planet.

In a special foreword in the report, Planetary Boundaries lead researcher Johan Rockström underlines the need for an urgent transition to a world that works within Earth’s safe operating space.

The report also features research from the Global Footprint Network that shows that while we only have one Earth, humanity is currently using the resources of 1.6 planets to provide the goods and services we use each year.

“No matter how you add it up, the math does not look good. The more we continue to exceed Earth’s limits, the more damage we do to our own future,” said Lambertini. “We are at a decisive moment in time when we can seize the solutions to steer our food, energy and finance systems in a more sustainable direction.”

Charting the way forward
The WWF report demonstrates that we need to rethink how we produce, consume, measure success and value the natural environment.

Adequately protecting the environment alongside economic and social development requires an urgent system change by individuals, businesses and governments to move from a short-sighted approach to a visionary approach that values future generations.

In one example, the report shows how smallholder farmers in Kenya work with local authorities and the food industry to manage the natural resources of Lake Naivasha, the country’s second largest freshwater body, a biodiversity hotspot and a significant contributor to its GDP.

The report also illustrates the positive momentum that is building by highlighting recent global agreements on climate change and sustainable development. In particular, the report recognizes the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as an essential guide to decision-making that can ensure that the environment is valued alongside economic and social interests.

“A strong natural environment is the key to defeating poverty, improving health and developing a just and prosperous future. We have proven that we know what it takes to build a resilient planet for future generations, we just need to act on that knowledge,” Lambertini added.

Living Planet Report 2016: Risk and resilience in a new era is the eleventh edition of WWF’s biennial flagship publication. The report tracks over 14,000 vertebrate populations of over 3,700 species from 1970 to 2012.

bookmark_borderClimate Change, Extreme Weather and Toxic Crops

by Daniel Brouse

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has released a report that examines how climate change is increasing the toxicity of crops.

Crop Toxicity
Extreme weather events, such as “drought and high temperatures, can trigger the accumulation in crops of chemical compounds that are toxic to animals and humans.”

The report goes on to say: Wheat, barley, maize (corn) and millet are among the crops most susceptible to nitrate accumulation, which is caused by prolonged drought. Acute nitrate poisoning in animals can lead to miscarriage, asphyxiation and death, ruining the lives of smallholder farmers and herders.

Heavy rains that break prolonged drought can also result in the dangerous accumulation of another toxic compound called hydrogen cyanide or prussic acid in crops like flax, maize, sorghum, arrow grass, cherries and apples.

Aflatoxins, which are fungal toxins that can cause cancer and stunt foetal growth, are another emerging problem in crops. The risk of aflatoxin contamination, especially in maize, is expected to increase in higher latitudes due to rising temperatures. A recent study predicts that this toxin will become a food safety issue for Europe, especially in the most likely scenario of a 2oC rise in global temperatures.

The report highlights two critical issues associated with climate change – loss and damage. Given the delays in the last 25 years in mitigating and adapting to climate change, scientific evidence suggests that losses and damages from climate change are inevitable, with profound consequences for ecosystems, people, assets and economies. This is already happening. The heat waves of 2003 are a good example of what happens when efforts to mitigate and adapt to changes in the climate fail: 30,000 people died, glaciers decreased, permafrost thawed and the European Union’s agricultural sector lost $14.7 billion.

bookmark_borderAir Pollution Killing Millions

by Daniel Brouse

It is estimated by the World Health Organization that 7 million people per year die as a result of air pollution. “According to the latest urban air quality database, 98% of cities in low- and middle income countries with more than 100,000 inhabitants do not meet WHO air quality guidelines. Over 80% of those living in urbanized regions with air-quality monitoring breathe air featuring pollution levels that exceed World Health Organization safety limits.”

“Air pollution is a major cause of disease and death. It is good news that more cities are stepping up to monitor air quality, so when they take actions to improve it they have a benchmark,” says Dr Flavia Bustreo, WHO Assistant-Director General, Family, Women and Children’s Health. “When dirty air blankets our cities the most vulnerable urban populations—the youngest, oldest and poorest—are the most impacted.”

“Urban air pollution continues to rise at an alarming rate, wreaking havoc on human health,” says Dr Maria Neira, WHO Director, Department of Public Health, Environmental and Social Determinants of Health.

“It is crucial for city and national governments to make urban air quality a health and development priority,” says WHO’s Dr Carlos Dora. “When air quality improves, health costs from air pollution-related diseases shrink, worker productivity expands and life expectancy grows. Reducing air pollution also brings an added climate bonus, which can become a part of countries’ commitments to the climate treaty.”

The problem was thought to be mostly a problem in cities; however, new research show that parts of the world with the most farming are a big problem, too. In the study by by scientists at NASA and several universities, it was found that emissions from farms are greater than all other industrial sources of particulate air pollution in the United States, Europe, Russia and China.

“What we found surprising is simply the large amount that is attributed to farming that leads to near-surface air pollution,” said Susanne Bauer, an atmospheric scientist at Columbia University and NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. The largest U.S. impact is on the Northeastern United States “where nitrogen emissions from fertilizer and ammonia from animal waste combine with sulfates and nitrogen oxides from industries and automobiles.”

The article “Significant atmospheric aerosol pollution caused by world food cultivation” was published by Susan Bauer, Kostas Tsigaridis and Ron Miller:

Particulate matter is a major concern for public health, causing cancer and cardiopulmonary mortality. Therefore, governments in most industrialized countries monitor and set limits for particulate matter. To assist policy makers, it is important to connect the chemical composition and severity of particulate pollution to its sources. Here we show how agricultural practices, livestock production, and the use of nitrogen fertilizers impact near-surface air quality. In many densely populated areas, aerosols formed from gases that are released by fertilizer application and animal husbandry dominate over the combined contributions from all other anthropogenic pollution. Here we test reduction scenarios of combustion-based and agricultural emissions that could lower air pollution. For a future scenario, we find opposite trends, decreasing nitrate aerosol formation near the surface while total tropospheric loads increase. This suggests that food production could be increased to match the growing global population without sacrificing air quality if combustion emission is decreased.

More of the Human Induced Climate Change Experiment

bookmark_borderHope Versus Climate Change

Global warming is a huge problem; however, we can make it much worse if we keep burning fossil carbon and killing ecosystems.

The hopeful bit is that:

  1. Coal is dead. The US energy information administration confirms coal production is declining across the country. Greenpeace reports that globally “coal is in terminal decline.”
  2. Solar and battery cost and efficiencies already make sense, so much so that utilities must embrace them or die.
  3. Electric cars are coming faster than we imagine.
  4. Nearly 200 countries have signed-on to the Paris Agreement. The aim of the agreement is:
      1. Holding the increase in the global average temperature, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change;
      2. Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production;
      3. Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.

    “Countries furthermore aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible.”

  5. If we do all this and more, we might save East Antarctica (which is another 150-200 feet of sea level rise over Greenland and West Antarctica melt of 30 feet SLR or so. Many species that are probably crucial to our survival could be saved.)

As for hope, it was said in another war, “It is not necessary to hope, in order to persevere.”

By Sidd Mukherjee and Daniel Brouse 2016

The Human Induced Climate Change Experiment

bookmark_borderGlobal Drought

by Daniel Brouse

EARTH — The world is experiencing one of the worst years of drought ever recorded. The conditions are so bad in India that the state of Bihar has banned daytime cooking. “We call this the fire season in Bihar,” a state-disaster management official said. “Strong, westerly winds stoke fires which spread easily and cause great damage.” So far, the fires have killed 79 people. Over 300 people have died of heat-related illness in the past month. There are armed guards stationed at India’s dams. Al Jazeera reports, “Trains loaded with water are being moved across the country, but farmers’ wells are drying up and drinking water is being rationed. Arriving almost daily, each train brings millions of litres of water to this drought-stricken area. But even this is not enough.”

India is not alone. Africa is also facing severe droughts. SABC News of South Africa reports, “Residents of three major Free State towns – Kroonstad, Steynsrus Viljoenskroon and Bloemfontein – are being slapped with even tighter water restrictions as the area’s main water source is fast running dry. Residents are complaining that the situation is so bad that they cannot use lavatories and that business has been affected. Taps are expected to run empty within a month as the dam is nearing empty level.”

Operation USA released a statement saying, “East Africa is currently experiencing the worst drought to hit the region in 60 years. The UN has officially declared famine in parts of southern Somalia—regions of Lower Shabelle and southern Bakool. It is predicted that the entire south of Somalia will face famine within the next two months. Operation USA is working to assess unmet needs on the ground, with its initial response focusing on water resource needs in Kenya’s Dadaab refugee camps. The Dadaab camps–the largest in the world–are reported to receive as many as 1,300 refugees a day, the majority fleeing war-torn Somalia. These camps house almost 400,000 displaced people in three camps originally designated for 90,000.

Other countries in the Horn of Africa are being severely affected by drought. Successive seasons of failed rains—combined with increasing food prices, conflict and limited humanitarian access—have resulted in food and water shortages, acute malnutrition and mass displacement throughout the region. The lack of rain has also contributed to massive livestock deaths undermining the livelihoods of those who depend on them for economic and food security. Estimates are that there are at least 1.5 million displaced people—and 10 million people in need of immediate food assistance as a result of this crisis.”

China has been impacted by drought, as well. CCTV News states, “Southern China is facing the worst drought in a century. By March 16th, nearly 6.5 million hectares of farmland had been affected, and more than 20 million people faced drinking water shortages.”

Closer to home, the U.S. is facing the longterm consequences of drought. US News and World Report states, ‘”The Gold Rush State has sunk more than 45 feet since 1935 – something the U.S. government calls the “largest human alteration of the earth’s surface.” But earthquakes aren’t the cause. It’s happening because of excessive groundwater mining brought on by drought, and geologists say all the rain in the world won’t reverse cave-ins of dirt and rock in underground aquifers. “‘

“We’ve not seen anything like this in recent history,” says University of California professor Jay Lund. “The last time we saw this was in the ’20s and ’30s when we had the Dust Bowl.”

The government agency NIDIS (drought.gov) reports, “The global monthly high temperature record has been broken for the eleventh consecutive month. According to NOAA, March 2016 was 2.20 degree Celsius warmer than the average March temperature and was the highest departure of any month in the record which begins in January 1880. In Europe, drought conditions remain intense around the Mediterranean Sea while interior and northern Europe is wetter than last month. In Asia, drought expanded in and around the central and western Indian sub-continent, as well as intensifying in the West. In India, sugar production is expected to fall 5-7% while in Thailand, rice production is expected to rise 11% in the coming year with the easing of the drought there. In Africa, short-term drought remains strong in the North and the South and has intensified around the equator. In Somalia, 40% of the population of the North is suffering from drought and need emergency aid. In South Africa, an anticipated reduction in the 2016 fruit crop may have an impact on global shipping companies. In North America, drought remains entrenched in the higher latitudes, and is expanding in Mexico. Western US snowpack is near-average, the best conditions since 2011. In South America, drought remains in the northern part of the continent, despite some slight easing, while the South saw much-needed rain again this month. Venezuela, the capital of Caracas could soon begin to experience rolling blackouts as the Guri Dam, which supplies much of its’ power, is approaching critically low water levels. In Oceania, drought eased slightly in Southern Australia while remaining firmly entrenched in the islands to the north. Australian is anticipating a rebound in wheat, cotton, and milk production with the waning of El Nino.”

Global Drought
Global Drought

bookmark_borderGMO’s: Throwing the Baby out with the Bathwater

by Daniel Brouse

The definition of GMO is the modern version, not selective breeding. (0)

GMO’s (genetically modified organism) have been around for thousands of years; however, the irrational fear of GMO’s is a recent phenomenon. Are there risks to GMO’s? Yes. Has there been any evidence of harm to human health? No. The risks associated with GMO’s are from the impact to our ecosystem through the misuse of GMO agricultural practices.

Technically speaking, you are a genetically modified organism.  One of the first patents issued for GMO’s was for medicine. “In 1982, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approves the first genetically engineered drug, Genentech’s Humulin, a form of human insulin produced by bacteria. This is the first consumer product developed through modern bioengineering.”

The phobia of GMO’s is really a fear of modern bioengineering patents. Modern bioengineering started in 1980. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “genetically altered life forms can be patented. The decision allowed the Exxon Oil Company to patent an oil-eating microorganism.” (1)

Another change in the meaning of GMO occurred with the sequencing of genes. “NHGRI led the National Institutes of Health’s contribution to the International Human Genome Project. This project, which had as its primary goal the sequencing of the three thousand million base pairs that make up human genome, was successfully completed in April 2003.” (1.1) With these discoveries all sorts-of risks arose. There are the benefits of being able to use plants similar to the human genome for research. For instance, GMO tobacco plants are being used to help develop new medicines because of their similarity to the human genome. It is the ability of Man to alter genetics so rapidly that is frightening.

SHOULD WE BE AFRAID OF GMO’s?
The use of GMO’s in agriculture practices should be of concern. “There is a case for GMOs and a case against the indiscriminate use of monoculture crops fueled by synthetic fertilizer on dead lands.” (2)

Part of the concern is a monoculture crop. There may be long term impacts from the lack of diversity caused by patent controlled crops. This factor is the least concerning since patents are only good for 17 years. After that, the GMO seed is free to crossbreed.

Of more concern is, “fueled by synthetic fertilizer on dead lands.” The inherent risk from GMO’s is not the plant itself, but how the plant is farmed. Some GMO crops promote the use of RoundUp (glyphosate). RoundUp creates dead lands — the rest of the ecosystem is destroyed, at least to some extent. Certainly, all the other vegetation is extinct from that land. The collapse of bee colonies may, or may not, be part of that destroyed ecosystem. Combining RoundUp with synthetic fertilizer just adds fuel to the deadly mix.  There appears to be no debate that GMO seed created for the purpose of being fed fossil fuel fertilizer has a negative impact on the entire world.

5,000 years ago in China similar agriculture experiments were conducted. (In particular, the cultivation of rice.) Today it is believed these methods of farming are the origins of human induced climate change. (3)

If you look at the impact on Earth as an ecosystem, humans are conducting a deadly agriculture experiment.

PART II: Should we throw the baby out with the bathwater?

On the other hand, GMO farming (in particular, the cultivation of rice) is saving millions of children from dying or going blind. (4)

HUMAN HEALTH
Since 1992, millions of animals have been raised on GMO feed. Since 1996, cows, chickens, pigs and pretty much all other types of livestock have eaten GMO crops. To date, there has not been a single case of a health problem for either the animals nor the humans that consume the meat. This equates to multiple generations being raised without an occurrence of ill health.

Also since 1996, almost all organic produce has been grown using GMO fed manure. During these multiple generations of plants, neither a plant nor human has shown any ill effects related to the GMO dung.

… TO BE CONTINUED.

0) Mark Mullen (2016)
1) American Public Radio (2016)
1.1) Human Genome Project (2003)
2) Sidd (2016)
3) Richard Lovett (2014)
4} Golden Rice / U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2015)

bookmark_borderKilling Ourselves With Climate Change

WASHINGTON DC — Climate change is maiming and killing humans.

“This isn’t just about glaciers and the polar bears; it’s about the health of our family and our kids,” said Gina McCarthy, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, one of eight U.S. agencies that contributed to the report. “To protect ourselves and future generations, we need to understand the health impacts of climate changes that are already happening and those we expect to see down the road.”

The US Global Change Research Program is a report compiled over several years by the federal government. The report states:
Climate change is a significant threat to the health of the American people. The impacts of human-induced climate change are increasing nationwide. Rising greenhouse gas concentrations result in increases in temperature, changes in precipitation, increases in the frequency and intensity of some extreme weather events, and rising sea levels. These climate change impacts endanger our health by affecting our food and water sources, the air we breathe, the weather we experience, and our interactions with the built and natural environments. As the climate continues to change, the risks to human health continue to grow.

Current and future climate impacts expose more people in more places to public health threats. Already in the United States, we have observed climate-related increases in our exposure to elevated temperatures; more frequent, severe, or longer-lasting extreme events; degraded air quality; diseases transmitted through food, water, and disease vectors (such as ticks and mosquitoes); and stresses to our mental health and well-being. Almost all of these threats are expected to worsen with continued climate change. Some of these health threats will occur over longer time periods, or at unprecedented times of the year; some people will be exposed to threats not previously experienced in their locations. Overall, instances of potentially beneficial health impacts of climate change are limited in number and pertain to specific regions or populations. For example, the reduction in cold-related deaths is projected to be smaller than the increase in heat-related deaths in most regions.

Every American is vulnerable to the health impacts associated with climate change. Increased exposure to multiple health threats, together with changes in sensitivity and the ability to adapt to those threats, increases a person’s vulnerability to climate-related health effects. The impacts of climate change on human health interact with underlying health, demographic, and socioeconomic factors. Through the combined influence of these factors, climate change exacerbates some existing health threats and creates new public health challenges. While all Americans are at risk, some populations are disproportionately vulnerable, including those with low income, some communities of color, immigrant groups (including those with limited English proficiency), Indigenous peoples, children and pregnant women, older adults, vulnerable occupational groups, persons with disabilities, and persons with preexisting or chronic medical conditions.

In recent years, scientific understanding of how climate change increases risks to human health has advanced significantly. Even so, the ability to evaluate, monitor, and project health effects varies across climate impacts. For instance, information on health outcomes differ in terms of whether complete, long-term datasets exist that allow quantification of observed changes, and whether existing models can project impacts at the timescales and geographic scales of interest. Differences also exist in the metrics available for observing or projecting different health impacts. For some health impacts, the available metrics only describe changes in risk of exposure, while for others, metrics describe changes in actual health outcomes (such as the number of new cases of a disease or an increase in deaths).

This assessment strengthens and expands our understanding of climate-related health impacts by providing a more definitive description of climate-related health burdens in the United States. It builds on the 2014 National Climate Assessment and reviews and synthesizes key contributions to the published literature. Acknowledging the rising demand for data that can be used to characterize how climate change affects health, this report assesses recent analyses that quantify observed and projected health impacts. Each chapter characterizes the strength of the scientific evidence for a given climate–health exposure pathway or “link” in the causal chain between a climate change impact and its associated health outcome. This assessment’s findings represent an improvement in scientific confidence in the link between climate change and a broad range of threats to public health, while recognizing populations of concern and identifying emerging issues. These considerations provide the context for understanding Americans’ changing health risks and allow us to identify, project, and respond to future climate change health threats. The overall findings underscore the significance of the growing risk climate change poses to human health in the United States.

HUMAN HEALTH
The influences of weather and climate on human health are significant and varied. Exposure to health hazards related to climate change affects different people and different communities to different degrees. While often assessed individually, exposure to multiple climate change threats can occur simultaneously, resulting in compounding or cascading health impacts (see Figure ES2).

With climate change, the frequency, severity, duration, and location of weather and climate phenomena—like rising temperatures, heavy rains and droughts, and some other kinds of severe weather—are changing. This means that areas already experiencing health-threatening weather and climate phenomena, such as severe heat or hurricanes, are likely to experience worsening impacts, such as higher temperatures and increased storm intensity, rainfall rates, and storm surge. It also means that some locations will experience new climate-related health threats. For example, areas previously unaffected by toxic algal blooms or waterborne diseases because of cooler water temperatures may face these hazards in the future as increasing water temperatures allow the organisms that cause these health risks to thrive. Even areas that currently experience these health threats may see a shift in the timing of the seasons that pose the greatest risk to human health.

Climate change can therefore affect human health in two main ways: first, by changing the severity or frequency of health problems that are already affected by climate or weather factors; and second, by creating unprecedented or unanticipated health problems or health threats in places where they have not previously occurred.

Temperature-Related Death and Illness
Increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases lead to an increase of both average and extreme temperatures. This is expected to lead to an increase in deaths and illness from heat and a potential decrease in deaths from cold (see Figure ES3), particularly for a number of communities especially vulnerable to these changes, such as children, the elderly, and economically disadvantaged groups. Days that are hotter than the average seasonal temperature in the summer or colder than the average seasonal temperature in the winter cause increased levels of illness and death by compromising the body’s ability to regulate its temperature or by inducing direct or indirect health complications. Loss of internal temperature control can result in a cascade of illnesses, including heat cramps, heat exhaustion, heatstroke, and hyperthermia in the presence of extreme heat, and hypothermia and frostbite in the presence of extreme cold. Temperature extremes can also worsen chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, cerebrovascular disease, and diabetes-related conditions. Prolonged exposure to high temperatures is associated with increased hospital admissions for cardiovascular, kidney, and respiratory disorders.

Air Quality Impacts
Changes in the climate affect the air we breathe, both indoors and outdoors. The changing climate has modified weather patterns, which in turn have influenced the levels and location of outdoor air pollutants such as ground-level ozone (O3) (see Figure ES4) and fine particulate matter. Increasing carbon dioxide (CO2) levels also promote the growth of plants that release airborne allergens (aeroallergens). Finally, these changes to outdoor air quality and aeroallergens also affect indoor air quality as both pollutants and aeroallergens infiltrate homes, schools, and other buildings. Poor air quality, whether outdoors or indoors, can negatively affect the human respiratory and cardiovascular systems. Higher pollen concentrations and longer pollen seasons can increase allergic sensitization and asthma episodes and thereby limit productivity at work and school.

Extreme Events
Climate change projections show that there will be continuing increases in the occurrence and severity of some extreme events by the end of the century, while for other extremes the links to climate change are more uncertain. Some regions of the United States have already experienced costly impacts—in terms of both lives lost and economic damages (see Figure ES5)—from observed changes in the frequency, intensity, or duration of certain extreme events. While it is intuitive that extremes can have health impacts such as death or injury during an event (for example, drowning during floods), health impacts can also occur before or after an extreme event, as individuals may be involved in activities that put their health at risk, such as disaster preparation and post-event cleanup. Health risks may also arise long after the event, or in places outside the area where the event took place, as a result of damage to property, destruction of assets, loss of infrastructure and public services, social and economic impacts, environmental degradation, and other factors. Extreme events also pose unique health risks if multiple events occur simultaneously or in succession in a given location. The severity and extent of health effects associated with extreme events depend on the physical impacts of the extreme events themselves as well as the unique human, societal, and environmental circumstances at the time and place where events occur.

Vector-Borne Diseases
Vector-borne diseases are illnesses that are transmitted by vectors, which include mosquitoes, ticks, and fleas. These vectors can carry infective pathogens such as viruses, bacteria, and protozoa, which can be transferred from one host (carrier) to another. The seasonality, distribution, and prevalence of vector-borne diseases are influenced significantly by climate factors, primarily high and low temperature extremes and precipitation patterns. Climate change is likely to have both short- and long-term effects on vector-borne disease transmission and infection patterns, affecting both seasonal risk and broad geographic changes in disease occurrence over decades (see Figure ES6). While climate variability and climate change both alter the transmission of vector-borne diseases, they will likely interact with many other factors, including how pathogens adapt and change, the availability of hosts, changing ecosystems and land use, demographics, human behavior, and adaptive capacity. These complex interactions make it difficult to predict the effects of climate change on vector-borne diseases.

Water-Related Illness
Across most of the United States, climate change is expected to affect fresh and marine water resources in ways that will increase people’s exposure to water-related contaminants that cause illness (see Figure ES7). Water-related illnesses include waterborne diseases caused by pathogens, such as bacteria, viruses, and protozoa. Water-related illnesses are also caused by toxins produced by certain harmful algae and cyanobacteria and by chemicals introduced into the environment by human activities. Exposure occurs through ingestion, inhalation, or direct contact with contaminated drinking or recreational water and through consumption of contaminated fish and shellfish. Factors related to climate change—including temperature, precipitation and related runoff, hurricanes, and storm surge—affect the growth, survival, spread, and virulence or toxicity of agents (causes) of water-related illness. Whether or not illness results from exposure to contaminated water, fish, or shellfish is dependent on a complex set of factors, including human behavior and social determinants of health that may affect a person’s exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Water resource, public health, and environmental agencies in the United States provide many public health safeguards to reduce risk of exposure and illness even if water becomes contaminated. These include water quality monitoring, drinking water treatment standards and practices, beach closures, and issuing advisories for boiling drinking water and harvesting shellfish.

Food Safety, Nutrition, and Distribution
A safe and nutritious food supply is a vital component of food security. The impacts of climate change on food production, prices, and trade for the United States and globally have been widely examined, including in the recent report “Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System.” An overall finding of that report was that “climate change is very likely to affect global, regional, and local food security by disrupting food availability, decreasing access to food, and making utilization more difficult.” This chapter focuses on some of the less reported aspects of food security, specifically the impacts of climate change on food safety, nutrition, and distribution. There are two overarching means by which increasing carbon dioxide (CO2) and climate change alter safety, nutrition, and distribution of food. The first is associated with rising global temperatures and the subsequent changes in weather patterns and extreme climate events. Current and anticipated changes in climate and the physical environment have consequences for contamination, spoilage, and the disruption of food distribution. The second pathway is through the direct CO2 “fertilization” effect on plant photosynthesis. Higher concentrations of CO2 stimulate growth and carbohydrate production in some plants, but can lower the levels of protein and essential minerals in a number of widely consumed crops, including wheat, rice, and potatoes, with potentially negative implications for human nutrition.

Mental Health and Well-Being
The effects of global climate change on mental health and well-being are integral parts of the overall climate-related human health impacts. Mental health consequences of climate change range from minimal stress and distress symptoms to clinical disorders, such as anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, and suicidality. Other consequences include effects on the everyday life, perceptions, and experiences of individuals and communities attempting to understand and respond appropriately to climate change and its implications. The mental health and well-being consequences of climate change related impacts rarely occur in isolation, but often interact with other social and environmental stressors. The interactive and cumulative nature of climate change effects on health, mental health, and well-being are critical factors in understanding the overall consequences of climate change on human health.

Populations of Concern
Climate change is already causing, and is expected to continue to cause, a range of health impacts that vary across different population groups in the United States. The vulnerability of any given group is a function of its sensitivity to climate change related health risks, its exposure to those risks, and its capacity for responding to or coping with climate variability and change. Vulnerable groups of people, described here as populations of concern, include those with low income, some communities of color, immigrant groups (including those with limited English proficiency), Indigenous peoples, children and pregnant women, older adults, vulnerable occupational groups, persons with disabilities, and persons with preexisting or chronic medical conditions. Characterizations of vulnerability should consider how populations of concern experience disproportionate, multiple, and complex risks to their health and well-being in response to climate change.

Death By Ozone
Health And Air Quality
Human Induced Climate Change Experiments

bookmark_borderDiet And Global Warming

For quite some time, the scientific consensus has been eating meat is worse for the environment than being a vegetarian; however, a new study found a very different result. Lettuce is “over three times worse in greenhouse gas emissions than eating bacon,” according to researchers from the Carnegie Mellon University.

Paul Fischbeck, study co-author and CMU’s professor of social and decisions sciences, said: “Lots of common vegetables require more resources per calorie than you would think. Eggplant, celery and cucumbers look particularly bad when compared to pork or chicken.”

bookmark_borderClimate Change Immigrants and Refugees

By Daniel Brouse

EARTH — As human induced climate change is realized, mammals have started showing patterns of migration. Some conditions are driving animals south due to the loss of their habitat (mostly animals living on ice, such as, seals and polar bears.) Some conditions are allowing animals to migrate further north (like humpback whales.) Some conditions are forcing animals to seek higher ground, as well as, escape salt water intrusion. (eg humans that live on islands)

* NOAA recently concluded that mammals are migrating due to global warming. “Humpback and fin whales are now able to go farther north in most winters, competing with beluga whales for resources,” a scientist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said.

* The government of the Marshall Islands has requested climate change refugee status from the United States for former Bikini island residents. “The people of Bikini came back to us and asked us to take this proposal to the US, to request the resettlement trust fund be used to settle people in the US not just the Marshall Islands,” said Tony de Brum, Foreign Minister of the Marshall Islands. “We have not seen the final text of the legislation but the request that went in was on the basis of Kili being uninhabitable because of climate change.”

* In Paris almost 200 countries have ratified a new agreement in an attempt to help mitigate climate change. Included in the deal is $100bn fund to help developing and island countries adapt to global warming.

* Long ago in the United States, FEMA started a forced plan of relocation for homes located in areas prone to flooding.

Chances are large that if you are a mammal you will become a climate change refugee.

More on the Human Induced Climate Change Experiment

bookmark_borderRare Winter Air Quality Alert for Philadelphia

Philadelphia, PA — December 7 and 8, 2015 have been declared “don’t breath in Philly days” by the EPA. It is rare to have a December air quality alert in Philadelphia, PA. It is recommended not to breath in the out-of-doors on alert days. Children, elderly and physically active individuals are most at risk for disease and death.

View the current air quality for Philadelphia.

Philadelphia Air Quality Winter 2015
Philadelphia Air Quality Winter 2015

More on the health risks of air pollution.

Death By Ozone

More on global warming and climate change.