Photo by: Pixabay user Marcinjozwiak

Harvard Chan School study shows negative impacts of burning natural gas and biomass have surpassed coal generation in many states

05/05/2021 | Harvard Chan C-CHANGE

New inventory of air pollution impacts from stationary sources over past decade shows trend may continue

BOSTON – A new study finds that burning natural gas, biomass, and wood now have more negative health impacts than burning coal in many states, and is a trend that may continue. The study from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health published in Environmental Research Letters is the first to provide an inventory of the health impacts of each type of fuel burned at stationary sources from 2008-2017, based on available data. 

Researchers examined the impact on mortality of tiny particles of pollution called PM2.5 that are emitted outdoors at stationary sources like coal plants, gas plants, industrial boilers, buildings (commercial and residential), and other industries up the oil and gas supply chain. Exposure to PM2.5 can lead to a variety of negative health impacts including cardiovascular and respiratory disease, stroke, asthma, autism spectrum disorder, and premature mortality. 

  • Fuel consuming stationary sources in 2017 were responsible for an estimated $524 billion to $777 billion in health impacts and 47,000-69,000 premature deaths, 33,000-53,000 of which were due to fuel sources other than coal.
  • As of 2017, gas emissions from stationary sources led to more deaths than coal in at least 19 states (CA, CO, CT, DE, ID, IL, KS, LA, MA, MS, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OR, RI, VA, VT, WA) and D.C.
  • As coal use has decreased, the share of health impacts from stationary sources has risen from gas, wood, and biomass. Together these fuels accounted for an estimated 70-77% of total early deaths from fuel consuming stationary source PM2.5 in 2017.

“Our findings show that while there are public health benefits from reducing coal emissions, gas, biomass, and wood are not clean or healthy alternative energy sources. Swapping one polluting fuel source for another is not a pathway to a healthy energy system,” says lead author Jonathan Buonocore Sc.D., a Research Scientist at the Center for Climate, Health, and the Global Environment at the Harvard Chan School. “Wind, solar, and other non-fuel combusting renewable energy are the healthiest energy sources available for generating electricity, powering our factories, and heating our homes.” 

The study, supported by RMI, estimates health-related social costs of air pollution emissions in the U.S. and projects current impacts of changes in energy infrastructure. These projections can provide community groups working to reduce pollution hotspots access to pollution and health impact data from nearby stationary sources. They can also serve as a tool for policymakers considering how to regulate building emissions and increase building electrification. 

“Our health and energy policies are inextricably linked. Burning gas and biomass have significant health impacts and should be replaced with clean renewable energy sources. Yet, climate policies have focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and not the air pollutant emissions that cause adverse health impacts, which has led to the rise of gas and biomass combustion as coal is replaced,” says study author Parichehr Salimifard, a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Harvard Healthy Buildings program. “Energy infrastructure built today could operate for decades—locking in their health impacts along with greenhouse gas emissions. Policymakers must consider health when making energy decisions.”

The authors used national emissions inventory data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, State Energy Data System from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, and three reduced complexity models.

  • Taken together, biomass and wood have the fastest-growing share of early deaths in the major energy-consuming sectors. In 2008 early deaths attributed to burning biomass and wood accounted for around 14-17% of average total deaths from stationary sources but by 2017, biomass and wood increased to 39-47% of total averaged early deaths.
  • Health impacts from coal are decreasing while the share of impacts from gas and wood/biomass are increasing, and this will likely continue beyond 2017. Projections estimate that in 2018, the health impacts of coal and gas were nearly equal—coal remained the most harmful fuel in the electricity sector, while wood/biomass and gas were most harmful in buildings and industrial boilers.
  • The health impacts of these fuels are conservative estimates because they only account for what is emitted outdoors at stationary sources, during combustion. For example, the full life cycle of emissions from gas production and compressor stations are not included. The study only looked at primary and secondary PM2.5 emissions—PM2.5 emissions from precursors (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and volatile organic compounds)—not ozone, direct NO2 exposure, and exposure to other air toxics, such as benzene and toluene.

Related:

Media contact: Anna Miller, amiller@hsph.harvard.edu

“A decade of the U.S. energy mix transitioning away from coal: historical reconstruction of the reductions in the public health burden of energy,” Jonathan J. Buonocore, Parichehr Salimifard, Drew R. Michanowicz, Joseph G. Allen, Environmental Research Letters, May 5, 2021. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/abe74c

The 2023 Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change: Policy Brief for the U.S.

Read Now

The 2022 Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change: Policy Brief for the U.S.

Climate change puts everyone at risk, but policy decisions and industry actions make some communities more vulnerable to the harms of climate change.

Read Now

Home is Where the Pipeline Ends

Our study is the first to test for health-damaging air pollutants in unburned natural gas where it is used: in our homes.

Read Now

2021 Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change: U.S. Policy Report

Our response to climate change must prioritize and optimize health and equity. We can improve health through climate actions that reduce our use of fossil fuels.

Read Now

Methane Reductions in the Oil and Gas Sector can Protect Public Health

A literature review examines the last ten years of research on methane and health-damaging air pollutant emissions from the oil and gas industry.

Read Now

Negative impacts of burning natural gas and biomass have surpassed coal generation in many states

A new inventory of air pollution impacts from stationary sources over the past decade shows this trend may continue.

Read Now

Pennsylvania setback regulations for fracking do not prevent setback incidents

The first study to look at the effectiveness of PA's statewide setback regulations and identify the potential risks and exposures for people living near fracking or UNG wells.

Read Now

Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previously thought

Fine particulate pollution from fossil fuel combustion was responsible for one in five early deaths worldwide in 2018, with vulnerable groups at greatest risk.

Read Now

Fossil fuel air pollution responsible for 1 in 5 deaths worldwide

New research finds that deaths from fossil fuel emissions are higher than previously thought—more than 8 million people per year, worldwide.

Read Now

'We Don't Have To Live This Way': Doctors Call For Climate Action

A sprawling analysis published by The Lancet focuses on public health data from 2019, and finds that heat waves, air pollution and extreme weather increasingly damage human health.

Read Now

New Harvard study shows where to install renewable energy in the U.S. to achieve the greatest climate and health benefits

Models offer guidance for state and national policymakers designing climate action plans.

Read Now

It’s been a rough summer for environmental regs, but Trump’s biggest cut is still to come

Our senior adviser Kathleen Lambert weighs in on the Affordable Clean Energy rule's impacts, based on her research.

Read Now

Combating EPA rollbacks — Health care’s response to a retreat on climate

Our Director Gina McCarthy and Co-director Dr. Aaron Bernstein on the many things the healthcare sector can do to fight the climate crisis.

Read Now

The 6 things you most need to know about Trump’s new climate plan

Our study lent insight into the counter-productivity of the EPA's Affordable Clean Energy plan.

Read Now

ACE rule excluded key details, researchers say

Our Senior Adviser, Kathy Fallon Lambert, discusses the negative effects of EPA's new Affordable Clean Energy Rule.

Read Now

U.S. EPA Administrator touts new energy plan despite agency analysis

Our Senior Adviser, Kathy Fallon Lambert, discusses how the EPA's new Affordable Clean Energy Rule is counterproductive.

Read Now

Problematic Natural Gas Storage Well Design Said Widely Used in U.S.

Many underground natural gas storage wells are potentially dangerous and need more regulation, says our Research Associate Drew Michanowicz.

Read Now

Urban Air Pollution Solutions

Our research associate, Jonathan Buonocore, collaborated with the USAID to develop a guide on air pollution solutions.

Read Now

Gina McCarthy on the roll back of the Clean Power Plan

Gina McCarthy speaks with Rick Ungar about the Trump administration's perseverance to promote the coal industry's prevalence in the United States and to halt the country's progress towards sustainable energy.

Read Now

Trump Admin Rolls Back Obama Era Clean Air Rules

Gina McCarthy contributes to discussion on the new Affordable Clean Energy rule and its disregard for scientific proof of climate change.

Read Now