Photo by: Pixabay user SD Pictures
Studies by Harvard Chan School researchers found that carbon pricing—where polluters pay a fee on the carbon they produce—can save lives and prevent disease.
Why it matters: Air pollution from fossil fuels can have major effects on human health. It can cause early death, heart attacks, hospitalizations for respiratory disorders, stroke, asthma attacks, and absenteeism from school and work.
Recent studies have suggested that it may even contribute to autism spectrum disorder and Alzheimer’s disease. Research at the Harvard Chan School showed that adding a price to human-made carbon emissions could reduce the use of fossil fuels, and improve public health in Massachusetts and other states.
The background: In one study, researchers simulated what would happen to public and environmental health in Massachusetts if a carbon pricing policy were enacted. The scenario assigned a fee to fossil fuels in transport, residential and commercial buildings, and in 33 industries across Massachusetts.
- The study found that by 2040, putting a carbon pricing policy in action would reduce carbon emissions by 33 million metric tons, which in turn would reduce harmful byproducts of combustion like nitrogen oxides (NOx), ozone, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
- The policy was estimated to save 340 lives statewide. It also found that it would save the state nearly three billion dollars in medical-related costs.
The Upshot: Without firm climate change policies from the federal government, state and regional actions can make a difference in reducing pollution. Studies showing how policies like carbon pricing can save both money and lives give health-based evidence for actions that slow climate change around the U.S. and the world.
- Climate, air quality, and health benefits of a carbon fee-and-rebate bill in Massachusetts, U.S.A.
- Carbon pricing: a win-win environmental and public health policy
- Costs and Health Co-Benefits for a U.S. Power Plant Carbon Standard
- Health Co-Benefits of Carbon Standards for Existing Power Plants
- Estimating Public Health Impacts from Individual Power Plants
- Air Pollution Within EPA Standards Affects Our Lungs
- Health and Climate Benefits of Offshore Wind
An 80x30 Clean Electricity Standard: Carbon, Costs, and Health Benefits
The energy, economic, environmental, and health outcomes of an illustrative clean energy standard design that reaches 80% clean electricity by 2030.
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.
Health-related savings from increased walking and bicycling far exceed estimated transportation infrastructure costs
Research in the Journal of Urban Health shows that transportation infrastructure investments could save hundreds of lives and billions of dollars.
Adding A Climate Lens To Health Policy In The United States
Our Yerby Fellow Dr. Renee Salas and Interim Director Dr. Aaron Bernstein outline specific recommendations for achieving climate action through health policy and decision making.
2020 Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change: U.S. Policy Report
COVID-19 shows how no one is immune from converging health crises and that millions of lives can be saved with climate action.
Clean Energy Futures Project shows low or zero carbon emissions policies for the electricity sector are achievable with climate and health benefits by 2040 to 2050
New research from Clean Energy Futures Project shows low or zero carbon emissions policies for the electricity sector are achievable with climate and health benefits by 2040 to 2050
Study: Regional transportation pact could save more than 1,000 lives
A regional initiative among 12 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states aimed at reducing carbon emissions from transportation could help avoid about 1,100 deaths and nearly 5,000 asthma cases each year, and could save more than $11 billion in health costs, according to a new analysis.
Solutions for preventing the next pandemic
The cost of preventing the next pandemic is 2% of the cost we’re paying for COVID-19.
Carbon Standards Re-Examined
Our researchers collaborated with other institutions on a working paper on what EPA’s finalized ACE Rule means for public health. The analysis calls into question the assumptions and predictions used in EPA’s cost-benefit analysis.
Viewpoint: Encouraging health professionals’ civic engagement to address health impact of climate crisis
Health professionals who want to address the effects of the climate crisis on the health of people and the planet should become more civically engaged.
Jonathan Buonocore Sc.D
Jonathan focuses on the health, environmental, and climate impacts of energy, and the benefits of reducing carbon emissions—commonly called “health co-benefits.”
Drew Michanowicz DrPH, CPH
Drew’s research interests are related to poorly understood and emerging environmental hazards on both global- and community-level scales.
Kathy Fallon Lambert
Kathy examines how big data and models can be used to quantify the health and environment benefits of actions to mitigate climate change.