Many people, even some environmentalists, see air pollution public health and global warming as very different problems.
They two issues certainly have different time horizons…air pollution damages public health today, while global warming threatens to make the earth unlivable over a longer time period.
But, they are related in the two important ways –
First, both air pollution and global warming are public health and environmental justice issues;
Second, eliminating or greatly reducing diesel exhaust particulate matter would not only reduce the public health effects of air pollution; because it would reduce black carbon and the melting of sea ice, it may be the quickest way to delay or reduce global warming.
Graphic Source: NRDC
Check out this Washington Post blog article below for a few good ideas, and the Ditching Dirty Diesel Collaborative for more. I underlined some of the most interesting references.
Last but not least, a question for you the reader – should the goods movement public health community and the global warming community work together more closely on diesel exhaust?
How to Stop the Arctic Ice and Glaciers from Melting … Without Spending a Ton Or Imposing Tyranny
The Real Reason the Arctic and Glaciers Are Melting So Fast
Soot—also known as black carbon—heats up the atmosphere because it absorbs sunlight. Black things do. That is basic physics. But for years the institutions that focus on climate policy have played down the role of pollutants such as black carbon that stay in the atmosphere for a short time, and concentrated on carbon dioxide ….***On January 15th … the most comprehensive study of black carbon yet conducted was published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. It concluded that the stuff was the second-most-damaging greenhouse agent after CO2 and about twice as bad for the climate as had been thought until now.***Black carbon is especially damaging to frozen regions, because when soot falls on snow and ice it increases the amount of light and heat they absorb. The new assessment may therefore help explain why the Arctic has been melting faster than anyone had expected.***Whereas CO2is long-lasting and an inevitable by-product of burning fossil fuels, soot drops out of the atmosphere within weeks.
Soot remains in the atmosphere for around seven days – a far shorter time thanCO2, which remains in the atmosphere for centuries. This means efforts to reduce soot may apply an important brake to warming in the short term with quick results, the researchers suggest.***Initially, calls from some climate scientists during the past decade to focus first on reducing emissions of shorter-lived but powerful warming agents, such as methane or soot, have been met with polite nods and a resumption of heated debates over CO2 emissions. But the increasing recognition of the adverse health effects of soot, as well as the experience from efforts to control soot, are changing that, some researchers say.
Unlike CO2, which can hang around in the atmosphere for centuries — CO2 that was emitted by the first coal-powered train is probably still in the air, warming the planet — black carbon has a relatively brief life span. It remains just a few weeks in the air before it falls to earth. That’s key, because if the world could reduce black carbon emissions soon, it could help blunt warming almost instantly. “You can wait a week or a month and the totals in the atmosphere can be significantly different,” says Eric Wilcox, an atmospheric scientist with NASA. Meanwhile, if we were to vastly reduce new CO2 emissions immediately, the billions of tons that already exist in the atmosphere would keep warming the planet for decades.
Because black carbon only remains in the atmosphere for several days to weeks, reducing it can bring about almost immediate mitigation of warming, whereas decreases in temperature lag reductions in CO2 by 1,000 years or more.
The MAIN Cause of Global Warming?
Given the uncertainties in the estimates, black-carbon soot may even outpace CO2‘s warming effect, according to the 232-page study published today in the Journal of Geophysical Research–Atmospheres.
The Most Important Short-Term Action
Reducing Arctic [black carbon] concentrations sooner rather than later is the most efﬁcient way to mitigate Arctic warming that we know of.
Top climate scientists say that soot plays a huge role in the melting of snow and ice. The director of Stanford’s Atmosphere and Energy Program and professor of civil and environmental engineering (Mark Jacobson) believes that soot is the primary cause of melting arctic ice, and says:Controlling soot may be the only way to significantly slow Arctic warming over the next two decades ….
Air traffic is the biggest source of pollution in the Arctic. Ever since cross-polar flightsbecame commonplace in the late 1990s, flights crossing the Arctic Circle have risen steadily, surpassing 50,000 in 2010.While cross-polar flights account for only a tiny percent of total global emissions from aviation, the standard cruising altitude for commercial planes in the Arctic is the stratosphere, an extremely stable layer of the atmosphere. Black carbon and other emissions get trapped in this layer and as a result remain in the atmosphere longer, causing far more damage than emissions from flights at lower latitudes, scientists say.But with some creative detours, airlines can buy a little more time for Arctic sea ice, a new study suggests.Writing in the journal Climatic Change, Mark Jacobson, an atmospheric scientist at Stanford University, and other researchers report that rerouting planes around the Arctic Circle could help delay the advent of a tipping point after which the ice would eventually disappear.The research team gathered emissions data from 40,399 cross-polar flights in 2006 and used computer simulations to compare what would happen over the next 22 years if those flights skirted the Arctic rather than following their current routes.
Good News: We Can Reduce Soot Without Selling Our Souls
Stop putting it there and it will rapidly go away—a potentially easy win.That win is made easier still by the fact that about 70% of emissions in Europe and the Americas come from diesel engines. Better exhausts, to trap carbon particles before they are emitted, and the scrapping of old, highly polluting vehicles could make an immediate impact. In other countries the problem is more often inefficient stoves and dirty fuel—again, things that are easy to deal with, at least in principle.
Decreasing black carbon emissions would be a relatively cheap way to significantly rein in global warming — especially in the short term, climate experts say …
“There are clear options” to cut soot emissions, Ramanathan says.In California, for instance, black-carbon soot emissions fell by half between 1990 to 2008 in response to tighter air-quality regulations affecting diesel emissions, according to a study Ramanathan and colleagues from Scripps and Argonne National Laboratory published in early 2011.The decline occurred even as “diesel consumption has increased significantly,” he adds. The soot pollution “has come down to almost nothing” statewide.The study on global black-carbon soot released Tuesday notes that focusing initially on diesel sources “appears to offer the most confidence in reducing near-term” warming.Another opportunity lies in supplying cook stoves that burn biofuels like wood or dung more efficiently, Ramanathan adds.
Action on soot and ozone can transform the politics of climate change because controlling these pollutants doesn’t just benefit the climate. It also delivers tangible local benefits. Even the governments that are skittish about spending money for global benefits can see real local advantages in this new strategy.”
Dealing with them is also cheaper than cutting CO2 emissions and does not need global agreement, because the local benefits would be the main point, so no one could free-ride on the emission-cutting efforts of others. Instead, the good of the climate would be free-riding on local self-interest.
In February, six countries (including the United States) formed a coalition devoted to promote practical changes that could control emissions of global warming agents such as soot and ozone.