Global Clean Air

How the Build Back Better Act will help clear the air

By Aileen Nowlan / Published: November 3, 2021

With the Build Back Better Act, Congress has the opportunity to make an unprecedented investment in public health and the climate, particularly in the reduction of harmful air pollution, which disproportionately harms low-income residents and communities of color.

While many cities across the country have experienced an overall improvement in air quality, residents in neighborhoods from West Oakland, California to the 5th Ward in Houston must still fight for cleaner air, as heavy truck traffic and industrial pollution continue to seriously impact their health.

woman on ladder installing small air pollution monitor on telephone poll

Hyperlocal air quality monitors have demonstrated how air quality levels can vary street by street.

Air pollution is not evenly distributed across the places that people live, work, play and worship. A critical step in better understanding and taking action to reduce these inequities in air pollution impacts is to fill in the many gaps in our national air quality monitoring network.

Historic investments in air quality monitoring

This bill would help eliminate air pollution blindspots by providing at least $170 million for direct air quality monitoring, a near doubling of federal investment in such monitoring, which has dropped by 20% in real terms over the past 16 years.

It also allocates $50 million to monitor and reduce air pollution in schools that serve students from low-income communities.

This funding has the opportunity to make a tremendous impact on the health and wellbeing of children, as 1 in 5 of all new childhood asthma cases in the United States are attributable to traffic related air pollution. Asthma is a leading cause of school absenteeism, accounting for about 14 million absences each school year, or one-third of all school days missed.

Data-focused investing

The Build Back Better Act also recognizes that historically we have been investing in activities that cause or mitigate pollution with our eyes closed. The bill invites, and in some cases requires, insights about local pollution in order to apply for billions in grant funding available to mitigate pollution.

Specifically, the bill provides $5 Billion in planning and implementation for pollution reduction, and requires applications to include ‘‘(A) the degree to which greenhouse gas air pollution is projected to be reduced [in] low-income and disadvantaged communities.” Communities would be required to demonstrate how they will verify that pollution is decreasing after receiving the grants.

It also offers $4 Billion to mitigate or remediate the negative impacts of transportation, starting by monitoring or assessments of local and ambient air quality, transportation emissions, and hot spots of extreme heat or elevated air pollution.

These funds could be especially helpful in communities that bear the greatest cumulative burdens of pollution–those adjacent or downwind of major industries, plagued by heavy truck traffic and/or surrounded by highways–the consequence of systemic racism.

To address this, the bill includes $3 Billion in Environmental And Climate Justice Block Grants, which could include monitoring and mitigation of air pollution, and facilitate engagement of disadvantaged communities in state and federal public processes.

Opportunities to harness new technology

This bill comes at a time when technology and analytics like satellites and low-cost air pollution monitors are making it simpler to track pollution and its impacts. These insights will be critical to the accountability required by the grants and can help transform our understanding of where air pollution comes from, what it does to local health, and who is responsible.

With this historic funding, we can put the new, innovative methods to use at far greater scale, fueling a better understanding of how air pollution impacts health at the neighborhood level. With richer, more reliable data in hand, policymakers can focus mitigation efforts on areas with the highest burden and turn to solutions that have the potential for the greatest impact, especially for those who are most at risk.

Posted in Government Official/Policymaker, Health, Homepage, Monitoring / Comments are closed

Digging into Freight Pollution Data in London

By Greg Slater / Published: November 1, 2021

Road transportation is a major source of air pollution in London, with heavy goods vehicles one of the top contributors of pollutants that harm people’s health.

The thinktank, Centre for London, has been conducting research this year to look “at how we can create smarter, fairer and more sustainable freight and logistics ecosystems.”

Centre for London was keen to understand more about freight activity in London, like daily activity patterns and how it was affected by COVID-19 lockdowns in the last year. These questions aren’t easy to answer with publicly available data sources. Using supportive traffic and congestion datasets, we were able to produce an analysis that provides a closer look at freight across the capital city – and a special focus on a particular neighbourhood in South London to get a more granular picture.

Here’s what we found. Read More »

Posted in Health, Homepage / Comments are closed

Take Back Health In Your City: WHO’s Dr. Maria Neira’s argument for reducing emissions

By Sergio Sanchez / Published: October 25, 2021

When the World Health Organization (WHO) released its new Global Air Quality guidelines earlier this month for the first time since 2005, it cited an overwhelming body of evidence showing how air pollution severely impacts health at even lower concentrations than previously understood. And while concentrations still largely exceed levels published by the WHO in 2005 for several pollutants in many areas around the world, the organization has now set more aggressive targets along with a phased approach in the hopes it can encourage countries to redouble their efforts to abate air pollution for protecting public health.

The price of inaction is clear: The burden of disease from both ambient and household air pollution exposure continues to grow. Children’s health is largely impaired by reduced long growth and function, respiratory infections and aggravated asthma resulting from breathing poor air quality. In adults, major causes of premature death attributable to air pollution are heart disease and stroke, and there is emerging evidence of diabetes and neurodegenerative conditions, among other effects. Every year, exposure to air pollution causes some 7 million premature deaths and results in the loss of millions more healthy years of life.

In a recent conversation, Dr. Maria Neira, the WHO’s Director of Public Health, Environment and Social Determinants, suggested that policymakers examine what they will gain from implementing stricter air quality standards, in addition to the consequences of inaction.

Dr. Maria Neira, World Health Organization

Health benefits of taking action

Dr. Neira argues that we should reframe our approach to focus on the multiple benefits of reducing pollution. “If the world stops burning fossil fuels, we will see an incredible benefit to public health,” Dr. Neira said. Not only could we prevent a significant percentage of chronic diseases, she says, “You could have more walking in the city. You could have more physical activity. You could take back your city.”

Dr. Neira, who wanted to be a physician since she was a child growing up in Spain, began her career as an endocrinologist, providing her a fist-hand look at the body’s feedback to endocrine disruptors like air pollution emissions. She later served as the medical director for Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) in refugee camps in El Salvador and Honduras. That experience prompted her to work in public health. “I couldn’t accept the fact that I was treating patients and then sending them back into conditions that were causing diseases,” she says. “I realized I could make a bigger impact if I worked on sanitation problems or children breathing poor air.”

Slowing climate change, benefitting public health

Now, charged with the leading of the WHO prevention arm, Dr. Neira examines the multitude of factors that can influence health, including diet and the environment. She hopes that in addition to adopting stricter air quality standards, countries will begin to look more closely at the health benefits associated with combating climate change. She argues that the cost savings in health—from the reduction in chronic diseases to increased productivity—would outweigh the investments needed to end our dependence on fossil fuels. Showing that kind of positive outcome in a similar way that current models illustrate economic benefits, would be “the indicator we would dream about.”

While climate change and air pollution impact vulnerable populations more acutely, Dr. Neira notes that dirty air and its impacts are harmful across all sectors of society. “In Europe we have 400,000 deaths every year due to air pollution.” When you add the cost of related hospital visits and the loss of work days, the impacts represent an overall cost to society, she says. Cities known for higher levels of air pollution may even find themselves less attractive to businesses, if they cannot lure top talent to live with their families, she says, citing Shanghai as a prime example.

Following positive examples

Social distancing requirements for COVID-19 brought many cities like Bogota, Columbia to expand bicycling infrastructure.

Countries like Canada and those in Scandinavia are trending in the right direction because their clean air and climate policies, Dr. Neira says. She also noted that mayors with the political will to transform their cities with low emission, sustainable interventions are seeing positive results. Bogota, Colombia, and Bilbao, Spain, are examples of industrialized cities that are now becoming “a pleasure to see.” However, “national politicians need to go farther.”

Need for additional research

While the WHO cited a wealth of research in its decision to lower emissions standards, Dr. Neira says scientists still have plenty of areas for future study. “I think most of the research now needs to go to interventions,” she says. “And whether we can prove those interventions are impactful or not.” Measuring health gains from changing traffic patterns or agricultural practices could help determine which interventions countries adopt. Researchers should examine whether interventions are cost-effective, how soon their impacts can be measured and how beneficial they are to both the environment and human health. “We have to prioritize those that have the biggest public health impact in the shortest possible period of time,” she concluded.

Posted in Climate, Government Official/Policymaker, Health, Public Health/Environmental Official / Comments are closed

Global Clean Air Profile: Rodolfo Lacy Tamayo, Director of the Environmental Directorate at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

By Sergio Sanchez / Published: October 5, 2021

Rodolfo Lacy Tamayo is the Director of the Environmental Directorate at the OECD, where he studies the intersection of land use change, housing and urban planning. Lacy and his colleagues are determining how the development of cities can change to reduce the burden of air pollution from vehicles.

How did you get involved in clean air work?

In 1977, when I was a student at the Metropolitan Autonomous University in Mexico City, World Environment Day was celebrated with a week of panels and exhibitions about environmental problems in Mexico. One of them was the air pollution problem in the valley of Mexico. At that time there were no catalytic converters, and we used leaded gasoline. We suffered from traffic congestion and high air pollution. In the valley of Mexico, Lake Texcoco had been drained, changing the ecosystem. We were suffering from dust storms, heat waves, and of course, air pollution problems that were related to sulfur dioxide. Then, the amount of uncontrolled air pollution sources was huge, and air pollution problems were very critical.

I was a student and was very interested in working on those problems, so I started to focus my studies in environmental engineering with a specialty in air quality.

Later, I was in charge of the first comprehensive air pollution program in Mexico City and the citywide air quality monitoring network, in addition to enforcement teams and the first smog inspection program for the whole metro area.

Why do you find this work so critical, especially today?

Many of the technological advances related to air pollution control in the world are helping us now to address the global challenges related to climate change. We started with very small initiatives at local level and then found out that the pollution we were trying to tackle was related to global problems that are transforming the planet in general. I think I found in this discipline the way to really help my community, my city, my country and now the climate.

How should leaders couple climate and clean air goals?

I think leaders are seeing this problem even today with a siloed approach. But everything is related to the way we are using our resources, the energy we are selecting to give us the comfort we are enjoying and the way we are addressing technological challenges. If I need to move people from one place to another, I can choose a car as a mode of transportation that is very polluting. Or, I can design something that really solves the problem without affecting the environment or ecosystems. Now we are realizing that electric cars, vehicles in general—ships, boats, airplanes—could not only reduce but eliminate air pollution problems in our cities. We knew it several decades ago, but the siloed approach and the lack of comprehensive vision of how we can improve our quality of life without breaking all ecological cycles has been a failure. It’s clear for many people now that we have abused the planet—we have used it in an unsustainable way. We have to change the way we are living and satisfying our needs; otherwise, we will destroy the planet very soon.

How can organizations align funding to achieve both clean air and climate benefits simultaneously?

There is a revolution in the financial system, because the governing decisions in central banks and financial institutions are changing. Now we can adopt regulations to really promote low-carbon technologies or technologies that are not emitting any pollutants. Many financial institutions recently stopped financing or investing in coal. This is a new attitude of central banks and the financial system. The changes that we are now seeing are related to consciousness, the knowledge we have about how very profitable investments are really destroying ecosystems, our way of life and our quality of life. So instead of promoting and subsidizing oil and gas industries, mining activities and petrochemical corporations that are producing very harmful and toxic substances and materials, the financial system is willing to invest in technologies that we must massively deploy to protect natural resources.

I think that the financial system is changing, and we can see it is avoiding climate risks. They are requiring different kinds of assessments to make decisions about what kind of portfolios they will be promoting. That these institutions are now making good decisions for the future is a positive sign.

What gives you reason to hope?

Under the Paris Agreement and the Kyoto Protocol, we were addressing 6 greenhouse gases. But recently, with the advances of science, the IPCC has started to talk about 13 different climate forcers. We must reduce emissions of those climate forcers that are increasing the temperature and exacerbating the greenhouse gas effect, including short-term pollutants like black carbon. We have to expand the scope of work of many of the policies that countries are implementing now. Otherwise, we will not be able to tackle the climate challenge or improve the quality of life of people in cities, because we are not really reducing those pollutants that are affecting air quality and the climate system as a whole.

We can see that the agendas to tackle air quality and greenhouse gases are overlapping more and are converging in a common set of policies, decisions and regulations that are more comprehensive, and that will help us solve the problem in an integrated way.

Posted in Health / Comments are closed

Capturing the health benefits of climate policy is critical

By jgohlke / Published: October 4, 2021

Over the past 30 years, numerous scientific reports have highlighted the health impacts of climate change, starting with the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report in 1990. The report included a short summary on heat stress, vector and water borne diseases and air pollution health effects like asthma and heart attacks.

Yet health impacts are not fully accounted for in cost of carbon estimates – presenting a missed opportunity. Public health researchers and economists should continue to work together to more fully capture the health value of policies that cut climate pollution.

Climate and health

The most recent National Climate Assessment, published in 2018, provides an extensive review of climate change effects on human health in U.S. regions. Public health impacts include:

changes in mortality and hospitalizations due to extreme weather events including heat waves, floods, and droughts.
changes in vector-, food-, and waterborne infectious diseases.
changes in chemical exposures via air, food and water.
stresses to mental health.

The World Health Organization (WHO) quantifies global health impacts of climate change, utilizing the burden of disease methodology to estimate mortality and disability-adjusted life years. Based on heat-related mortality, diarrheal disease, malnutrition and malaria, the most recent WHO assessment projected 250,000 additional deaths per year in 2030 – despite only quantifying a subset of health impacts from climate change.

The Lancet has also commissioned several series of articles and reports detailing the human health implications of climate change. After the Paris Agreement, the outlet initiated the Lancet Countdown, tracking the status of health effects from climate change through reporting on numerous indicators across impacts, exposures and vulnerabilities, as well as adaptation and mitigation actions. For example, the most recent Lancet report estimated a 53.7% increase in heat-related mortality over the last 20 years and an estimated 15% increase in climate suitability for transmission of dengue.

Health benefits largely absent

Benefit-cost analysis – typically managed by economists – is a cornerstone of U.S. regulatory analysis. The U.S. Government is required to use a monetized estimate of the net impacts of global climate change, referred to as the social cost of carbon (SCC), in regulatory rulemakings of greenhouse gas emissions. The current models used to estimate the SCC incorporate impacts to agriculture productivity, energy use, property damage and, within the health sector, an estimation of changes in cold and heat-related mortality.

Yet, while the research community continues to provide more detailed characterizations of climate change’s health effects, health researchers have been less involved in applying these findings to estimate the SCC. As a result, health is still not fully represented in the SCC.

Quantification of health benefits, like lives saved and hospitalizations avoided, can provide critical justification for and evidence of success of environmental policies. For example, the regulatory impact analysis of the Clean Power Plan included an estimation of health and other benefits from reduced greenhouse gas emissions using the SCC estimate, as well as expected health co-benefits via reduced air pollution.

Improving health benefits estimates

A 2017 National Academies of Science Engineering and Medicine report recommended two critical research needs for advancing the science behind the SCC estimate:

Updating health damage modules to incorporate recent health literature.
Improving delineation of the different effects of climate change across regions of the world – e.g., trying to determine the different health impacts expected in different areas.

Since the release of this report, several groups have been working to address these recommendations. For example, the Climate Impact Lab has developed an improved temperature-related mortality estimate that incorporates adaptation and delineates distributional effects across areas of the globe.

A recent analysis utilized WHO, Climate Impact Lab, and Lancet Countdown temperature-mortality functions to produce estimated mortality costs associated with climate change – suggesting a seven-fold increase in estimated monetary damages from previous estimates. In other words, adding in more specific health damage estimates increased the estimated cost of carbon pollution by seven times—from $37 to $258 per metric ton of carbon dioxide emitted.

Although climate change is a global phenomenon, the impacts are unequal and disproportionately burden underserved, low-income and marginalized communities. For example, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found that socially vulnerable populations are likely to experience the most severe harms from climate change. Evaluating distributional health effects of climate change at a finer geographical scale could help policymakers address inequities.

It’s critical for policymakers to have accurate information to weigh the benefits and costs of cutting carbon. With health researchers involved, benefit-cost analyses can more accurately capture the threat that climate change poses to people’s health – and the benefits that come with acting on climate.

Posted in Climate, Health / Comments are closed

EDF unveils Spanish version of its flagship How-to Guide for mapping hyperlocal air pollution

By Sergio Sanchez / Published: September 7, 2021

As momentum grows in cities to tackle the global air pollution crisis, data sharing and access to knowledge will be a key catalyst in finding viable solutions. Today, on International Day of Clean Air for Blue Skies, EDF is proud to announce the publication of the Spanish translation of its guide, Making the Invisible Visible: A guide for mapping hyperlocal air pollution to drive clean air action, expanding reach and knowledge to an additional 570 million Spanish-speakers in 23 countries across the globe. Read More »

Posted in Mexico / Comments are closed

Discover what’s causing air pollution in London with this interactive map

By Elizabeth Fonseca / Published: September 7, 2021

Ever wonder where air pollution in your neighbourhood is coming from?

We’ve been working on a new Greater London map that displays detailed information on the sources of health-harming air pollution. Search for or click anywhere on the map to get a breakdown of pollution sources – for both nitrogen oxides (NO_x) and fine particulate matter (PM_2.5) pollution – at that particular spot.

What does the map display?

The map uses data produced by Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants (CERC) using the ADMS-Urban model as part of the Breathe London pilot project.

Based on modelled data for 2019, the map:

Displays an estimate of annual average NO_x and PM₅ pollution levels in London for major different sources of pollution.
Allows users to see a calculation of the pollution that people breathe, depending on where they are in the city and separated out by source category.
Provides distinct visual ‘layers’ for more than 20 individual sources (e.g., taxis, Transport for London buses, commercial gas), as well as grouped sources (e.g., all diesel vehicles).

The modelled data, which takes into account factors like wind and weather, is available on a 10 metre grid across London and provides the annual pollution concentrations experienced at 1m above ground level.

Which sources are included?

Road transport: Cars, buses, lorries, etc. and particularly those that run on diesel fuel.
Other transport: Other means of transportation that don’t involve the road, such as planes, trains and ships.
Commercial and domestic fuel: Heating and powering of indoor spaces like our homes, offices and shops by combustion of fuels such as gas, oil and wood.
Industrial and construction: Waste management activities like energy from waste plants and ‘Non-Road Mobile Machinery,’ i.e., construction sites and machines like diggers, excavators and diesel generators.
Miscellaneous: Other smaller sources like sewage treatment and smaller household sources
Background: Pollution produced outside of London that has been blown in by the wind.

Pollution health impacts

The map displays two pollutants: NO_x and PM_2.5. NO_x are a sum of nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) which, along with PM_2.5, are the main air pollutants of concern in London. They are harmful to human health and are associated with adverse health outcomes like asthma, strokes and cancer.

London also has emissions inventories for NO_x and PM_2.5, meaning there is a detailed list of all the activities contributing to these pollutants across the city. The model that is behind the dataset requires these emission inventories.

This is the first time that modelled pollution sources data has been displayed in this detail across Greater London on an interactive public map. With a better understanding of which activities are causing pollution and where, leaders and communities can develop targeted solutions that clean the air and protect people’s health.

Please see here for a recorded demo on how to use the map, explain how the data was calculated and answer your questions.

Posted in Government Official/Policymaker, London, UK / Comments are closed

The World Bank’s Ernesto Sánchez-Triana on the fight for clean air

By Sergio Sanchez / Published: September 3, 2021

Ernesto Sánchez-Triana is the Global Lead for Pollution Management and Circular Economy for the World Bank, where he manages the Program on Pollution Management and Environmental Health and the Program on Pollution Management and Circular Economy. He recently shared his thoughts on the fight for clean air with Sergio Sanchez, EDF’s Senior Policy Director, Global Clean Air.

Sergio: Why do you fight for clean air?

Ernesto: My best friend died of lung cancer when he was less than 40 years old. Like me, he had completed graduate studies in environmental engineering. In addition, one of my sons had respiratory problems associated with air pollution that resulted in bronchitis and asthma. This experience, as well as over three decades of working closely with the most vulnerable populations on the planet, have led me to specialize in this area. This is more than a professional obligation for me; it is an unconditional commitment that brings meaning to my life.

Air pollution is one of the biggest environmental threats the world faces and is the world’s leading environmental risk to human health. Exposure to PM2.5 (particles equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter) pollution, both outdoors and indoors, caused an estimated 6.4 million premature deaths and 21 million years lived with disability in 2019, according to the Global Burden of Disease Report. About 95% of those deaths occurred in low- and middle-income countries.

The World Bank has estimated that the annual health costs of PM2.5 pollution are US$8.1 trillion. Thus, in addition to causing pain and suffering, air pollution causes significant economic costs, equivalent to nearly 6.1% of global gross domestic product. Unless ambitious and concrete interventions are implemented, ambient (outdoor) air pollution is likely to increase its health and social burden in the future as low- and middle-income countries continue to urbanize, industrialize, and experience population growth.

Helping low- and middle-income client countries to address pollution-related challenges is indispensable to the World Bank’s mission of ending extreme poverty and promoting shared prosperity in a sustainable manner. The poor and other vulnerable groups, including children, the elderly, and women, are primarily affected by air pollution. They are exposed to higher concentrations of PM2.5 for reasons that include worse air quality in their neighborhoods, reliance on solid fuels for cooking and heating, and occupational exposure.

Sergio: Why do you find this work so critical, especially today?

Ernesto: Air pollution is increasingly recognized as the worldwide public health crisis that it is and a top development priority in fostering the creation of competitive, prosperous cities whose residents and visitors can breathe safe air. Recent analytical work conducted by the World Bank has demonstrated that interventions to manage air quality can deliver multiple benefits. Although the largest benefit is in health—notably through a reduction in premature death and cases of illness—there are additional benefits such as supporting more-livable cities, energy efficiency, reductions in healthcare costs and improvements in agricultural productivity, among others.

Furthermore, some air pollutants—most notably, black carbon and methane—are climate warmers. Black carbon is a component of PM 2.5 and therefore has adverse impacts on health. Consequently, efforts to reduce black carbon have benefits for health as well as for climate-change mitigation.

International health crises, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic, further highlight the need for continued action in addressing environmental pollution. Ongoing research is finding close links between air pollution and the incidence of illness and death due to COVID-19. Air pollution can cause cellular damage and inflammation throughout the body and has been linked to higher rates of diseases, including cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, asthma, and other comorbidities. All these conditions can also increase the risk of death in COVID-19 patients.

Sergio: How does the World Bank help countries reduce air pollution? How much funding is the World Bank financing for air pollution control?

Ernesto: Addressing air-quality management through analytical work, technical assistance, and lending is a top priority for the World Bank. During the period FY2004–FY2020, the World Bank portfolio of lending and technical assistance that targeted pollution amounted to approximately US$49 billion, of which about US$15 billion targeted air pollution.

Sergio: Where do you see the future of air quality monitoring for Low- and Middle-Income Countries?

Ernesto: Establishment of ground-level networks to measure and monitor air and climate pollutants is key. Supporting countries in developing robust plans for managing air quality—plans driven by reliable monitoring data on air quality—provide the basis for implementing projects that reduce high levels of air pollutants in a cost-effective way. Countries need to prioritize establishing and strengthening ground-level monitoring networks that measure fine (PM2.5) and ultrafine (PM0.1) particulate matter to inform the design and implementation of effective and efficient investment and policy interventions to protect human health from air pollution’s adverse effects.

The World Bank, through the Pollution Management and Environmental Health program, conducted analytical work on the potential for applying satellite measurements for air-quality monitoring in low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed to improve knowledge both on the extent to which satellite measurements can best be used to enhance air-quality monitoring, thus improving estimation of human exposure to air pollution, and on how satellite measurements can be brought into closer agreement with ground-level data, considering the shortcomings and advantages of satellite measurements.

The analytical work found that many different conditions—including mountainous terrains, snow, coasts, clouds, and dust—prevent accurate representations of air-pollution conditions by satellites in the cities tested. Overall, this work suggests that satellites cannot be a replacement for a high-quality ground-level monitoring (GLM) network in any of the cities evaluated, which initially included Delhi, India; Lima, Peru; and Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia; and later expanded to include Accra, Ghana; Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; Dakar, Senegal; Hanoi, Vietnam; Kampala, Uganda; and Kathmandu, Nepal.

In countries with no GLM data available, satellite estimates of surface PM2.5 concentration may have errors in the range of 22 to 85 percent. Establishment of GLM networks that include adequate quality assurance and quality control and follow standard operating procedures to ensure the data are of sufficient quality would likely enable better understanding of human exposure to air pollution specific to an individual city.

Sergio: Why should people participate in International Day of Clean Air for Blue Skies (Sept 7)? What do you see as the role of international collaboration in the fight against air pollution?

Ernesto: The International Day of Clean Air for Blue Skies brings a global call for action toward a single, unifying objective: clean air for all by urging countries to work together to tackle air pollution around the world. The International Day of Clean Air plays an indispensable role in spurring action against air pollution. For instance, it strengthens awareness about the significant health, social, economic, and development impacts caused by air pollution and galvanizes collective action to address it.

We have seen how important public-awareness campaigns have been to increase public and private commitments to tackle environmental problems. The Bank has partnered with other organizations to raise awareness among decision-makers and the general public on the air-pollution crisis. In 2018, together with the World Health Organization (WHO), the Bank organized the First Global Conference on Air Pollution and Health. The conference concluded with a Geneva Action Agenda to Combat Air Pollution to scale up efforts and mobilize action globally. The aspirational goal is to reduce the number of deaths from air pollution by two-thirds by 2030.

Airsheds cross both domestic state jurisdictions and national boundaries, often requiring international collaboration to ensure effective regional air-quality management. For example, international collaboration is needed to address the air-quality challenges of regional airsheds, such as the Indo-Gangetic Plain and Indus Basin, and the North China Plain; airsheds covering the Gulf States, Western Balkan States, and Turkey; and major urban agglomerations along the coast of Western Africa. International collaboration also plays a role in sharing knowledge and lessons learned from airshed approaches that have been critical in improving air quality in several parts of the world.

International collaboration can also contribute to developing analytical work that can underpin effective interventions, as demonstrated by the World Bank Group’s experience in supporting air-quality management in its client countries. For instance, in China, analytical work supported by the Bank helped to identify the sources of ambient air pollution in Hebei Province, including agriculture, which had previously not been considered. As a result of the findings of the analytical work, the Bank financed interventions to reduce ambient air pollution associated with the use of nitrogen-based fertilizers in the agriculture sector. In Peru, benefit-cost analysis of alternative interventions to control air pollution informed the design of three development policy lending operations that addressed air pollution through policy reforms in the energy and transport sectors. International collaboration could be used to support analytical work to inform the design and implementation of policy reforms and investments to tackle air pollution, as well as for generating knowledge of a more global nature with application across regions.

While technical assistance, analytical work, and advocacy are key tools for achieving objectives in managing air quality, capital mobilization is critical for ensuring that investments to reduce air pollution are put in place. International collaboration is vital to attract private investors and other stakeholders with an appetite for financial mechanisms for air-pollution control, including results-based mechanisms for payment for air-quality improvements such as green bonds. The very first green bond was issued in 2007 by the European Investment Bank and the World Bank. By 2020, multilateral development banks, private investors, and governments had issued bonds with a cumulative value of more than US$1 trillion. Green bonds illustrate how international collaboration can pilot new financial mechanisms and business models that will unlock significant investments to address air pollution and other sustainability challenges.

Posted in Health, Homepage / Comments are closed

Tackling air pollution and climate justice together

By Ananya Roy / Published: August 24, 2021

By Elizabeth Moses and Ananya Roy

We are seeing the beginnings of the impact of unchecked emissions globally.

Extreme rainfall and flooding in India, China and Germany have destroyed infrastructure and homes. Heat waves have sent temperatures soaring above 100^o F (40^o C) for weeks, causing heat exhaustion and mortality. Wildfires ravage forests and smoke drifts across continents painting skies orange and grey, triggering asthma attacks and air quality alerts in cities. The toll of death and destruction from these capture headlines adding to the steady drum roll of disease and death due to air pollution year after year. In every instance the most vulnerable in our societies: children, women, the elderly, those with existing disease and marginalized populations – Indigenous People, those belonging to ethnic or racial minorities and low-income communities, bear a disproportionate burden. Read More »

Posted in Climate, Health, Homepage / Comments are closed

How integrated transport solutions can maximize health and climate benefits

By Sergio Sanchez / Published: August 18, 2021

We are facing an epic twin challenge: climate change and the air pollution crisis.

One way we can confront this challenge is by approaching transport solutions with both a climate and clean air lens – simultaneously targeting multiple pollutants that warm the planet and harm our health.

Transport, health and climate

Transport is one of the main sources of air pollution around the world, with direct effects on mortality as well as on respiratory and cardiovascular disease. These effects disproportionately impact vulnerable populations like children, the elderly and those with preexisting conditions. For example, a recent health impact assessment by Environmental Defense Fund estimated more than 2,500 lives are lost and 5,200 children develop asthma every year in the San Francisco Bay Area due to exposure to traffic-related pollution.

Transport-related sources of air pollution that damage our health are also sources of climate pollution. The extraction, transport and refining of hydrocarbons and the burning of gasoline, diesel or any other fuel to power our vehicles emits a cocktail of substances that harm both people and environmental health, as well as a mixture of greenhouse gases that heat the Earth.

With overlapping sources of pollution, the transportation sector presents a huge opportunity to achieve both climate and air pollution goals simultaneously.

The dangers of looking at climate without a clean air lens

Often climate and air quality goals are treated separately within a city or region, creating an artificial division and disconnected solutions. A city might have a climate plan and a distinct air pollution plan, run by different teams, which can inadvertently lead to harmful health outcomes.

For example, in the 1990s and 2000s in the European Union, climate policy encouraged drivers to switch to diesel vehicles. That policy was focused on reducing carbon pollution – without accounting for the significant amount of nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) pollution that diesel engines put into the air. According to the American Lung Association, NO₂ is associated with increased inflammation of the airways that can cause:

Worsened cough and wheezing;
Reduced lung function;
Increased asthma attacks; and
Greater likelihood of emergency department and hospital admissions.

The pro-diesel policy led to a huge uptick in diesel-fueled cars on European roads, kicking off a new wave of air pollution that cities across the continent are still grappling with today. In London, for example, our research revealed how diesel pollution remains a huge source of the city’s air pollution, with diesel cars serving as the largest single source contributor to nitrogen oxides (NO_x) pollution at London primary schools. NO_x is a group of gases that includes NO₂.

The benefits of an integrated approach

Fortunately, city leaders are beginning to address climate and air pollution goals simultaneously. For example, Medellin, Colombia launched an Integrated Air Quality Management Plan that addresses both climate pollutants and health-damaging air pollutants. The plan includes the implementation of a Low Emission Zone focused on reducing fine particulate matter pollution and the incorporation of 64 zero-emission buses to the city’s Bus Rapid Transit system.

Sustainable transport is not just about clean vehicles. The ‘Avoid-Shift-Improve framework’ from the SLOCAT Partnership is useful:

Avoid trips in motorized vehicles and diminish distances travelled by both passenger and goods, through policies such as home office and other travel demand management measures, transit-oriented development, and logistics optimization.
Shift travel to sustainable mobility modes, by prioritizing investments on walking, cycling and public transport infrastructure, complemented by promotion strategies to ensure their preference by passengers, as well as to prioritize the use of efficient freight alternatives such as railways.
Improve the environmental performance of transport modes through energy efficiency, and ultra-low and zero emission technology and fuel systems.

Integrated climate and clean air solutions means more livable cities where people can breathe clean air, safely walk and cycle and access better and affordable public transport. It means optimized freight logistics, options to reduce commuting whenever possible and technologies and measures to reduce air pollution and carbon emissions. Integrated solutions mean using less-polluting vehicles and creating connected cities in which people can enjoy family and friends, go to school, work and have fun – all within a short distance.

We can tackle our twin challenge of climate and air pollution, with transport playing a key role in reducing emissions, protecting people’s health and achieving multiple other benefits for our lives and the planet.

Posted in Climate, Government Official/Policymaker, Health, Homepage / Comments are closed