A recent environmental study reports that of the possible effects of global warming, rising temperatures will have the strongest effect on people’s well-being and health, proving definite links between the number of fatalities on any given day and thermal conditions.

A new report by a prominent reinsurance company reveals that there is a trend towards ever-larger and more catastrophic natural disasters due to increasing global warming caused by human activities. And this trend towards an increasing frequency of extreme natural events will in turn have direct negative effects on human life.

The report, Weather Catastrophes and Climate Change (published by the German firm Munich Re AG), warned that the 2003 heat wave that killed tens of thousands in Europe gives an idea of what could happen more frequently if global warming continues to accelerate. The heat wave, which is cited as a particularly striking example of a climate-related disaster, left an estimated 35,000 dead in the summer of 2003.

Climate research has revealed that atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) has risen strongly since 1850; this rise is caused by human activity and is primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels. The rising concentration of CO2 and other anthropogenic (caused or derived from human activities) greenhouse gases (GHG) has resulted in the global climate in the past century warming by -0.6º C. If the concentration of GHG doubles, the resulting global mean warming will very likely be between 1.5 and 4.5º C.

The report added that the impact of global environmental changes generated by human activity is growing. It cited statistics showing that only 16% of the approximately 14,000 natural catastrophes analyzed between 1980 and 2003 were natural hazard events such as earthquakes or volcanic eruptions which cannot be influenced by mankind. The large remainder, five out of six natural catastrophes, originate in the atmosphere.

Temperatures rising

Of the possible effects of global warming, rising temperatures will have the strongest effect on people’s well-being and health, according to the report. It said that there are many studies which prove definite links between the number of fatalities on any given day and thermal conditions. In New York and Shanghai, for example, three times as many people die on extremely hot days as on normal warm days— and these two cities are in completely different regions.

It also noted seemingly significant correlations between extremely hot conditions and traffic accidents. A scientific analysis revealed that there were 18% more road accidents on the hottest days than on cool days. Even in countries where heat load is common such as Saudi Arabia, there is a positive correlation between the frequency of road accidents and air temperature.

Occupational health studies also reveal that heat increases the number of occupational accidents and reduces productivity. There is also evidence that heat is capable of raising the level of aggression and the incidence of violent acts.

Negative environmental effects

But apart from these direct effects on well-being, climate change also has negative effects on the environment which could also impact on people’s health and welfare.

For example, higher water surface temperatures could lead to an increased probability of torrential rain. Climate change will therefore result in a greater risk of deaths due to severe weather events. There is already a clear upward trend in annual numbers of people killed throughout the world by weather-related natural catastrophes since 1980.

Changes in air and water temperatures can also prove favorable to the spread of tropical diseases such as malaria and dengue fever. Exceptional weather events can also cause clusters of diseases that are transmitted by water, mosquitoes, or rodents.

Extreme torrential rain and droughts can also trigger diarrhea due to the pollution of drinking water sources by overflowing sewage facilities, and water shortages which make it difficult to be hygienic when preparing meals. The World Health Organization in fact estimates that changes in the climate over the past decades are responsible for approximately 2.4% of all diarrhea cases today. Further, increased heat can also bring about more cases of spoiled food leading to a high incidence of food poisoning.

But the most serious effects of global warming concern the accelerated rise in sea levels. As the global average temperature rises, the sea level may go up by five meters and more in the centuries to come, because substantial amounts of inland ice in Greenland and the Antarctic will melt.

Most of the human race lives in coastal areas. A rise in sea level by about one meter would be a heavy blow to some people but would not endanger major cities such as New York. However, if the sea level were to rise by seven or twelve meters, most cities in the world would definitely be affected. Large migratory movements would be inevitable and conflicts over ever-scarcer favorable settlement options would probably trigger military conflict.

What must be done?

In order to avoid such extreme scenarios, the emission of greenhouse gases must be reduced and eventually stopped. The report raises three options to minimize or eliminate the emission of GHG: using renewable energy, sequestering greenhouse gases in geological formations and discarding energy consumption as a status symbol.

The European Union Commission, for example, announced in June 2003 its aim to implement a hydrogen economy on the basis of renewable energies in Europe by the year 2010. A hydrogen economy uses renewable sources of energy such as wind, hydro and geothermal, to produce electricity. This electricity in turn is used to split water into hydrogen and oxygen through electrolysis. This hydrogen is in turn stored and used, when needed, to generate electricity.

There have also been proposals to generate electricity and/or hydrogen from fossil fuels in a manner that involves storing the resulting CO2 in suitable geographical formations, i.e. a cavern from which the original natural gas has been extracted. The use of such technology would naturally double energy costs, but this would be spread out over a period of time and thus the world economy could absorb it without major dislocations.

This applies all the more so, the report said, if energy consumption is no longer seen as a status symbol, as is often the case in the industrialized nations. It noted that cultural changes are afoot that are helping new status symbols — and a more relaxed approach to status consumption — gain in importance.

For example, the worldwide environmental movement has established new linkages between natural lifestyles, beauty and health from which not only organic farmers and alternative-therapy providers are benefiting. At the same time, the internet is promoting a lifestyle in which the ability to use resources counts for more than conventional property ownership.

Still, even if the three options were to interact on a global scale, GHG could not be reduced to zero overnight. The concentration will only stabilize when humans emit no more greenhouse gases than the atmosphere is able to degrade or pass on.  This means that stabilization of the atmospheric concentration of GHG is only possible if there is a dramatic decrease in global emissions.

A global environmental policy

One important milestone towards multilateral cooperation on global energy and environmental policy is the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Kyoto Protocol binds signatory countries that ratify the treaty to commit to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases, or engage in emissions trading if they maintain or increase emissions of these gases. Emissions trading is an administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emission of pollutants.

The problem is that the Bush administration has brusquely rejected the Protocol. And without the United States an international energy and environmental policy will be impossible, according to the report. The fabled “American Dream” is consistently linked to a wasteful lifestyle of boundless growth in energy consumption. The US also combines its claim to global leadership with its stated aim of securing its own supply of oil and other energy sources in the long term. The Kyoto Protocol will not be ratified by a completely new US administration either, since the targets for 2008-2012 can no longer be achieved due to the emission trends that have occurred in the meantime.

Still, despite the backing out of the US, the Protocol is not dead. On the contrary, the climate summits in Bonn and Marrakech have managed to bring the negotiations on all the sticking points in the Protocol to a successful conclusion. Over 120 states have ratified it in the meantime and the in very many countries climate policy measures are now in place.

Even in the US, there are growing signs that in various states, and possibly even at the federal level in the future, emissions trading programs and portfolio targets in favor of renewable energy sources will in fact be adopted. It is also worth noting that high oil and gas prices in the US may open the door to constructive approaches to a climate policy. IBON Features