skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Cobenefits of global and domestic greenhouse gas emissions for air quality and human health

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1396738
Resource Type:
Journal Article: Publisher's Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Lancet (British Edition)
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Name: Lancet (British Edition); Journal Volume: 389; Journal Issue: S2; Related Information: CHORUS Timestamp: 2017-10-04 15:13:50; Journal ID: ISSN 0140-6736
Publisher:
Elsevier
Country of Publication:
United Kingdom
Language:
English

Citation Formats

West, Jason, Zhang, Yuqiang, Smith, Steven, Silva, Raquel, Bowden, Jared, Naik, Vaishali, Li, Ying, Gilfillan, Dennis, Adelman, Zachariah, Fry, Meridith, Anenberg, Susan, Horowitz, Larry, and Lamarque, Jean-Francois. Cobenefits of global and domestic greenhouse gas emissions for air quality and human health. United Kingdom: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31135-2.
West, Jason, Zhang, Yuqiang, Smith, Steven, Silva, Raquel, Bowden, Jared, Naik, Vaishali, Li, Ying, Gilfillan, Dennis, Adelman, Zachariah, Fry, Meridith, Anenberg, Susan, Horowitz, Larry, & Lamarque, Jean-Francois. Cobenefits of global and domestic greenhouse gas emissions for air quality and human health. United Kingdom. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31135-2.
West, Jason, Zhang, Yuqiang, Smith, Steven, Silva, Raquel, Bowden, Jared, Naik, Vaishali, Li, Ying, Gilfillan, Dennis, Adelman, Zachariah, Fry, Meridith, Anenberg, Susan, Horowitz, Larry, and Lamarque, Jean-Francois. Sat . "Cobenefits of global and domestic greenhouse gas emissions for air quality and human health". United Kingdom. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31135-2.
@article{osti_1396738,
title = {Cobenefits of global and domestic greenhouse gas emissions for air quality and human health},
author = {West, Jason and Zhang, Yuqiang and Smith, Steven and Silva, Raquel and Bowden, Jared and Naik, Vaishali and Li, Ying and Gilfillan, Dennis and Adelman, Zachariah and Fry, Meridith and Anenberg, Susan and Horowitz, Larry and Lamarque, Jean-Francois},
abstractNote = {},
doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31135-2},
journal = {Lancet (British Edition)},
number = S2,
volume = 389,
place = {United Kingdom},
year = {Sat Apr 01 00:00:00 EDT 2017},
month = {Sat Apr 01 00:00:00 EDT 2017}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record at 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31135-2

Save / Share:
  • Policies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions can bring ancillary benefits of improved air quality and reduced premature mortality, in addition to slowing climate change. Here we study the co-benefits of global and domestic GHG mitigation on US air quality and human health in 2050 at fine resolution using dynamical downscaling, and quantify for the first time the co-benefits from foreign GHG mitigation. Relative to a reference scenario, global GHG reductions in RCP4.5 avoid 16000 PM2.5-related all-cause deaths yr-1 (90% confidence interval, 11700-20300), and 8000 (3600-12400) O3-related respiratory deaths yr-1 in the US in 2050. Foreign GHG mitigation avoids 15%more » and 62% of PM2.5- and O3-related total avoided deaths, highlighting the importance of foreign GHG mitigation on US human health benefits. GHG mitigation in the US residential sector brings the largest co-benefits for PM2.5-related deaths (21% of total domestic co-benefits), and industry for O3 (17%). Monetized benefits, for avoided deaths from ozone, PM2.5, and heat stress from a related study, are $148 ($96-201) per ton CO2 at high valuation and $49 ($32-67) at low valuation, of which 36% are from foreign GHG reductions. These benefits likely exceed the marginal cost of GHG reductions in 2050. The US gains significantly greater co-benefits when coordinating GHG reductions with foreign countries. Similarly, previous studies estimating co-benefits locally or regionally may greatly underestimate the full co-benefits of coordinated global actions.« less
  • Reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions also influences air quality. We simulate the co-benefits of global GHG reductions on air quality and human health via two mechanisms: a) reducing co-emitted air pollutants, and b) slowing climate change and its effect on air quality. Relative to a reference scenario, global GHG mitigation in the RCP4.5 scenario avoids 0.5±0.2, 1.3±0.6, and 2.2±1.6 million premature deaths in 2030, 2050, and 2100, from changes in fine particulate matter and ozone. Global average marginal co-benefits of avoided mortality are $40-400 (ton CO2)-1, exceeding marginal abatement costs in 2030 and 2050, and within the low range ofmore » costs in 2100. East Asian co-benefits are 10-80 times the marginal cost in 2030. These results indicate that transitioning to a low-carbon future might be justified by air quality and health co-benefits.« less
  • Policies to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will not only slow climate change but can also have ancillary benefits of improved air quality. Here we examine the co-benefits of both global and regional GHG mitigation for US air quality in 2050 at fine resolution, using dynamical downscaling methods, building on a previous global co-benefits study (West et al., 2013). The co-benefits for US air quality are quantified via two mechanisms: through reductions in co-emitted air pollutants from the same sources and by slowing climate change and its influence on air quality, following West et al. (2013). Additionally, we separate the totalmore » co-benefits into contributions from domestic GHG mitigation vs. mitigation in foreign countries. We use the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model to dynamically downscale future global climate to the regional scale and the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) program to directly process global anthropogenic emissions to the regional domain, and we provide dynamical boundary conditions from global simulations to the regional Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) model. The total co-benefits of global GHG mitigation from the RCP4.5 scenario compared with its reference are estimated to be higher in the eastern US (ranging from 0.6 to 1.0 µg m -3) than the west (0–0.4 µg m -3) for fine particulate matter (PM 2.5), with an average of 0.47 µg m -3 over the US; for O 3, the total co-benefits are more uniform at 2–5 ppb, with a US average of 3.55 ppb. Comparing the two mechanisms of co-benefits, we find that reductions in co-emitted air pollutants have a much greater influence on both PM 2.5 (96 % of the total co-benefits) and O 3 (89 % of the total) than the second co-benefits mechanism via slowing climate change, consistent with West et al. (2013). GHG mitigation from foreign countries contributes more to the US O 3 reduction (76 % of the total) than that from domestic GHG mitigation only (24 %), highlighting the importance of global methane reductions and the intercontinental transport of air pollutants. For PM 2.5, the benefits of domestic GHG control are greater (74 % of total). Since foreign contributions to co-benefits can be substantial, with foreign O 3 benefits much larger than those from domestic reductions, previous studies that focus on local or regional co-benefits may greatly underestimate the total co-benefits of global GHG reductions. We conclude that the US can gain significantly greater domestic air quality co-benefits by engaging with other nations to control GHGs.« less
  • The report summarizes the findings of field tests and provides emission factors for methane (CH4) and nitorus oxide (N2O) from wastewater treatment (WWT). It also includes country-specific activity data on industrial and domestic WWT which were used to develop country-specific emission estimates for CH4 and N2O. The report concludes that WWT is unlikely to be a significant source of volatile organic carbon and carbon dioxide emissions. The biggest contributor to industrial CH4 emissions from WWT is the pulp and paper industry in developing and Eastern European countries. The second principal contributor to CH4 emissions from WWT is the meat andmore » poultry industry. Russia is believed to be the largest contributor. CH4 emissions from untreated domestic wastewater may be many times higher than those of treated wastewater. The report provides rough estimates for global N2O emissions from WWT.« less