3 ms·

I went down a rabbit whole and eventually stumbled upon this small webpage documenting changes from 1900 to 2000. https://demography.cpc.unc.edu/2014/06/16/mor

I went down a rabbit whole and eventually stumbled upon this small webpage documenting changes from 1900 to 2000. https://demography.cpc.unc.edu/2014/06/16/mortality-and-cause-of-death-1900-v-2010/ https://demography.cpc.unc.edu/2014/06/16/mortality-and-caus... I also pulled up car accident fatalities and found it interesting that we peaked in the 30s and 40s per capita in the US, despite the major investment of the highway system in the 50s which one could have presumed would have made it far worse given the combination of speed and lack of air bags. Then again, my anecdotal experience says that I know far more people killed or severely injured from country driving and small town DUI than highway driving. I wonder what the 2100 graph will say? Will that cancer chunk be eliminated or mostly scrunched down? Will we have figured out how to grow new hearts so we eliminate heart disease? Hope I live long enough to find out (I’d be 115).

aaronbrethorst 8y ago
Life expectancy is going to drop due to 150 million premature deaths from CO2 over the 21st century unless we can reduce CO2 emissions. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0108-y https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0108-y And this says nothing about the direct and indirect deaths from rising sea levels: famine, wars, pandemics, etc.
- njarboe 8y ago
  Not a very honest paper title. "Quantified, localized health benefits of accelerated carbon dioxide emissions reductions". I lost a little more respect for Nature today. To call them premature deaths due to CO2 when they are really about other things that are emitted with the CO2 when burning fossil fuels, is deceptive. From the article abstract: "This generally reduces co-emissions that cause ambient air pollution, resulting in near-term, localized health benefits. We therefore examine the human health benefits of increasing 21st-century CO2 reductions by 180 GtC, an amount that would shift a ‘standard’ 2 °C scenario to 1.5 °C or could achieve 2 °C without negative emissions." I did not read the article but the abstract emphasizes the number of lives saved in Asia and Africa. It is probably the reduction in burning coal without any scrubbers that gives the large reduction in deaths. Reducing natural gas power generation in the US would likely reduce few deaths.
  - wjossey 8y ago
    I had written a similar post earlier but decided not to submit as I felt I must have been missing something. You articulated what I was attempting to say very well. Thank you!

aaronbrethorst 8y ago

Life expectancy is going to drop due to 150 million premature deaths from CO2 over the 21st century unless we can reduce CO2 emissions. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0108-y https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0108-y And this says nothing about the direct and indirect deaths from rising sea levels: famine, wars, pandemics, etc.

njarboe 8y ago
Not a very honest paper title. "Quantified, localized health benefits of accelerated carbon dioxide emissions reductions". I lost a little more respect for Nature today. To call them premature deaths due to CO2 when they are really about other things that are emitted with the CO2 when burning fossil fuels, is deceptive. From the article abstract: "This generally reduces co-emissions that cause ambient air pollution, resulting in near-term, localized health benefits. We therefore examine the human health benefits of increasing 21st-century CO2 reductions by 180 GtC, an amount that would shift a ‘standard’ 2 °C scenario to 1.5 °C or could achieve 2 °C without negative emissions." I did not read the article but the abstract emphasizes the number of lives saved in Asia and Africa. It is probably the reduction in burning coal without any scrubbers that gives the large reduction in deaths. Reducing natural gas power generation in the US would likely reduce few deaths.
- wjossey 8y ago
  I had written a similar post earlier but decided not to submit as I felt I must have been missing something. You articulated what I was attempting to say very well. Thank you!