You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'Climate Change' category.
Dan Bednarz
Abstract:
Modern healthcare systems are intensive users of fossil fuel produced energy and therefore significant contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. This suggests a moral imperative to lower energy consumption for reasons of ecological sustainability. A second, and less articulated, practical reason to lowering energy consumption is that it is no longer inexpensive; rising costs, which derive from a geological peaking of worldwide oil extraction rates, are creating a strong economic incentive to reduce energy consumption. The implications of these twin driving forces -which have a common root in our reliance upon fossil fuels- for healthcare are complex and if misconstrued can lead to public policies placing them in opposition. In other words, assigning differing weights to these driving forces leads to divergent decision trees which, on the one hand, could exacerbate climate change, as in a scenario where coal is turned to as a substitute for declining supplies of oil and natural gas. On the other hand, an alternative decision tree weighting each driving force equally has healthcare setting a leadership example for energy conservation and ecological sustainability. This latter decision path, however, will –in all likelihood- introduce revisions of extant health theories and models of practice. How sweeping these changes will be is an unknown and therefore should be conceptualized with a full spectrum of scenarios that take account of the interplay between varying degrees of climate change mitigation done under varying conditions of energy constraint.
[Edited by: Paul R. Epstein and Jesse Selber, Published by: The Center for Health and the Global Environment, Harvard Medical School]
When significant deposits of oil were discovered in the 19th Century, this fossil fuel appeared to offer a limitless source of energy to drive development. While oil and the energy it supplies provide multiple benefits to human society, every stage in the life cycle from exploration to use can have harmful effects on our health and the environment. This report examines the health and environmental impacts of oil exploration, drilling, extraction, transport, refining and combustion. Drilling and extraction carry acute and chronic hazards, including fires and blowouts, occupational injury and disease, and can lead to longterm harm to plant and animal communities. Oil spills and leaks along coastlines pose risks for marine life and fisheries, and can threaten the livelihoods of human communities. Refining exposes workers and wildlife to petroleum, its by-products and the chemicals used in the refining process. At the pump, gasoline can be both toxic and carcinogenic.
Refining and combustion result in air pollution and acid rain. Pollutant chemicals can be toxic to humans, other animals and plants, while acid rain has impacts on terrestrial, aquatic and marine coastal systems. Finally, the aggregate of gas and particulate emissions from burning oil have begun to alter the world’s climate system; with implications for human health, agricultural productivity, vulnerable ecosystems and societal infrastructure.
This report, while not exhaustive, is intended to provide a comprehensive framework for evaluating the true costs of our use of oil. The authors hope it will serve as a resource for further study.
Recent Comments