Slashdot Mirror
The World's Fastest-Growing Cause of Death Is Pollution From Car Exhaust
pigrabbitbear writes "Cars, once again, are killing us. They're killing us in crashes and accidents, yes, and they're encouraging us to grow obese and then killing us a little more slowly. But, more than ever before, they're killing us with their pollution. Particulate air pollution, along with obesity, is now the two fastest-growing causes of death in the world, according to a new study published in the Lancet. The study found that in 2010, 3.2 million people died prematurely from the air pollution – particularly the sooty kind that spews from the exhaust pipes of cars and trucks. And of those untimely deaths, 2.1 million were in Asia, where a boom in car use has choked the streets of India and China's fast-expanding cities with smog."
They'll keel over from the strain, removing them from the gene pool and us skinny folk can continue to drive to our heart's content.
Cars want to be dominant form of intelligent life on the planet!
Just as soon as they get the bugs out of the in-dash entertainment systems, we're toast!
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Diesel exhaust not only smells noxious, it also causes cancer.
You may think that diesel makes you an environmental superfag, but those of us on the road behind you have to roll up our windows due to pungent smell spewing from the back of your car.
Please take your diesel to a scrap yard or drive it into a tree.
Modern cars run so completely clean compared to their ancestors that, if anything, deaths from car exhaust are probably at their historical low. But, just like violent crime has been dropping steadily for the last 20 years, don't let a good crisis go to waste without politicizing it. Are you sure it's not ManBearPig that actually wrote this?
We're seeing this because we're approximately at the peak of oil production. As the reserves dry up this will cease to be a big problem
Darwin approves!
..to 2 billion people when you consider India + China. That means automobile transportation is quickly becoming NORMAL in those areas. That means HORRENDOUS smog problems for the next 4-6 decades in those areas.
In short, this isn't news, it was expected when you consider how much of the world is still developing quickly.
I swear they give me mod points to shut me up.
I'll pay attention when an article comes from an accredited source, not some newspaper.... At this point I look at it as the journalist pressing his views, but as stated before, if somethings comes out that's reviewed by other peer's within the field that are considered masters within their field I'll pay attention.
More congestion = more pollution, so are the greens always the ones fighting improved roadworks that will relieve congestion? Seriously, the more clogged traffic is, the worse your mileage, the more wear and tear on your car, the more pollution, the more time you waste, the more accidents and more people are hurt and killed in accidents. Free flowing consistent traffic is always safer, less polluting, faster, less wasteful from early wear and tear on the car and so on....
What possible real reason can there be to fight things like expanding roadworks from 2 lanes to 3 lanes other than a desire to tell other people how to live their lives. If your entire argument depends on trying to make something suck for someone else to gain converts, chances are pretty good your on the wrong side of the argument.
How many people would be dying each year if we didn't have cars?
Say 10 million.
So really cars are saving our lives.
Well it has to be something, What would people prefer it to be, smallpox?
In Asia there are a lot of old 2-stroke powered vehicles about, each one of them pumps out up to 50x more pollutant than a relatively new car. Combined with heavy traffic means lots of them idling in the street at any one time. Many of these engines are only a couple of horsepower and cost only a few $100 to replace with a new 4-stroke model but people don't have this kind of money to spare so they are stuck with these old polluting engines.
Back in the time before carbon offsetting was dismissed as 'buying indulgences' one of the things offsetting companies spent money on was buying 4-stroke petrol engines (or less polluting 2-strokes) to put the old 2-stroke engines out of circulation.
You might as well get use to it.
At the airlines at LAX hundreds of trucks show up dropping of freight. some places have 8 doors all the trucks are docked with engines running.
Fumes go right inside add LA freeways all the cars coming and going the planes taking off boy that burns a gallon or two.
After 20 years or so can you still find a living freight agent. I think so.
Is is because of the accent?
No brain, no pain.
From The Lancet article:
Interpretation Worldwide, the contribution of different risk factors to disease burden has changed substantially, with a shift away from risks for communicable diseases in children towards those for non-communicable diseases in adults. These changes are related to the ageing population, decreased mortality among children younger than 5 years, changes in cause-of-death composition, and changes in risk factor exposures. New evidence has led to changes in the magnitude of key risks including unimproved water and sanitation, vitamin A and zinc deficiencies, and ambient particulate matter pollution. The extent to which the epidemiological shift has occurred and what the leading risks currently are varies greatly across regions. In much of sub-Saharan Africa, the leading risks are still those associated with poverty and those that affect children.
So we are just moving from underdeveloped causes of death, up to luxury causes of death . . .
Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
I blame Windows, as a new leading cause of death . . .
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
The first article mentions fastest growing, which is to say not necessarily the most prominent factor. Also, some weird wording is going on
The study found that in 2010, 3.2 million people died prematurely from the air pollution–particularly the sooty kind that spews from the exhaust pipes of cars and trucks. And of those untimely deaths, 2.1 million were in Asia
So, in the rest of the world 1.1 million people died from air pollution, that might come from cars. I wonder how many of those 2.1 million asians were from China?
The second article directly contradicts the summary viewpoint:
In 2010, the three leading risk factors for global disease burden were high blood pressure (70% [95% uncertainty interval 62—77] of global DALYs), tobacco smoking including second-hand smoke (63% [55—70]), and alcohol use (55% [50—59]). In 1990, the leading risks were childhood underweight (79% [68—94]), household air pollution from solid fuels (HAP; 70% [56—83]), and tobacco smoking including second-hand smoke (61% [54—68]).
... whatever
And once again, this is why I think the electric car's time has come or nearly come. Ignoring everything else good (and there is a lot), we get zero fumes (at least in the areas that matter, since the electricity has to come from somewhere). And for someone like me who lives next to a busy road, we get much lower sound.
For those who don't know, the Tesla Model S has received countless "car of the year" 2012/2013 awards, up against all the usual gas guzzlers. And it's been pretty unanimous. I didn't take an interest in cars before at all, but that one car has changed all that.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
in the USA the air has become a lot cleaner in the last 20 some years due to the requirement that all cars sold have one
I'm curious, how do you prove that a death was directly related to car exhaust?
It's because British diesel receives superior dental care, and eats a healthier diet of butter and pork fat.
We should make a country wide movement to ban cars. Or at least limit the amount the gas tank can hold.
you'll know its the older vehicles with the 2-stroke engines and zero emission controls that belch out the black smoke all over the place.
I can't drive behind one because they make me quickly sick. But the modern diesels such as the VW/Audi TDi and the Mercedes CDI are clean, no smoke.
Billions are being spent on airport security to save lives. How many die each year in air planes for any reason? If governments really wanted to save lives, safer cars and pollution are two more appropriate subjects for huge spending.
Motors in developing nations have pretty much no pollution control, and many are badly maintained which makes the problem even worse.
If there are regulations, they're toothless or ignored or bribed away. Those motors have to be cheap! It's not really a surprise that big cities are choked in a toxic miasma.
Up yours, all you so-called car nuts badmouthing those "wasteful" pollution control systems. Yeah they cost extra, yeah you have to engineer around the way they change engine characteristics. Not choking to death on smog is still absolutely worth it.
We must stop using cars in America. They are deadly and, like firearms, need to be banned
I see this all the time:
"Cars kill ______" or "car strikes _______"
Cars are inanimate objects. DRIVERS kill _____, drivers strike _____.
There was a UK traffic study that found that police cited driver error in something like 90% of crashes. Topmost cause: failure to use due care.
People are more concerned about having a coffee, texting, changing the radio station, or just tuning out and running on autopilot because there's no consequences. Crash and your insurance pays for the damages+injuries; the most you'll get in the US, unless your conduct is completely egregious, is a civil fine and a hike in your insurance rate.
For fuck's sakes, we have insurance companies here that advertise "accident forgiveness" policies!
Until an at-fault collision involves having to appear in criminal court, people will keep right on smashing into things - other cars, stationary objects, and human beings.
Please help metamoderate.
When I lived in the UK, Greenies would often point to an infamous study claiming something along the lines of '24,000 people die every year from traffic pollution!' which proved that CARS ARE EVIL!
Of course when you actually looked at the actual study you discovered that what it actually said was something like 'up to 24,000 people died up to two weeks earlier than they would otherwise have done because they were already mortally sick' and that most of the harmful pollution came from diesel vehicles, not petrol.
So as soon as I see a study showing people 'die prematurely' from air pollution, my BS meter goes off the charts.
You can prove anything with statistics.
Globally, we're living much longer than we lived even twenty years ago. There are more cars than there were twenty years ago so I guess that means cars make us live longer. ie. more cars == more life
I know ... correlation is not causation. (Yes, I do know what a spurious correlation is.)
In 2010, the three leading risk factors for global disease burden were high blood pressure (70% [95% uncertainty interval 62—77] of global DALYs), tobacco smoking including second-hand smoke (63% [55—70]), and alcohol use (55% [50—59]). In 1990, the leading risks were childhood underweight (79% [68—94]), household air pollution from solid fuels (HAP; 70% [56—83]), and tobacco smoking including second-hand smoke (61% [54—68]). Dietary risk factors and physical inactivity collectively accounted for 100% (95% UI 92—108) of global DALYs in 2010, with the most prominent dietary risks being diets low in fruits and those high in sodium. Several risks that primarily affect childhood communicable diseases, including unimproved water and sanitation and childhood micronutrient deficiencies, fell in rank between 1990 and 2010, with unimproved water and sanitation accounting for 09% (04—16) of global DALYs in 2010. However, in most of sub-Saharan Africa childhood underweight, HAP, and non-exclusive and discontinued breastfeeding were the leading risks in 2010, while HAP was the leading risk in south Asia. The leading risk factor in Eastern Europe, most of Latin America, and southern sub-Saharan Africa in 2010 was alcohol use; in most of Asia, North Africa and Middle East, and central Europe it was high blood pressure. Despite declines, tobacco smoking including second-hand smoke remained the leading risk in high-income north America and western Europe. High body-mass index has increased globally and it is the leading risk in Australasia and southern Latin America, and also ranks high in other high-income regions, North Africa and Middle East, and Oceania.
The news here is that the risk factors have shifted in the last 20 years, not that "OMG cars are baaaaad", still, salty foods are a lot more likely too kill you than a car exhaust.
Fastest growing can be misleading: https://xkcd.com/1102/
Yes they would. Walking, cycling, going by bus / train / tube / tram. Maybe this would even end people driving 2 hours a day from A to B whilst the same number of people drives 2 hours from B to A each day just to work.
Cars kill twenty children every hour. Nobody is ever charged. If those children had rifles to protect themselves, none of them would be hit. The cars would avoid them, just like they avoid tractor trailers.
As comparison, alcohol causes 2.5 million deaths every year, according to World Health Organization.
Problem is everybody is so self-important these days they can't imagine how the world could possibly continue without them and that they must not die. The world would be a better place if we could lose an additional 3.2 million people each year.
Modern cars run so completely clean compared to their ancestors that, if anything, deaths from car exhaust are probably at their historical low.
And you've been modded insightful for simply declaring a study wrong on personal incredulity.
However, I'll tackle your claim: yes, the very expensive, CA-emissions-compliant car in your driveway is a very clean car. However, it is not representative of what you will find in the major, growing cities of the world, and before you say "but the major cities of the world are like California", you'd best check your ethnocentrism at the door; a lot of developing countries, you'll find vehicles that are outside their warranty period and definitely not as emissions-compliant. Japan, for example, makes it incredibly difficult to hang on to an older car, mostly to drive their economy. The older cars get shipped off to the other asian countries, where they're not nearly as well maintained.
Further, the problem is that people and goods who used to get around by more efficient, lower-pollution means - bicycles, walking, etc. - are now getting around by cars, and probably they're by themselves in that car. The infrastructure can't handle it, so aside from their being many more tailpipes, they're all attached to cars sitting in jammed traffic. Pollution goes up from both. It doesn't matter how low-pollution a car is if it wouldn't have been there in the first place, and is now causing more pollution by virtue of contributing to congestion.
The smartest cities are forcing people out of their cars and trucks; Paris, for example, banned large trucks from the core of the city - and bike cargo delivery has taken off as a result. London has a congestion charge now, and it's been nothing but Win, with the money going towards public transit.
Please help metamoderate.
...because the Japanese force, through fees/fines/whatnot, old cars off the road. It's done mostly to bolster the economy.
The used cars are shipped off throughout Asia. They're just exiting their warranty period, which is about how long the emissions system components are designed to last.
Please help metamoderate.
let's ban all cars. While we're at it, let's also ban guns, airplanes, fast food, alcohol, cigarettes, electronics, books... in short, anything that's man made. Let's all go back to live in the woods and re-tune ourselves to the rhythms of nature.
The great thing about an electric car is simplicity. You have a battery, a motor, a differential, and a light-weight cooling system (mainly for the batteries). The engine is basically one moving part that doesn't reciprocate, you don't need a multi-gear transmission with a shifting mechanism, and there's no high-heat to degrade everything. No oil changes, rare coolant fluid changes.
Although you may have to take it in for maintenance, it should be relatively rare compared to an internal combustion engine.
...in action.
"Today, a car emits less pollution travelling at full speed than a parked car did in 1970 from leaks."
-- Matt Ridley, The Rational Optimist, see http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/the-mustang-test.aspx
Globalization is. All this shipping on giant cargo ships from one continent to another is the real problem. The cargo ships use the lowest grade fuel available, which pollutes up to 50x more sulphur and tons of particulate.
We, the supreme nanny state, get to decide what you "need."
And even if a car is a basic city fuel-efficient put-put car, we'll ban it if it has an "evil" sporty look to it. And we'll limit purchases to one every five years, and require a background check and mental health examination.
http://xkcd.com/1102/
Passing legislation that would curtail automobile-related deaths would, based on these numbers and other numbers related to car-deaths, save many more lives that passing legislation that would ban citizens from owning firearms.
The numbers speak for themselves. Cars kill far more people than guns.
Now if only they could ban cars like they did with indoor smoking. For all of the clamouring over that, I would guess that it (car exhaust) is much worse - it certainly feels that way when walking or cycling.
"China's fast-expanding cities with smog.""
should be:
China's fast-expanding cities with pollution."
Smog is smoke and fog.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
16 of the largest super container ships emit as much sulphur as all of the worlds cars.
They typically run 24 hours a day, up to 16 cylinder 107,000 horsepower engines.
International Maritime Organization rules allow ships to burn fuel containing up to 4.5 per cent sulphur. That is up to 4,500 times more than is allowed in automobile fuel. Both international shipping and aviation are exempt from the Kyoto Protocol rules on cutting carbon emissions.
Look it up, Google/Bing/whatever and be shocked.
After typing this, I found this info here: http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/11/23/1618229/one-giant-cargo-ship-pollutes-as-much-as-50m-cars
Procrastination; I'll think of a sig tomorrow.
This is something I know a little bit about having travelled through many South American cities especially. One was so bad ai felt sick with a metallic taste after 20 minutes walking from home.
Here's a few tips I've learnt.
1) There is a kickstarter project for a blueooth device that logs air quality in various metrics
2) I don't know where I read this but I heard the pollution drops off quickly at less than 30m from the road
3) Cars soak up more pollution than bicycles - so change your air filter. In fact, where can we buy carbon activated filter material for a custom upgrade to squeeze into our cars?
4) I wore a full gas mask on a few car journeys. It can make the difference between getting out of your car feeling like yoiu've run a marathon and getting out feeling just a bit cramped. It looks silly but why not try it to confirm to yourself if there's a problem worth working on that "pollen" filter?
5) You can get slimmer masks designed for cyclists. I mention this on my blog. Filtering is a compilcated business. I've found the main thing is to filter those particulates including the rubber off the tyres. I'm not too sure about the gasses. These have an effect but it seems less immediate to me.
6) You can get plants to filter air in your home. I'd like to see a air con system intregrating such a system on a rooftop. There was a Slashdot article on this.
7) You can get a 12v airfilter to go on your passenger seat but it isn't cheap and it works by recycling the air rather than catching it on the way in
8) Looking at truckers forums I've noticed this is definately a big problem that is killing people. This is totally unneccessary. I hope we can help them with cabin filters?
A blog I run for the wealth
I guess that Respro masks will become more fashionable in the coming years.
a huge portion of the smog in any city is from cars idling in drive thru restaurants. So yeah, ban fast food and we all get cleaner air.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Cars kill more people then terrorist, so why aren't we having a war against them?
How about the TSA scans peeps going into car dealers?
How about the fact that I am more likely to die driving a car then to die by a terrorist act?
For the record, I do not drive, but I still am more likely to die driving a car then to die by a terrorist act.
Be seeing you...
The Lancet study is about risk factors leading to death and not about causes of death. It is impossible to say how many people died just because of air pollution. What they have published is estimates based on models. If the models are wrong, their estimates are also wrong.
The Chinese and Indians have been competing with us for jobs, natural resources and economic growth for years now and often at the expense of environmental quality. If they want to go on poisoning themselves, why should we be concerned? Indeed, a few less Chinese and Indians competing for jobs and resources benefits us Americans and Europeans and unlike some other emissions, smog and soot are mainly localized problems which tend to punish most those who produced them in the first place. So excuse me while I enjoy a bit of Schadenfreude over the environmental problems of our Chinese and Indian competitors; it couldn't have happened to nicer people after all.
. . . you'd better link cars to erectile dysfunction. Otherwise, we're driving.
-- Knowledge is power. -- Francis Bacon
The biggest pollution problems are in big cities in poorer countries.
They have the same problems there we did early in our car eras... that streets aren't wide or good, safety is nonexistent etc. Compared to our early car eras they have far less time to act. And they mostly don't have the public transit infrastructure as a guard against congestion.
The answer is actually very simple. To improve infrastructure for what is, other than walking, already the dominant mode of transport, bicycling. Costs a heck of a lot less than car infrastructure, cheaper to maintain, works better in high density areas anyway since they take so much less room and are so much less dangerous to pedestrians.
And if they want some evidence of the viability of the approach in a modern city, and look for ways to make it work well, they should go to Amsterdam. And it's not an isolated thing, bicycling is enjoying a mini-resurgence all over the world. Hard to say how far it will go, but it should be another clear sign that rushing headlong toward cars has MAJOR downsides.
Do all countries now basically require unleaded gas? Or do some countries allow leaded?