environment pollution and climate change essay

What You Need to Know About Climate Change and Air Pollution

#ShowYourStripes graphic by Professor Ed Hawkins (University of Reading) https://showyourstripes.info/

How big a problem is air pollution globally?

Air pollution is the world’s leading environmental cause of illness and premature death. Fine air pollution particles or aerosols, also known as fine particulate matter or PM 2.5 , are responsible for 6.4 million deaths every year, caused by diseases such as ischemic heart disease, stroke, lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, type 2 diabetes, and neonatal disorders. About 95% of these deaths occur in developing countries, where billions of people are exposed to outdoor and indoor concentrations of PM 2.5 that are multiple times higher than guidelines established by the World Health Organization. A World Bank report estimated that the cost of the health damage caused by air pollution amounts to $8.1 trillion a year, equivalent to 6.1% of global GDP.

Poor people, elderly people, and young children who come from poor families are the most affected and the least likely to be able to cope with the health impacts that come with air pollution. Global health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic weaken the resilience of societies. Compounding this, exposure to air pollution is linked to increased incidence of COVID-19-related hospital admissions and mortality. In addition to health, air pollution is also linked to biodiversity and ecosystem loss , and has adverse impacts on human capital . Reducing air pollution, on the other hand, not only improves health but strengthens economies. A recent World Bank study found that a 20% decrease in PM 2.5 concentration is associated with a 16% increase in employment growth rate and a 33% increase in labor productivity growth rate .

A World Bank report estimated that the cost of the health damage caused by air pollution amounts to $8.1 trillion a year, equivalent to 6.1% of global GDP.

How is air pollution related to climate change?

Air pollution and climate change are two sides of the same coin, but they are typically addressed separately. They should be tackled jointly, with a focus on protecting peoples’ health – particularly in low- and middle-income countries – to strengthen human capital and reduce poverty.

Air pollutants and greenhouse gases often come from the same sources, such as coal-fired power plants and diesel-fueled vehicles. Some air pollutants do not last long in the environment, notably black carbon – a part of fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ). Other short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) include methane, hydrofluorocarbons, and ground-level or tropospheric ozone. SLCPs are far more potent climate warmers than carbon dioxide. Methane is a precursor of ground-level ozone, which according to the Climate and Clean air Coalition and Stockholm Environment Institute, kills about a million people each year, and is 80 times more potent at warming the planet than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. Their relatively short lifespans, coupled with their strong warming potential, means that interventions to reduce SLCP emissions can deliver climate benefits in a relatively short time. If we address short-lived climate pollutants, we gain dual benefits: better air quality and improved health where we live, and the global benefit of mitigating climate change.

A World Bank study found that PM 2.5 from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal combustion or diesel-fueled vehicle emissions is among the most toxic types of PM 2.5 . Particles from these sources are more damaging to health than particles from most other air pollution sources. Addressing these sources of PM 2.5 -- like coal combustion and traffic – would address the most toxic air pollution. Given that these sources are also key contributors to climate warming, tackling air pollution from these sources also mitigates climate change.  

What are some requirements for effectively addressing air pollution?

Measure it and monitor it . Many developing countries do not have even rudimentary infrastructure for measuring air pollution. A World Bank study found that there was only one PM 2.5 ground-level monitor per 65 million people in low-income countries , and one per 28 million people in Sub-Saharan Africa;  in contrast, there is one monitor per 370,000 people in high-income countries. This is a serious issue, because you cannot properly manage what you do not measure. If you don't know how bad your problem is, you won’t know whether anything you do to fix it is effective. Countries need to establish ground-level monitoring networks and operate and maintain them properly so they yield reliable air quality data.

Know the main sources of air pollution and their contributions to poor air quality. For example, in City A, transport may be the biggest contributor, but in City B, it could be something completely different, such as emissions from dirty cooking fuels seeping from homes into the outside environment. With this information you can target interventions appropriately to abate air pollution. There are certainly intuitive, no-regret steps cities and countries can take to tackle air pollution, such as shifting to clean buses or renewable energy. But if you want to address air pollution comprehensively, you need to understand what your own sources are.

Disseminate air quality data to the public . People have a right to know the quality of the air they're breathing. Disseminating this information exerts pressure on those who can make the needed changes. Air quality data should be easily accessible in formats that are widely understood so people can reduce their exposure to air pollution and protect vulnerable groups such as young children, the elderly, and people with health conditions that can be exacerbated by poor air quality.

What are some interventions that countries can implement to reduce air pollution?

Reducing air pollution may require physical investments or it may require policy reforms or both. Not every intervention fits every context. Interventions whose benefits (notably improved health) outweigh the costs should be selected. Part of our work at the World Bank is to incorporate climate change considerations into analysis so that the climate benefits of improving air quality can be taken into account in the decision-making process. A few examples of interventions to improve air quality in different sectors:

• Energy : Change the energy mix to include cleaner, renewable energy sources and phase out subsidies that promote use of polluting fuels.
• Industry: Use renewable fuels, adopt cleaner production measures, and install scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators in industrial facilities to filter particulates from emissions before they are released into the air.
• Transport : Change from diesel to electric vehicles, install catalytic converters in vehicles to reduce toxicity of emissions, establish vehicle inspection and maintenance programs.
• Agriculture : Discourage use of nitrogen-based fertilizers; improve nitrogen-use efficiency of agricultural soils; and improve fertilizer and manure management. Nitrogen-based fertilizers release ammonia, a precursor of secondary PM 2.5 formation. Nitrogen-based fertilizers can also be oxidized and emitted to the air as nitrous oxide, a long-lived greenhouse gas.
• Cooking and heating : Promote clean cooking and heating solutions including clean stoves and boilers.

Part of our work at the World Bank is to incorporate climate change considerations into analysis so that the climate benefits of improving air quality can be taken into account in the decision-making process.

What is the World Bank doing to help?

The World Bank has invested about $52 billion in addressing pollution in the past two decades. However, we need to scale this up. Some successful projects that address air pollution include:

In China , we supported a program in the Hebei region , the largest contributor to air pollution in the country. The overall result was a reduction in the concentration of PM 2.5 in the atmosphere by almost 40% between 2013 and the end of 2017. The program linked loan disbursements to tangible results. Hebei issued the most stringent industrial emission standards in the country, replaced diesel buses with electric buses, coal stoves with gas stoves, and improved the efficiency of fertilizer use in agriculture. The program also supported effective use of a continuous emission monitoring system to track and enforce compliance by all major industrial enterprises in the province. The project delivered about 5 million tons of CO2 equivalent emissions reductions per year through interventions such as the installation of new stoves in municipalities, and addition of a new clean energy bus fleet. The emissions reductions generated from the installation of 1,221,500 new stoves alone were equivalent to taking more than 860,000 passenger cars off the road each year.

In Peru , the World Bank is supporting a project to develop environmental information systems that includes expanding the country's air quality monitoring network to six new cities. The project is also developing new systems to disseminate information on environmental quality to the public.

In Egypt, we assessed the health impacts from environmental pollution, including the effects of ambient air pollution in Greater Cairo. We found that 19,200 people died prematurely and over 3 billion days were lived with illness in Egypt in 2017 as a result of PM 2.5 air pollution in Greater Cairo and inadequate water, sanitation, and hygiene in all of Egypt. This analytical work has led to a project to reduce vehicle emissions, improve the management of solid waste, and strengthen the air and climate decision-making system in Greater Cairo .

In Vietnam , we are working with the rapidly growing city of Hanoi to simultaneously combat the issues of climate change and air pollution. We are supporting the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources to improve the Air Quality Monitoring Network and develop an understanding of emissions sources, as well as an Air Quality Management Plan for the city.

In Lao PDR , the World Bank program supported the government in establishing stringent ambient air quality standards, including a standard for annual average concentrations of PM 2. in line with the World Health Organization’s air quality guideline value at the time. The program also supported the adoption of regulated procedures for sampling and analyzing PM 2.5 and PM 10 in air, and other pollutants in water.

We need to tackle air pollution and climate change challenges jointly rather than separately with a focus on protecting peoples’ health today, particularly in developing countries.

Can we expect better air quality in the future as countries decarbonize their economies?

First, we must continue to reduce poverty and meet the needs of poor people, whether through lower energy costs, ensuring cleaner air, or other means. With these goals in mind, we need to tackle air pollution and climate change challenges jointly rather than separately with a focus on protecting peoples’ health today, particularly in developing countries. The health benefits of reducing emissions from the burning of fossil fuels can occur in the near term. However, the reduction of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would occur over a longer timeframe. If decarbonization efforts pay attention to non-CO 2 pollutants as well, notably PM 2.5 , we cannot only expect better air quality, but also health benefits in the short term.

Blog: Supporting a Breath of Fresh Air for Lagos

Website:  Climate Explainer Series

Website:  Climate Stories: How Countries and Communities Are Shaping A Sustainable Future

Website:  World Bank - Climate Change

Website: World Bank - Environment

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

Climate Change: Evidence and Causes: Update 2020 (2020)

Chapter: conclusion, c onclusion.

This document explains that there are well-understood physical mechanisms by which changes in the amounts of greenhouse gases cause climate changes. It discusses the evidence that the concentrations of these gases in the atmosphere have increased and are still increasing rapidly, that climate change is occurring, and that most of the recent change is almost certainly due to emissions of greenhouse gases caused by human activities. Further climate change is inevitable; if emissions of greenhouse gases continue unabated, future changes will substantially exceed those that have occurred so far. There remains a range of estimates of the magnitude and regional expression of future change, but increases in the extremes of climate that can adversely affect natural ecosystems and human activities and infrastructure are expected.

Citizens and governments can choose among several options (or a mixture of those options) in response to this information: they can change their pattern of energy production and usage in order to limit emissions of greenhouse gases and hence the magnitude of climate changes; they can wait for changes to occur and accept the losses, damage, and suffering that arise; they can adapt to actual and expected changes as much as possible; or they can seek as yet unproven “geoengineering” solutions to counteract some of the climate changes that would otherwise occur. Each of these options has risks, attractions and costs, and what is actually done may be a mixture of these different options. Different nations and communities will vary in their vulnerability and their capacity to adapt. There is an important debate to be had about choices among these options, to decide what is best for each group or nation, and most importantly for the global population as a whole. The options have to be discussed at a global scale because in many cases those communities that are most vulnerable control few of the emissions, either past or future. Our description of the science of climate change, with both its facts and its uncertainties, is offered as a basis to inform that policy debate.

A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The following individuals served as the primary writing team for the 2014 and 2020 editions of this document:

• Eric Wolff FRS, (UK lead), University of Cambridge
• Inez Fung (NAS, US lead), University of California, Berkeley
• Brian Hoskins FRS, Grantham Institute for Climate Change
• John F.B. Mitchell FRS, UK Met Office
• Tim Palmer FRS, University of Oxford
• Benjamin Santer (NAS), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
• John Shepherd FRS, University of Southampton
• Keith Shine FRS, University of Reading.
• Susan Solomon (NAS), Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• Kevin Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research
• John Walsh, University of Alaska, Fairbanks
• Don Wuebbles, University of Illinois

Staff support for the 2020 revision was provided by Richard Walker, Amanda Purcell, Nancy Huddleston, and Michael Hudson. We offer special thanks to Rebecca Lindsey and NOAA Climate.gov for providing data and figure updates.

The following individuals served as reviewers of the 2014 document in accordance with procedures approved by the Royal Society and the National Academy of Sciences:

• Richard Alley (NAS), Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University
• Alec Broers FRS, Former President of the Royal Academy of Engineering
• Harry Elderfield FRS, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge
• Joanna Haigh FRS, Professor of Atmospheric Physics, Imperial College London
• Isaac Held (NAS), NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory
• John Kutzbach (NAS), Center for Climatic Research, University of Wisconsin
• Jerry Meehl, Senior Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research
• John Pendry FRS, Imperial College London
• John Pyle FRS, Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge
• Gavin Schmidt, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
• Emily Shuckburgh, British Antarctic Survey
• Gabrielle Walker, Journalist
• Andrew Watson FRS, University of East Anglia

The Support for the 2014 Edition was provided by NAS Endowment Funds. We offer sincere thanks to the Ralph J. and Carol M. Cicerone Endowment for NAS Missions for supporting the production of this 2020 Edition.

F OR FURTHER READING

For more detailed discussion of the topics addressed in this document (including references to the underlying original research), see:

• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2019: Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate [ https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc ]
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), 2019: Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration: A Research Agenda [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25259 ]
• Royal Society, 2018: Greenhouse gas removal [ https://raeng.org.uk/greenhousegasremoval ]
• U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), 2018: Fourth National Climate Assessment Volume II: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States [ https://nca2018.globalchange.gov ]
• IPCC, 2018: Global Warming of 1.5°C [ https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15 ]
• USGCRP, 2017: Fourth National Climate Assessment Volume I: Climate Science Special Reports [ https://science2017.globalchange.gov ]
• NASEM, 2016: Attribution of Extreme Weather Events in the Context of Climate Change [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21852 ]
• IPCC, 2013: Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) Working Group 1. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis [ https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1 ]
• NRC, 2013: Abrupt Impacts of Climate Change: Anticipating Surprises [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18373 ]
• NRC, 2011: Climate Stabilization Targets: Emissions, Concentrations, and Impacts Over Decades to Millennia [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12877 ]
• Royal Society 2010: Climate Change: A Summary of the Science [ https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/publications/2010/climate-change-summary-science ]
• NRC, 2010: America’s Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12782 ]

Much of the original data underlying the scientific findings discussed here are available at:

• https://data.ucar.edu/
• https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu
• https://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu
• https://ess-dive.lbl.gov/
• https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/
• https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
• http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu
• http://hahana.soest.hawaii.edu/hot/

Climate change is one of the defining issues of our time. It is now more certain than ever, based on many lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth's climate. The Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences, with their similar missions to promote the use of science to benefit society and to inform critical policy debates, produced the original Climate Change: Evidence and Causes in 2014. It was written and reviewed by a UK-US team of leading climate scientists. This new edition, prepared by the same author team, has been updated with the most recent climate data and scientific analyses, all of which reinforce our understanding of human-caused climate change.

Scientific information is a vital component for society to make informed decisions about how to reduce the magnitude of climate change and how to adapt to its impacts. This booklet serves as a key reference document for decision makers, policy makers, educators, and others seeking authoritative answers about the current state of climate-change science.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

Search the United Nations

• What Is Climate Change
• Myth Busters
• Renewable Energy
• Finance & Justice
• Initiatives
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Paris Agreement
• Climate Ambition Summit 2023
• Climate Conferences
• Press Material
• Communications Tips

Causes and Effects of Climate Change

Fossil fuels – coal, oil and gas – are by far the largest contributor to global climate change, accounting for over 75 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions and nearly 90 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. As greenhouse gas emissions blanket the Earth, they trap the sun’s heat. This leads to global warming and climate change. The world is now warming faster than at any point in recorded history. Warmer temperatures over time are changing weather patterns and disrupting the usual balance of nature. This poses many risks to human beings and all other forms of life on Earth. 

Sacred plant helps forge a climate-friendly future in Paraguay

El Niño and climate crisis raise drought fears in Madagascar

The El Niño climate pattern, a naturally occurring phenomenon, can significantly disrupt global weather systems, but the human-made climate emergency is exacerbating the destructive effects.

“Verified for Climate” champions: Communicating science and solutions

Gustavo Figueirôa, biologist and communications director at SOS Pantanal, and Habiba Abdulrahman, eco-fashion educator, introduce themselves as champions for “Verified for Climate,” a joint initiative of the United Nations and Purpose to stand up to climate disinformation and put an end to the narratives of denialism, doomism, and delay.

Facts and figures

• What is climate change?
• Causes and effects
• Myth busters

Cutting emissions

• Explaining net zero
• High-level expert group on net zero
• Checklists for credibility of net-zero pledges
• Greenwashing
• What you can do

Clean energy

• Renewable energy – key to a safer future
• What is renewable energy
• Five ways to speed up the energy transition
• Why invest in renewable energy
• Clean energy stories
• A just transition

Adapting to climate change

• Climate adaptation
• Early warnings for all
• Youth voices

Financing climate action

• Finance and justice
• Loss and damage
• $100 billion commitment
• Why finance climate action
• Biodiversity
• Human Security

International cooperation

• What are Nationally Determined Contributions
• Acceleration Agenda
• Climate Ambition Summit
• Climate conferences (COPs)
• Youth Advisory Group
• Action initiatives
• Secretary-General’s speeches
• Press material
• Fact sheets
• Communications tips

Premium Content

• THE BIG IDEA

Climate Change First Became News 30 Years Ago. Why Haven’t We Fixed It?

In the time it took to build the case that climate change is a pollution problem, it’s become unnervingly more than that.

Thirty years ago, the potentially disruptive impact of heat-trapping emissions from burning fossil fuels and rain forests became front-page news.

It had taken a century of accumulating science, and a big shift in perceptions, for that to happen. Indeed, Svante Arrhenius, the pioneering Swedish scientist who in 1896 first estimated the scope of warming from widespread coal burning, mainly foresaw this as a boon , both in agricultural bounty and “more equable and better climates, especially as regards the colder regions of the Earth.”

There were scattered news reports through the decades, including a remarkably clear 1956 article in the New York Times that conveyed how accumulating greenhouse gas emissions from energy production would lead to long-lasting environmental changes. In its closing the article foresaw what’s become the main impediment to tackling harmful emissions: the abundance of fossil fuels. “Coal and oil are still plentiful and cheap in many parts of the world, and there is every reason to believe that both will be consumed by industry so long as it pays to do so.”

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was established in late 1988, after a variety of factors had pushed the greenhouse effect into the spotlight. That year there was severe drought and heat in the United States and vast fires in the Amazon rain forest and in Yellowstone National Park . The outline of a solution had been forged just one year earlier as the world’s nations agreed on the Montreal Protocol, which set steps to eliminate certain synthetic compounds imperiling the atmosphere’s protective ozone layer.

The crystallizing moment came on June 23 , in unnerving Senate testimony. James E. Hansen—a climate scientist who’d turned his attention from studying the searing conditions on Venus to Earth’s human-changed atmosphere—concluded bluntly that “the greenhouse effect has been detected and is changing our climate now.”

My journalistic journey to learn about climate change science, impacts, and related energy choices began in earnest later that month in Toronto, at the first World Conference on the Changing Atmosphere. It’s never stopped , weaving from the North Pole to the White House, from solar-tech labs and nuclear plant fuel pools to the Vatican . Details changed, but in many ways the main issues remain roughly as I and other journalists found them in 1988.

In 1988 a variety of factors —including severe drought and heat and vast fires in parts of the world—had pushed the greenhouse effect into the spotlight.

That October, my Discover magazine cover story touched on the flooding threat to Miami, the potential amped-up power of hurricanes, China’s predicted emissions surge, the vulnerability of California’s snowpack and thus its water supply, and more. It also described vexing uncertainties in warming projections that remain today. It ended with this quote from Michael B. McElroy, then, as now, a Harvard University professor: “If we choose to take on this challenge, it appears that we can slow the rate of change substantially, giving us time to develop mechanisms so that the cost to society and the damage to ecosystems can be minimized. We could alternatively close our eyes, hope for the best, and pay the cost when the bill comes due.”

That warning probably sounds familiar. Scientists, climate campaigners, and concerned politicians have been making similar statements ever since. Their warnings have not kept emissions from increasing. Glen Peters, a scientist at the Center for International Climate Research in Oslo, Norway, charted the rise of the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere from the year 1870—and found that nearly half that rise has come from human emissions in the past 30 years.

Plenty is happening with renewable energy technologies, with soaring growth in solar and wind systems and in performance of the batteries necessary to keep lights on when the sun is down and the air is still. But the world remains more than 85 percent reliant on fossil fuels to satisfy its thirst for energy. Gains in energy efficiency and renewable energy have been swamped by rising demand for fossil energy as poverty ebbs. In the U.S. and much of Europe, low-carbon nuclear power is in retreat as communities, recalling past scares, press to close aging plants, and high costs hinder the development of new ones.

What explains the lack of decisive progress on human-driven climate change? Having invested half of my 62 years in reporting and writing climate-related stories, blog posts, and books, I’ve lately found it useful—if sometimes uncomfortable—to look back for misperceptions or missed opportunities that let the problem worsen.

The Force of Climate Change

To explain how the enormity of climate change affects our grasp of it, Rice University’s Tim Morton cites a scene from the Star Wars movie The Empire Strikes Back where the Millennium Falcon flies into a “cave” that’s actually a giant worm’s maw. Living with climate change is like that, he says : “Because the worm is ‘everywhere’ in your field of vision, you can’t really tell the difference between it and the asteroid you think you landed on. For a while, you can kid yourself that you’re not inside a gigantic worm—until it starts digesting you.” —AR

Can we name the main culprits? There are almost as many theories and targets as there are advocates of one stripe or another. Among them: lack of basic research funding (I was often in that camp), industry influence on politics, poor media coverage, and doubt-sowing by those invested in fossil fuels or opposed to government intervention. There’s also our “inconvenient mind”—my description for a host of human behavioral traits and social norms that cut against getting climate change right.

For years I thought the answer was like the conclusion in Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express: that all suspects were guilty. But there’s another possibility. Maybe climate change is less an environmental wrong to be set right and more an emerging source of risk—a case of humanity’s planet-scale power outrunning, at least for now, our capacity for containing our momentous impacts. In a 2009 piece called “Puberty on the Scale of a Planet,” I toyed with this notion, suggesting that our species was in a turbulent transition from adolescence to adulthood, resisting admonitions to grow up—with fossil fuels standing in for testosterone.

But the situation is even more tangled. The more I reported in unlit Kenyan slums and Indian villages where people cook on illicit charcoal or hand-gathered twigs, the clearer it became that there’s no single “we” when it comes to energy, nor for vulnerability to climate hazards. The rich “we” can afford to convert to clean energy and cut vulnerability to heat, floods, and more. But the rest of humanity is still struggling to get the basic economic benefits that we’ve gotten from burning fossil fuels.

Climate change is unlike any environmental problem we’ve faced. We can’t ‘fix’ it the way we’ve started to fix smog or the ozone hole.

Research by an array of scientists and scholars supports a daunting conclusion: Climate change is unlike any environmental problem we’ve ever faced. We can’t “fix” it the way we’ve started to fix smog or the ozone hole, with circumscribed regulations and treaties and limited technological changes. Climate change is too big in space, time, and complexity; the emissions that cause it are too central a consequence of the effort of some 7.5 billion people now, and some 10 billion within several decades, to prosper on Earth.

You May Also Like

The gas in this exploding mine is odorless, colorless—and could transform the world

Ground-level ozone is getting worse. Here's what it means for your health.

Rest in … compost? These ‘green funerals’ offer an eco-friendly afterlife.

The real shape of what’s happening to Earth emerges only when the greenhouse emissions surge is considered alongside other metrics for human activity. A 2015 scientific report titled “ The Great Acceleration ” included a planetary dashboard of graphs charting signals of human activity, from tropical forest loss to paper manufacturing to water use. Most have the same shape as the curve for CO2 emissions. Pollution and climate impacts, then, are symptoms of a broader situation: the human-Earth mash-up moment that’s increasingly called the Anthropocene.

Adam Frank , an astrophysicist at the University of Rochester, has begun assessing possible outcomes for our planet under different scenarios. He draws on the rapidly expanding body of knowledge about other planets outside our solar system that could harbor life and plots possible trajectories for Earth-like planets inhabited by sentient species.

While the mathematical models are fairly simple, three broad scenarios emerge, which Frank describes in a new book called Light of the Stars. The first scenario is the “soft landing,” in which a civilization and its planet come smoothly to a new, steady state. The second is “die off,” in which a planet’s environmental conditions degrade and populations drop precipitously but seem to survive. “It’s hard to know if a technological civilization could survive losing something like 70 percent of its population,” Frank says.

And there’s a third scenario: collapse. “The population rises, the planetary state ‘heats up,’ and at some point the population crashes down to zero,” Frank says. “We even found solutions where the collapse could happen after the population changed from a high-impact energy source—fossil fuels—to a lower-impact one, solar.”

Related: Photos of Extreme Weather

Frank’s interplanetary perspective makes clear that the climate crisis is really more of a grand challenge, like the wars on cancer or poverty, that people work on over a lifetime, even generations, with a mix of urgency and patience. The change in perspective is troubling but also liberating: It means anyone with motivation and perseverance can make a difference—as a teacher or engineer, an artist or investor, or simply as an engaged planetary citizen.

In looking into space to assess Earth’s prospects, Frank has circled back to James Hansen’s starting point—his early research on our superhot neighbor, Venus. Earlier this year, I asked Frank what he sees in Earth’s future: Are we destined to be more like a struck match, flaring bright but briefly? Or could we glow on, like, say, a solar-powered LED?

Frank thinks it may be hard for any biosphere that evolves a planet-scale industrial civilization to avoid great disruption. “The question is, how often does the civilization make it through the transition to emerge as a still important part of the now changed biosphere,” Frank said. “Much may depend on the evolutionary heritage the species gets,” he says—whether populations can think and act as needed to adapt to, and responsibly manage, a new reality.

It’s a question for Earth, he says: “Do we have what it takes? I hope so, but I guess we’ll see pretty soon.”

Related Topics

• CLIMATE CHANGE
• AIR POLLUTION
• RENEWABLE ENERGY
• CLIMATOLOGY

Can energy harnessed from Earth’s interior help power the world?

What's a leap second—and why is it going away for good?

The Little Ice Age was brutal. How did people survive?

The best air purifiers for your home

Are there real ways to fight climate change? Yes.

• Environment

History & Culture

• History & Culture
• Coronavirus Coverage
• Mind, Body, Wonder
• Paid Content
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

Human Impacts on the Environment

Humans impact the physical environment in many ways: overpopulation, pollution, burning fossil fuels, and deforestation. Changes like these have triggered climate change, soil erosion, poor air quality, and undrinkable water. These negative impacts can affect human behavior and can prompt mass migrations or battles over clean water.

Help your students understand the impact humans have on the physical environment with these classroom resources.

Earth Science, Geology, Geography, Physical Geography

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 04 October 2021

Clean air for a sustainable world

Nature Communications volume  12 , Article number:  5824 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

20k Accesses

6 Citations

17 Altmetric

Metrics details

Air pollution is a cause of disease for millions around the world and now more than ever urgent action is required to tackle the burden of its impacts. Doing so will not only improve both life expectancy and quality of life, but will also lead to a more just and sustainable world.

Recently, we announced that we will publish a new series of collections focused on issues related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We start this series with a multidisciplinary collection on air pollution. As tackling air pollution is not one of the core SDGs, this may seem like an unusual choice. It is, however, a pressing environmental hazard affecting an ever increasing part of the world’s population. Currently, 91% of the world’s population live in locations where pollution levels exceed WHO guidelines, and in a recent announcement the WHO have further cut the recommended limits. Air pollution kills around 6.7 million people per year mainly through respiratory and cardiovascular diseases 1 , and has significant impacts on mental health. The main pollutants are sourced from fossil fuel combustion for transport, industry, agriculture and cooking stoves and, therefore, air pollution is linked directly with fulfilling many of our basic needs. As the SDGs aim to tackle the issue of how humanity can live sustainably, it is thus no surprise that addressing air pollution is related to the SDGs in many different ways. Promoting specific SDGs will lead to improved air quality as a side-effect, while reducing emissions will also progress a number of SDGs directly.

The high air pollution levels that we live with today is another demonstration of how our unsustainable lifestyles are one of the key challenges that needs to be overcome to create a more just and liveable world, which is the ultimate goal of the SDGs.

Although air pollution is a global issue, exposure is often not distributed equally. Industrial processes related to the production, trade and consumption of goods is a key source of air pollution. Much of this pollution is released in low- and middle-income countries while they manufacture goods that are traded abroad, allowing rich countries to outsource the air pollution and health effects of their consumption. Hence, global implementation of responsible consumption and sustainable production practices—the focus of SDG9 (“Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure”) and SDG12 (“Responsible Consumption and Production”)—will be key to reduce this unequal responsibility and exposure to dangerous environmental conditions.

Inequality in exposure does not only occur at an international level, but also within countries. Systematic and historical forms of discrimination often translate into higher exposure levels and, hence, enhanced health burdens to marginalized groups around the world. This is probably best studied in the US, where people of colour are shown to live under poorer air quality, independent of other factors like income 2 . In a commentary for our collection Viniece Jennings highlights that whilst green infrastructure has the potential to reduce air pollution, unequal access can limit improvements for marginalised communities 3 . While we often think of air pollution as an outdoor issue, much of the exposure to harmful particles actually happens inside houses. Household air pollution is mainly related to cooking, heating or lighting, often through the combustion of solid fuels. This exposure affects women and children disproportionately, especially in the developing world 4 . Consequently, targeting SDG10 (“Reduce inequality within and among countries”) and SDG 7 (“Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all.”) will be of vital importance to tackle embedded inequalities within and among countries to reduce air pollution exposure.

Air pollution and climate change are closely intertwined as they share the same root cause of human emissions. Even though ambitious climate mitigation policies do not come for free, they will in many cases also lead to improved air quality and lower health costs. The societal costs of air pollution avoided through reduced exposure levels as a result of climate mitigation measures alone are thought to outweigh the initial costs of these policies 5 . Air pollution also physically interacts with the climate system; particles in the atmosphere affect surface temperatures as well as clouds and precipitation. Climate change thus has the potential to “worsen air pollution, even in areas where it has been improving”, as pointed out by Denise Mauzarell in a Q&A for our Clean Air collection 6 . An example of this are the dangerous pollutants released by wildfires that are expected to become ever more frequent and intense in many parts of the world.

Similarly, to climate mitigation, improving air quality depends on strict and ambitious regulatory policies and controls, which must be implemented equitably. In this regard, there are reasons to be optimistic, as strict air quality policies like the Clean Air Act in the US and similar policies in Europe have resulted in reductions in pollution since the 1970s even though levels are still too high and continued efforts are crucial. These efforts show that ambitious policy supported by technological advances like improved filtering and modernization can be successful. These efforts should not only be done at national levels, but also need international collaboration, technology and knowledge transfer in order to acknowledge the shared responsibilities of air pollution. As part of the Clean Air collection we highlight papers Nature Communications has published that look at how policy and technology can be part of the solution to air pollution.

The high air pollution levels that we live with today is another demonstration of how our unsustainable lifestyles are one of the key challenges that needs to be overcome to create a more just and liveable world, which is the ultimate goal of the SDGs. Of course, reducing air pollution on its own will not meet the aims of all the other SDGs. Still, it is an illustrative example of how an interdisciplinary focus on a measurable and technologically approachable issue can help to also achieve other goals. It is in this spirit that our collection brings together research from different disciplines, such as applied scientists, economists, political scientists, health scientists and climate scientists as it is this interdisciplinary collaboration that Nature Communications wants to support will be vital in informing policy and decision makers. We envision that our collection on Clean Air will continue to grow and we welcome submissions across disciplines in this area.

GBD Global Risk Factors Collaborators. Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019. Lancet 396 , 1223–1249 (2020).

Tessum, C. W. et al. PM 2.5 polluters disproportionately and systemically affect people of color in the United States. Sci. Adv. 7 , 18 (2021).

Jennings, V., Reid C. E., & Fuller C. H. Green infrastructure can limit but not solve air pollution injustice. Nat. Commun. 12 , 4681 (2021).

Gordon, S. B., et al. Respiratory risks from household air pollution in low and middle income countries. Lancet Respir. Med. 2 , 823–860 (2014).

Vandyck, T. et al. Air quality co-benefits for human health and agriculture counterbalance costs to meet Paris Agreement pledges. Nat. Commun. 9 , 4939 (2018).

Nat. Commun. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-25491-w .

Download references

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Clean air for a sustainable world. Nat Commun 12 , 5824 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-25885-w

Download citation

Published : 04 October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-25885-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Processing nomex nanofibers by ionic solution blow-spinning for efficient high-temperature exhausts treatment.

• Zekun Cheng
• Haiyang Wang

Advanced Fiber Materials (2023)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

• Environmental Pollution Essay

Essay on Environmental Pollution

The environment is the surrounding of an organism. The environment in which an organism lives is made up of various components like air, water, land, etc. These components are found in fixed proportions to create a harmonious balance in the environment for the organism to live in. Any kind of undesirable and unwanted change in the proportions of these components can be termed as pollution. This issue is increasing with every passing year. It is an issue that creates economic, physical, and social troubles. The environmental problem that is worsening with each day needs to be addressed so that its harmful effects on humans as well as the planet can be discarded.

Causes of Environmental Pollution 

With the rise of the industries and the migration of people from villages to cities in search of employment, there has been a regular increase in the problem of proper housing and unhygienic living conditions. These reasons have given rise to factors that cause pollution. 

Environmental pollution is of five basic types namely, Air, Water, Soil, and Noise pollution. 

Air Pollution: Air pollution is a major issue in today’s world. The smoke pouring out of factory chimneys and automobiles pollute the air that we breathe in. Gases like carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and sulphur dioxide are emitted with this smoke which mixes with air and causes great harm to the human body, flora, and fauna. The dry-farm waste, dry grass, leaves, and coal used as domestic fuels in our villages also produce harmful gases. Acid rain occurs due to an excess of sulphur dioxide in the air.

The Main Sources of Air Pollution are as Follows:  

Automobile pollution 

Industrial air pollution 

Burning garbage 

Brick kilns 

Indoor air pollution 

Decomposed animals and plants 

Radioactive elements

Water Pollution: Water pollution is one of the most serious environmental issues. The waste products from the growing industries and sewage water are not treated properly before disposing of the wastewater into the rivers and other water bodies, thus leading to water pollution. Agricultural processes with excess fertilizers and pesticides also pollute the water bodies. 

The Main Sources of Water Pollution as Follows:  

Marine commerce. 

Industrial effluents joining seas and oceans. 

Dumping of radioactive substances into seawater. 

Sewage is disposed of into the sea by rivers. 

Offshore oil rigs. 

Recreational activities. 

Agricultural pollutants are disposed of into the water bodies.

Soil or Land Pollution: Soil pollution or land pollution results from the deposition of solid waste, accumulation of biodegradable material, deposition of chemicals with poisonous chemical compositions, etc on the open land. Waste materials such as plastics, polythene, and bottles, cause land pollution and render the soil infertile. Moreover, the dumping of dead bodies of animals adds to this issue. Soil pollution causes several diseases in man and animals like Cholera, Dysentery, Typhoid, etc.

The Main Causes of Soil Pollution are as Follows:  

Industrial waste 

Urban commercial and domestic waste 

Chemical fertilizers 

Biomedical waste 

Noise Pollution: With an increasing population, urbanization, and industrialization, noise pollution is becoming a serious form of pollution affecting human life, health, and comfort in daily life. Horns of vehicles, loudspeakers, music systems, and industrial activities contribute to noise pollution. 

The Main Sources of Noise Pollution as Follows:  

The machines in the factories and industries produce whistling sounds, crushing noise, and thundering sounds. 

Loudspeakers, horns of vehicles. 

Blasting of rocks and earth, drilling tube wells, ventilation fans, and heavy earth-moving machinery at construction sites.

How Pollution Harms Health and Environment

The lives of people and other creatures are affected by environmental pollution, both directly and indirectly. For centuries, these living organisms have coexisted with humans on the planet. 

1. Effect on the Environment

Smog is formed when carbon and dust particles bind together in the air, causing respiratory problems, haze, and smoke. These are created by the combustion of fossil fuels in industrial and manufacturing facilities and vehicle combustion of carbon fumes. 

Furthermore, these factors impact the immune systems of birds, making them carriers of viruses and diseases. It also has an impact on the body's system and organs. 

2.  Land, Soil, and Food Effects 

The degradation of human organic and chemical waste harms the land and soil. It also releases chemicals into the land and water. Pesticides, fertilisers, soil erosion, and crop residues are the main causes of land and soil pollution. 

3. Effects on water 

Water is easily contaminated by any pollutant, whether it be human waste or factory chemical discharge. We also use this water for crop irrigation and drinking. They, too, get polluted as a result of infection. Furthermore, an animal dies as a result of drinking the same tainted water. 

Furthermore, approximately 80% of land-based pollutants such as chemical, industrial, and agricultural waste wind up in water bodies. 

Furthermore, because these water basins eventually link to the sea, they contaminate the sea's biodiversity indirectly. 

4. Food Reaction

Crops and agricultural produce become poisonous as a result of contaminated soil and water. These crops are laced with chemical components from the start of their lives until harvest when they reach a mass level. Due to this, tainted food has an impact on our health and organs. 

5. Climate Change Impact 

Climate change is also a source of pollution in the environment. It also has an impact on the ecosystem's physical and biological components. 

Ozone depletion, greenhouse gas emissions, and global warming are all examples of environmental pollution. Because these water basins eventually link to the sea, they contaminate the sea's biodiversity indirectly. Furthermore, their consequences may be fatal for future generations. The unpredictably cold and hot climate impacts the earth’s natural system. 

Furthermore, earthquakes, starvation, smog, carbon particles, shallow rain or snow, thunderstorms, volcanic eruptions, and avalanches are all caused by climate change, caused entirely by environmental pollution.

How to Minimise Environmental Pollution? 

To minimise this issue, some preventive measures need to be taken. 

Principle of 3R’s: To save the environment, use the principle of 3 R’s; Reuse, Reduce and Recycle. 

Reuse products again and again. Instead of throwing away things after one use, find a way to use them again.  Reduce the generation of waste products.  

Recycle: Paper, plastics, glass, and electronic items can be processed into new products while using fewer natural resources and lesser energy. 

To prevent and control air pollution, better-designed equipment, and smokeless fuels should be used in homes and industries. More and more trees should be planted to balance the ecosystem and control greenhouse effects. 

Noise pollution can be minimised by better design and proper maintenance of vehicles. Industrial noise can be reduced by soundproofing equipment like generators, etc.  

To control soil pollution, we must stop the usage of plastic. Sewage should be treated properly before using it as fertilizers and as landfills. Encourage organic farming as this process involves the use of biological materials and avoiding synthetic substances to maintain soil fertility and ecological balance. 

Several measures can be adopted to control water pollution. Some of them are water consumption and usage that can be minimized by altering the techniques involved. Water should be reused with treatment. 

The melting icebergs in Antarctica resulted in rising sea levels due to the world's environmental pollution, which had become a serious problem due to global warming, which had become a significant concern. Rising carbon pollution poses a risk for causing natural disasters such as earthquakes, cyclones, and other natural disasters. 

The Hiroshima-Nagasaki and Chernobyl disasters in Russia have irreversibly harmed humanity. Different countries around the world are responding to these calamities in the most effective way possible. 

Different countries around the world are responding to these calamities in the most effective way possible. More public awareness campaigns are being established to educate people about the hazards of pollution and the importance of protecting our environment. Greener lifestyles are becoming more popular; for example, energy-efficient lighting, new climate-friendly autos, and the usage of wind and solar power are just a few examples. 

Governments emphasise the need to plant more trees, minimise the use of plastics, improve natural waste recovery, and reduce pesticide use. This ecological way of living has helped humanity save other creatures from extinction while making the Earth a greener and safer ecology. 

 Conclusion

It is the responsibility of every individual to save our planet from these environmental contamination agents. If preventive measures are not taken then our future generation will have to face major repercussions. The government is also taking steps to create public awareness. Every individual should be involved in helping to reduce and control pollution.

FAQs on Environmental Pollution Essay

1. What do you understand by ‘Environmental Pollution’?  

Environmental pollution is the contamination of the environment and surroundings like air, water, soil by the discharge of harmful substances.

2. What preventive measures should be taken to save our environment?

Some of the preventive measures that should be taken to save our environment are discussed below. 

We can save our environment by adopting the concept of carpooling and promoting public transport to save fuel. Smoking bars are public policies, including criminal laws and occupational safety and health regulations that prohibit tobacco smoking in workplaces and other public places.  

The use of Fossil fuels should be restricted because it causes major environmental issues like global warming.  

Encourage organic farming to maintain the fertility of the soil.

3.  What are the main sources of soil pollution?

The main sources of soil pollution as follows:

Industrial waste

Urban commercial and domestic waste

Chemical fertilizers

Biomedical waste

4. What is organic farming?

 It is a farming method that involves growing and nurturing crops without the use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides.

REVIEW article

Environmental and health impacts of air pollution: a review.

• 1 Delphis S.A., Kifisia, Greece
• 2 Laboratory of Hygiene and Environmental Protection, Faculty of Medicine, Democritus University of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Greece
• 3 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV), Service de Médicine Interne, Lausanne, Switzerland
• 4 School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom

One of our era's greatest scourges is air pollution, on account not only of its impact on climate change but also its impact on public and individual health due to increasing morbidity and mortality. There are many pollutants that are major factors in disease in humans. Among them, Particulate Matter (PM), particles of variable but very small diameter, penetrate the respiratory system via inhalation, causing respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, reproductive and central nervous system dysfunctions, and cancer. Despite the fact that ozone in the stratosphere plays a protective role against ultraviolet irradiation, it is harmful when in high concentration at ground level, also affecting the respiratory and cardiovascular system. Furthermore, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), dioxins, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are all considered air pollutants that are harmful to humans. Carbon monoxide can even provoke direct poisoning when breathed in at high levels. Heavy metals such as lead, when absorbed into the human body, can lead to direct poisoning or chronic intoxication, depending on exposure. Diseases occurring from the aforementioned substances include principally respiratory problems such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), asthma, bronchiolitis, and also lung cancer, cardiovascular events, central nervous system dysfunctions, and cutaneous diseases. Last but not least, climate change resulting from environmental pollution affects the geographical distribution of many infectious diseases, as do natural disasters. The only way to tackle this problem is through public awareness coupled with a multidisciplinary approach by scientific experts; national and international organizations must address the emergence of this threat and propose sustainable solutions.

Approach to the Problem

The interactions between humans and their physical surroundings have been extensively studied, as multiple human activities influence the environment. The environment is a coupling of the biotic (living organisms and microorganisms) and the abiotic (hydrosphere, lithosphere, and atmosphere).

Pollution is defined as the introduction into the environment of substances harmful to humans and other living organisms. Pollutants are harmful solids, liquids, or gases produced in higher than usual concentrations that reduce the quality of our environment.

Human activities have an adverse effect on the environment by polluting the water we drink, the air we breathe, and the soil in which plants grow. Although the industrial revolution was a great success in terms of technology, society, and the provision of multiple services, it also introduced the production of huge quantities of pollutants emitted into the air that are harmful to human health. Without any doubt, the global environmental pollution is considered an international public health issue with multiple facets. Social, economic, and legislative concerns and lifestyle habits are related to this major problem. Clearly, urbanization and industrialization are reaching unprecedented and upsetting proportions worldwide in our era. Anthropogenic air pollution is one of the biggest public health hazards worldwide, given that it accounts for about 9 million deaths per year ( 1 ).

Without a doubt, all of the aforementioned are closely associated with climate change, and in the event of danger, the consequences can be severe for mankind ( 2 ). Climate changes and the effects of global planetary warming seriously affect multiple ecosystems, causing problems such as food safety issues, ice and iceberg melting, animal extinction, and damage to plants ( 3 , 4 ).

Air pollution has various health effects. The health of susceptible and sensitive individuals can be impacted even on low air pollution days. Short-term exposure to air pollutants is closely related to COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease), cough, shortness of breath, wheezing, asthma, respiratory disease, and high rates of hospitalization (a measurement of morbidity).

The long-term effects associated with air pollution are chronic asthma, pulmonary insufficiency, cardiovascular diseases, and cardiovascular mortality. According to a Swedish cohort study, diabetes seems to be induced after long-term air pollution exposure ( 5 ). Moreover, air pollution seems to have various malign health effects in early human life, such as respiratory, cardiovascular, mental, and perinatal disorders ( 3 ), leading to infant mortality or chronic disease in adult age ( 6 ).

National reports have mentioned the increased risk of morbidity and mortality ( 1 ). These studies were conducted in many places around the world and show a correlation between daily ranges of particulate matter (PM) concentration and daily mortality. Climate shifts and global planetary warming ( 3 ) could aggravate the situation. Besides, increased hospitalization (an index of morbidity) has been registered among the elderly and susceptible individuals for specific reasons. Fine and ultrafine particulate matter seems to be associated with more serious illnesses ( 6 ), as it can invade the deepest parts of the airways and more easily reach the bloodstream.

Air pollution mainly affects those living in large urban areas, where road emissions contribute the most to the degradation of air quality. There is also a danger of industrial accidents, where the spread of a toxic fog can be fatal to the populations of the surrounding areas. The dispersion of pollutants is determined by many parameters, most notably atmospheric stability and wind ( 6 ).

In developing countries ( 7 ), the problem is more serious due to overpopulation and uncontrolled urbanization along with the development of industrialization. This leads to poor air quality, especially in countries with social disparities and a lack of information on sustainable management of the environment. The use of fuels such as wood fuel or solid fuel for domestic needs due to low incomes exposes people to bad-quality, polluted air at home. It is of note that three billion people around the world are using the above sources of energy for their daily heating and cooking needs ( 8 ). In developing countries, the women of the household seem to carry the highest risk for disease development due to their longer duration exposure to the indoor air pollution ( 8 , 9 ). Due to its fast industrial development and overpopulation, China is one of the Asian countries confronting serious air pollution problems ( 10 , 11 ). The lung cancer mortality observed in China is associated with fine particles ( 12 ). As stated already, long-term exposure is associated with deleterious effects on the cardiovascular system ( 3 , 5 ). However, it is interesting to note that cardiovascular diseases have mostly been observed in developed and high-income countries rather than in the developing low-income countries exposed highly to air pollution ( 13 ). Extreme air pollution is recorded in India, where the air quality reaches hazardous levels. New Delhi is one of the more polluted cities in India. Flights in and out of New Delhi International Airport are often canceled due to the reduced visibility associated with air pollution. Pollution is occurring both in urban and rural areas in India due to the fast industrialization, urbanization, and rise in use of motorcycle transportation. Nevertheless, biomass combustion associated with heating and cooking needs and practices is a major source of household air pollution in India and in Nepal ( 14 , 15 ). There is spatial heterogeneity in India, as areas with diverse climatological conditions and population and education levels generate different indoor air qualities, with higher PM 2.5 observed in North Indian states (557–601 μg/m 3 ) compared to the Southern States (183–214 μg/m 3 ) ( 16 , 17 ). The cold climate of the North Indian areas may be the main reason for this, as longer periods at home and more heating are necessary compared to in the tropical climate of Southern India. Household air pollution in India is associated with major health effects, especially in women and young children, who stay indoors for longer periods. Chronic obstructive respiratory disease (CORD) and lung cancer are mostly observed in women, while acute lower respiratory disease is seen in young children under 5 years of age ( 18 ).

Accumulation of air pollution, especially sulfur dioxide and smoke, reaching 1,500 mg/m3, resulted in an increase in the number of deaths (4,000 deaths) in December 1952 in London and in 1963 in New York City (400 deaths) ( 19 ). An association of pollution with mortality was reported on the basis of monitoring of outdoor pollution in six US metropolitan cities ( 20 ). In every case, it seems that mortality was closely related to the levels of fine, inhalable, and sulfate particles more than with the levels of total particulate pollution, aerosol acidity, sulfur dioxide, or nitrogen dioxide ( 20 ).

Furthermore, extremely high levels of pollution are reported in Mexico City and Rio de Janeiro, followed by Milan, Ankara, Melbourne, Tokyo, and Moscow ( 19 ).

Based on the magnitude of the public health impact, it is certain that different kinds of interventions should be taken into account. Success and effectiveness in controlling air pollution, specifically at the local level, have been reported. Adequate technological means are applied considering the source and the nature of the emission as well as its impact on health and the environment. The importance of point sources and non-point sources of air pollution control is reported by Schwela and Köth-Jahr ( 21 ). Without a doubt, a detailed emission inventory must record all sources in a given area. Beyond considering the above sources and their nature, topography and meteorology should also be considered, as stated previously. Assessment of the control policies and methods is often extrapolated from the local to the regional and then to the global scale. Air pollution may be dispersed and transported from one region to another area located far away. Air pollution management means the reduction to acceptable levels or possible elimination of air pollutants whose presence in the air affects our health or the environmental ecosystem. Private and governmental entities and authorities implement actions to ensure the air quality ( 22 ). Air quality standards and guidelines were adopted for the different pollutants by the WHO and EPA as a tool for the management of air quality ( 1 , 23 ). These standards have to be compared to the emissions inventory standards by causal analysis and dispersion modeling in order to reveal the problematic areas ( 24 ). Inventories are generally based on a combination of direct measurements and emissions modeling ( 24 ).

As an example, we state here the control measures at the source through the use of catalytic converters in cars. These are devices that turn the pollutants and toxic gases produced from combustion engines into less-toxic pollutants by catalysis through redox reactions ( 25 ). In Greece, the use of private cars was restricted by tracking their license plates in order to reduce traffic congestion during rush hour ( 25 ).

Concerning industrial emissions, collectors and closed systems can keep the air pollution to the minimal standards imposed by legislation ( 26 ).

Current strategies to improve air quality require an estimation of the economic value of the benefits gained from proposed programs. These proposed programs by public authorities, and directives are issued with guidelines to be respected.

In Europe, air quality limit values AQLVs (Air Quality Limit Values) are issued for setting off planning claims ( 27 ). In the USA, the NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards) establish the national air quality limit values ( 27 ). While both standards and directives are based on different mechanisms, significant success has been achieved in the reduction of overall emissions and associated health and environmental effects ( 27 ). The European Directive identifies geographical areas of risk exposure as monitoring/assessment zones to record the emission sources and levels of air pollution ( 27 ), whereas the USA establishes global geographical air quality criteria according to the severity of their air quality problem and records all sources of the pollutants and their precursors ( 27 ).

In this vein, funds have been financing, directly or indirectly, projects related to air quality along with the technical infrastructure to maintain good air quality. These plans focus on an inventory of databases from air quality environmental planning awareness campaigns. Moreover, pollution measures of air emissions may be taken for vehicles, machines, and industries in urban areas.

Technological innovation can only be successful if it is able to meet the needs of society. In this sense, technology must reflect the decision-making practices and procedures of those involved in risk assessment and evaluation and act as a facilitator in providing information and assessments to enable decision makers to make the best decisions possible. Summarizing the aforementioned in order to design an effective air quality control strategy, several aspects must be considered: environmental factors and ambient air quality conditions, engineering factors and air pollutant characteristics, and finally, economic operating costs for technological improvement and administrative and legal costs. Considering the economic factor, competitiveness through neoliberal concepts is offering a solution to environmental problems ( 22 ).

The development of environmental governance, along with technological progress, has initiated the deployment of a dialogue. Environmental politics has created objections and points of opposition between different political parties, scientists, media, and governmental and non-governmental organizations ( 22 ). Radical environmental activism actions and movements have been created ( 22 ). The rise of the new information and communication technologies (ICTs) are many times examined as to whether and in which way they have influenced means of communication and social movements such as activism ( 28 ). Since the 1990s, the term “digital activism” has been used increasingly and in many different disciplines ( 29 ). Nowadays, multiple digital technologies can be used to produce a digital activism outcome on environmental issues. More specifically, devices with online capabilities such as computers or mobile phones are being used as a way to pursue change in political and social affairs ( 30 ).

In the present paper, we focus on the sources of environmental pollution in relation to public health and propose some solutions and interventions that may be of interest to environmental legislators and decision makers.

Sources of Exposure

It is known that the majority of environmental pollutants are emitted through large-scale human activities such as the use of industrial machinery, power-producing stations, combustion engines, and cars. Because these activities are performed at such a large scale, they are by far the major contributors to air pollution, with cars estimated to be responsible for approximately 80% of today's pollution ( 31 ). Some other human activities are also influencing our environment to a lesser extent, such as field cultivation techniques, gas stations, fuel tanks heaters, and cleaning procedures ( 32 ), as well as several natural sources, such as volcanic and soil eruptions and forest fires.

The classification of air pollutants is based mainly on the sources producing pollution. Therefore, it is worth mentioning the four main sources, following the classification system: Major sources, Area sources, Mobile sources, and Natural sources.

Major sources include the emission of pollutants from power stations, refineries, and petrochemicals, the chemical and fertilizer industries, metallurgical and other industrial plants, and, finally, municipal incineration.

Indoor area sources include domestic cleaning activities, dry cleaners, printing shops, and petrol stations.

Mobile sources include automobiles, cars, railways, airways, and other types of vehicles.

Finally, natural sources include, as stated previously, physical disasters ( 33 ) such as forest fire, volcanic erosion, dust storms, and agricultural burning.

However, many classification systems have been proposed. Another type of classification is a grouping according to the recipient of the pollution, as follows:

Air pollution is determined as the presence of pollutants in the air in large quantities for long periods. Air pollutants are dispersed particles, hydrocarbons, CO, CO 2 , NO, NO 2 , SO 3 , etc.

Water pollution is organic and inorganic charge and biological charge ( 10 ) at high levels that affect the water quality ( 34 , 35 ).

Soil pollution occurs through the release of chemicals or the disposal of wastes, such as heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and pesticides.

Air pollution can influence the quality of soil and water bodies by polluting precipitation, falling into water and soil environments ( 34 , 36 ). Notably, the chemistry of the soil can be amended due to acid precipitation by affecting plants, cultures, and water quality ( 37 ). Moreover, movement of heavy metals is favored by soil acidity, and metals are so then moving into the watery environment. It is known that heavy metals such as aluminum are noxious to wildlife and fishes. Soil quality seems to be of importance, as soils with low calcium carbonate levels are at increased jeopardy from acid rain. Over and above rain, snow and particulate matter drip into watery ' bodies ( 36 , 38 ).

Lastly, pollution is classified following type of origin:

Radioactive and nuclear pollution , releasing radioactive and nuclear pollutants into water, air, and soil during nuclear explosions and accidents, from nuclear weapons, and through handling or disposal of radioactive sewage.

Radioactive materials can contaminate surface water bodies and, being noxious to the environment, plants, animals, and humans. It is known that several radioactive substances such as radium and uranium concentrate in the bones and can cause cancers ( 38 , 39 ).

Noise pollution is produced by machines, vehicles, traffic noises, and musical installations that are harmful to our hearing.

The World Health Organization introduced the term DALYs. The DALYs for a disease or health condition is defined as the sum of the Years of Life Lost (YLL) due to premature mortality in the population and the Years Lost due to Disability (YLD) for people living with the health condition or its consequences ( 39 ). In Europe, air pollution is the main cause of disability-adjusted life years lost (DALYs), followed by noise pollution. The potential relationships of noise and air pollution with health have been studied ( 40 ). The study found that DALYs related to noise were more important than those related to air pollution, as the effects of environmental noise on cardiovascular disease were independent of air pollution ( 40 ). Environmental noise should be counted as an independent public health risk ( 40 ).

Environmental pollution occurs when changes in the physical, chemical, or biological constituents of the environment (air masses, temperature, climate, etc.) are produced.

Pollutants harm our environment either by increasing levels above normal or by introducing harmful toxic substances. Primary pollutants are directly produced from the above sources, and secondary pollutants are emitted as by-products of the primary ones. Pollutants can be biodegradable or non-biodegradable and of natural origin or anthropogenic, as stated previously. Moreover, their origin can be a unique source (point-source) or dispersed sources.

Pollutants have differences in physical and chemical properties, explaining the discrepancy in their capacity for producing toxic effects. As an example, we state here that aerosol compounds ( 41 – 43 ) have a greater toxicity than gaseous compounds due to their tiny size (solid or liquid) in the atmosphere; they have a greater penetration capacity. Gaseous compounds are eliminated more easily by our respiratory system ( 41 ). These particles are able to damage lungs and can even enter the bloodstream ( 41 ), leading to the premature deaths of millions of people yearly. Moreover, the aerosol acidity ([H+]) seems to considerably enhance the production of secondary organic aerosols (SOA), but this last aspect is not supported by other scientific teams ( 38 ).

Climate and Pollution

Air pollution and climate change are closely related. Climate is the other side of the same coin that reduces the quality of our Earth ( 44 ). Pollutants such as black carbon, methane, tropospheric ozone, and aerosols affect the amount of incoming sunlight. As a result, the temperature of the Earth is increasing, resulting in the melting of ice, icebergs, and glaciers.

In this vein, climatic changes will affect the incidence and prevalence of both residual and imported infections in Europe. Climate and weather affect the duration, timing, and intensity of outbreaks strongly and change the map of infectious diseases in the globe ( 45 ). Mosquito-transmitted parasitic or viral diseases are extremely climate-sensitive, as warming firstly shortens the pathogen incubation period and secondly shifts the geographic map of the vector. Similarly, water-warming following climate changes leads to a high incidence of waterborne infections. Recently, in Europe, eradicated diseases seem to be emerging due to the migration of population, for example, cholera, poliomyelitis, tick-borne encephalitis, and malaria ( 46 ).

The spread of epidemics is associated with natural climate disasters and storms, which seem to occur more frequently nowadays ( 47 ). Malnutrition and disequilibration of the immune system are also associated with the emerging infections affecting public health ( 48 ).

The Chikungunya virus “took the airplane” from the Indian Ocean to Europe, as outbreaks of the disease were registered in Italy ( 49 ) as well as autochthonous cases in France ( 50 ).

An increase in cryptosporidiosis in the United Kingdom and in the Czech Republic seems to have occurred following flooding ( 36 , 51 ).

As stated previously, aerosols compounds are tiny in size and considerably affect the climate. They are able to dissipate sunlight (the albedo phenomenon) by dispersing a quarter of the sun's rays back to space and have cooled the global temperature over the last 30 years ( 52 ).

Air Pollutants

The World Health Organization (WHO) reports on six major air pollutants, namely particle pollution, ground-level ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and lead. Air pollution can have a disastrous effect on all components of the environment, including groundwater, soil, and air. Additionally, it poses a serious threat to living organisms. In this vein, our interest is mainly to focus on these pollutants, as they are related to more extensive and severe problems in human health and environmental impact. Acid rain, global warming, the greenhouse effect, and climate changes have an important ecological impact on air pollution ( 53 ).

Particulate Matter (PM) and Health

Studies have shown a relationship between particulate matter (PM) and adverse health effects, focusing on either short-term (acute) or long-term (chronic) PM exposure.

Particulate matter (PM) is usually formed in the atmosphere as a result of chemical reactions between the different pollutants. The penetration of particles is closely dependent on their size ( 53 ). Particulate Matter (PM) was defined as a term for particles by the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( 54 ). Particulate matter (PM) pollution includes particles with diameters of 10 micrometers (μm) or smaller, called PM 10 , and extremely fine particles with diameters that are generally 2.5 micrometers (μm) and smaller.

Particulate matter contains tiny liquid or solid droplets that can be inhaled and cause serious health effects ( 55 ). Particles <10 μm in diameter (PM 10 ) after inhalation can invade the lungs and even reach the bloodstream. Fine particles, PM 2.5 , pose a greater risk to health ( 6 , 56 ) ( Table 1 ).

Table 1 . Penetrability according to particle size.

Multiple epidemiological studies have been performed on the health effects of PM. A positive relation was shown between both short-term and long-term exposures of PM 2.5 and acute nasopharyngitis ( 56 ). In addition, long-term exposure to PM for years was found to be related to cardiovascular diseases and infant mortality.

Those studies depend on PM 2.5 monitors and are restricted in terms of study area or city area due to a lack of spatially resolved daily PM 2.5 concentration data and, in this way, are not representative of the entire population. Following a recent epidemiological study by the Department of Environmental Health at Harvard School of Public Health (Boston, MA) ( 57 ), it was reported that, as PM 2.5 concentrations vary spatially, an exposure error (Berkson error) seems to be produced, and the relative magnitudes of the short- and long-term effects are not yet completely elucidated. The team developed a PM 2.5 exposure model based on remote sensing data for assessing short- and long-term human exposures ( 57 ). This model permits spatial resolution in short-term effects plus the assessment of long-term effects in the whole population.

Moreover, respiratory diseases and affection of the immune system are registered as long-term chronic effects ( 58 ). It is worth noting that people with asthma, pneumonia, diabetes, and respiratory and cardiovascular diseases are especially susceptible and vulnerable to the effects of PM. PM 2.5 , followed by PM 10 , are strongly associated with diverse respiratory system diseases ( 59 ), as their size permits them to pierce interior spaces ( 60 ). The particles produce toxic effects according to their chemical and physical properties. The components of PM 10 and PM 2.5 can be organic (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, dioxins, benzene, 1-3 butadiene) or inorganic (carbon, chlorides, nitrates, sulfates, metals) in nature ( 55 ).

Particulate Matter (PM) is divided into four main categories according to type and size ( 61 ) ( Table 2 ).

Table 2 . Types and sizes of particulate Matter (PM).

Gas contaminants include PM in aerial masses.

Particulate contaminants include contaminants such as smog, soot, tobacco smoke, oil smoke, fly ash, and cement dust.

Biological Contaminants are microorganisms (bacteria, viruses, fungi, mold, and bacterial spores), cat allergens, house dust and allergens, and pollen.

Types of Dust include suspended atmospheric dust, settling dust, and heavy dust.

Finally, another fact is that the half-lives of PM 10 and PM 2.5 particles in the atmosphere is extended due to their tiny dimensions; this permits their long-lasting suspension in the atmosphere and even their transfer and spread to distant destinations where people and the environment may be exposed to the same magnitude of pollution ( 53 ). They are able to change the nutrient balance in watery ecosystems, damage forests and crops, and acidify water bodies.

As stated, PM 2.5 , due to their tiny size, are causing more serious health effects. These aforementioned fine particles are the main cause of the “haze” formation in different metropolitan areas ( 12 , 13 , 61 ).

Ozone Impact in the Atmosphere

Ozone (O 3 ) is a gas formed from oxygen under high voltage electric discharge ( 62 ). It is a strong oxidant, 52% stronger than chlorine. It arises in the stratosphere, but it could also arise following chain reactions of photochemical smog in the troposphere ( 63 ).

Ozone can travel to distant areas from its initial source, moving with air masses ( 64 ). It is surprising that ozone levels over cities are low in contrast to the increased amounts occuring in urban areas, which could become harmful for cultures, forests, and vegetation ( 65 ) as it is reducing carbon assimilation ( 66 ). Ozone reduces growth and yield ( 47 , 48 ) and affects the plant microflora due to its antimicrobial capacity ( 67 , 68 ). In this regard, ozone acts upon other natural ecosystems, with microflora ( 69 , 70 ) and animal species changing their species composition ( 71 ). Ozone increases DNA damage in epidermal keratinocytes and leads to impaired cellular function ( 72 ).

Ground-level ozone (GLO) is generated through a chemical reaction between oxides of nitrogen and VOCs emitted from natural sources and/or following anthropogenic activities.

Ozone uptake usually occurs by inhalation. Ozone affects the upper layers of the skin and the tear ducts ( 73 ). A study of short-term exposure of mice to high levels of ozone showed malondialdehyde formation in the upper skin (epidermis) but also depletion in vitamins C and E. It is likely that ozone levels are not interfering with the skin barrier function and integrity to predispose to skin disease ( 74 ).

Due to the low water-solubility of ozone, inhaled ozone has the capacity to penetrate deeply into the lungs ( 75 ).

Toxic effects induced by ozone are registered in urban areas all over the world, causing biochemical, morphologic, functional, and immunological disorders ( 76 ).

The European project (APHEA2) focuses on the acute effects of ambient ozone concentrations on mortality ( 77 ). Daily ozone concentrations compared to the daily number of deaths were reported from different European cities for a 3-year period. During the warm period of the year, an observed increase in ozone concentration was associated with an increase in the daily number of deaths (0.33%), in the number of respiratory deaths (1.13%), and in the number of cardiovascular deaths (0.45%). No effect was observed during wintertime.

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

Carbon monoxide is produced by fossil fuel when combustion is incomplete. The symptoms of poisoning due to inhaling carbon monoxide include headache, dizziness, weakness, nausea, vomiting, and, finally, loss of consciousness.

The affinity of carbon monoxide to hemoglobin is much greater than that of oxygen. In this vein, serious poisoning may occur in people exposed to high levels of carbon monoxide for a long period of time. Due to the loss of oxygen as a result of the competitive binding of carbon monoxide, hypoxia, ischemia, and cardiovascular disease are observed.

Carbon monoxide affects the greenhouses gases that are tightly connected to global warming and climate. This should lead to an increase in soil and water temperatures, and extreme weather conditions or storms may occur ( 68 ).

However, in laboratory and field experiments, it has been seen to produce increased plant growth ( 78 ).

Nitrogen Oxide (NO 2 )

Nitrogen oxide is a traffic-related pollutant, as it is emitted from automobile motor engines ( 79 , 80 ). It is an irritant of the respiratory system as it penetrates deep in the lung, inducing respiratory diseases, coughing, wheezing, dyspnea, bronchospasm, and even pulmonary edema when inhaled at high levels. It seems that concentrations over 0.2 ppm produce these adverse effects in humans, while concentrations higher than 2.0 ppm affect T-lymphocytes, particularly the CD8+ cells and NK cells that produce our immune response ( 81 ).It is reported that long-term exposure to high levels of nitrogen dioxide can be responsible for chronic lung disease. Long-term exposure to NO 2 can impair the sense of smell ( 81 ).

However, systems other than respiratory ones can be involved, as symptoms such as eye, throat, and nose irritation have been registered ( 81 ).

High levels of nitrogen dioxide are deleterious to crops and vegetation, as they have been observed to reduce crop yield and plant growth efficiency. Moreover, NO 2 can reduce visibility and discolor fabrics ( 81 ).

Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 )

Sulfur dioxide is a harmful gas that is emitted mainly from fossil fuel consumption or industrial activities. The annual standard for SO 2 is 0.03 ppm ( 82 ). It affects human, animal, and plant life. Susceptible people as those with lung disease, old people, and children, who present a higher risk of damage. The major health problems associated with sulfur dioxide emissions in industrialized areas are respiratory irritation, bronchitis, mucus production, and bronchospasm, as it is a sensory irritant and penetrates deep into the lung converted into bisulfite and interacting with sensory receptors, causing bronchoconstriction. Moreover, skin redness, damage to the eyes (lacrimation and corneal opacity) and mucous membranes, and worsening of pre-existing cardiovascular disease have been observed ( 81 ).

Environmental adverse effects, such as acidification of soil and acid rain, seem to be associated with sulfur dioxide emissions ( 83 ).

Lead is a heavy metal used in different industrial plants and emitted from some petrol motor engines, batteries, radiators, waste incinerators, and waste waters ( 84 ).

Moreover, major sources of lead pollution in the air are metals, ore, and piston-engine aircraft. Lead poisoning is a threat to public health due to its deleterious effects upon humans, animals, and the environment, especially in the developing countries.

Exposure to lead can occur through inhalation, ingestion, and dermal absorption. Trans- placental transport of lead was also reported, as lead passes through the placenta unencumbered ( 85 ). The younger the fetus is, the more harmful the toxic effects. Lead toxicity affects the fetal nervous system; edema or swelling of the brain is observed ( 86 ). Lead, when inhaled, accumulates in the blood, soft tissue, liver, lung, bones, and cardiovascular, nervous, and reproductive systems. Moreover, loss of concentration and memory, as well as muscle and joint pain, were observed in adults ( 85 , 86 ).

Children and newborns ( 87 ) are extremely susceptible even to minimal doses of lead, as it is a neurotoxicant and causes learning disabilities, impairment of memory, hyperactivity, and even mental retardation.

Elevated amounts of lead in the environment are harmful to plants and crop growth. Neurological effects are observed in vertebrates and animals in association with high lead levels ( 88 ).

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAHs)

The distribution of PAHs is ubiquitous in the environment, as the atmosphere is the most important means of their dispersal. They are found in coal and in tar sediments. Moreover, they are generated through incomplete combustion of organic matter as in the cases of forest fires, incineration, and engines ( 89 ). PAH compounds, such as benzopyrene, acenaphthylene, anthracene, and fluoranthene are recognized as toxic, mutagenic, and carcinogenic substances. They are an important risk factor for lung cancer ( 89 ).

Volatile Organic Compounds(VOCs)

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as toluene, benzene, ethylbenzene, and xylene ( 90 ), have been found to be associated with cancer in humans ( 91 ). The use of new products and materials has actually resulted in increased concentrations of VOCs. VOCs pollute indoor air ( 90 ) and may have adverse effects on human health ( 91 ). Short-term and long-term adverse effects on human health are observed. VOCs are responsible for indoor air smells. Short-term exposure is found to cause irritation of eyes, nose, throat, and mucosal membranes, while those of long duration exposure include toxic reactions ( 92 ). Predictable assessment of the toxic effects of complex VOC mixtures is difficult to estimate, as these pollutants can have synergic, antagonistic, or indifferent effects ( 91 , 93 ).

Dioxins originate from industrial processes but also come from natural processes, such as forest fires and volcanic eruptions. They accumulate in foods such as meat and dairy products, fish and shellfish, and especially in the fatty tissue of animals ( 94 ).

Short-period exhibition to high dioxin concentrations may result in dark spots and lesions on the skin ( 94 ). Long-term exposure to dioxins can cause developmental problems, impairment of the immune, endocrine and nervous systems, reproductive infertility, and cancer ( 94 ).

Without any doubt, fossil fuel consumption is responsible for a sizeable part of air contamination. This contamination may be anthropogenic, as in agricultural and industrial processes or transportation, while contamination from natural sources is also possible. Interestingly, it is of note that the air quality standards established through the European Air Quality Directive are somewhat looser than the WHO guidelines, which are stricter ( 95 ).

Effect of Air Pollution on Health

The most common air pollutants are ground-level ozone and Particulates Matter (PM). Air pollution is distinguished into two main types:

Outdoor pollution is the ambient air pollution.

Indoor pollution is the pollution generated by household combustion of fuels.

People exposed to high concentrations of air pollutants experience disease symptoms and states of greater and lesser seriousness. These effects are grouped into short- and long-term effects affecting health.

Susceptible populations that need to be aware of health protection measures include old people, children, and people with diabetes and predisposing heart or lung disease, especially asthma.

As extensively stated previously, according to a recent epidemiological study from Harvard School of Public Health, the relative magnitudes of the short- and long-term effects have not been completely clarified ( 57 ) due to the different epidemiological methodologies and to the exposure errors. New models are proposed for assessing short- and long-term human exposure data more successfully ( 57 ). Thus, in the present section, we report the more common short- and long-term health effects but also general concerns for both types of effects, as these effects are often dependent on environmental conditions, dose, and individual susceptibility.

Short-term effects are temporary and range from simple discomfort, such as irritation of the eyes, nose, skin, throat, wheezing, coughing and chest tightness, and breathing difficulties, to more serious states, such as asthma, pneumonia, bronchitis, and lung and heart problems. Short-term exposure to air pollution can also cause headaches, nausea, and dizziness.

These problems can be aggravated by extended long-term exposure to the pollutants, which is harmful to the neurological, reproductive, and respiratory systems and causes cancer and even, rarely, deaths.

The long-term effects are chronic, lasting for years or the whole life and can even lead to death. Furthermore, the toxicity of several air pollutants may also induce a variety of cancers in the long term ( 96 ).

As stated already, respiratory disorders are closely associated with the inhalation of air pollutants. These pollutants will invade through the airways and will accumulate at the cells. Damage to target cells should be related to the pollutant component involved and its source and dose. Health effects are also closely dependent on country, area, season, and time. An extended exposure duration to the pollutant should incline to long-term health effects in relation also to the above factors.

Particulate Matter (PMs), dust, benzene, and O 3 cause serious damage to the respiratory system ( 97 ). Moreover, there is a supplementary risk in case of existing respiratory disease such as asthma ( 98 ). Long-term effects are more frequent in people with a predisposing disease state. When the trachea is contaminated by pollutants, voice alterations may be remarked after acute exposure. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may be induced following air pollution, increasing morbidity and mortality ( 99 ). Long-term effects from traffic, industrial air pollution, and combustion of fuels are the major factors for COPD risk ( 99 ).

Multiple cardiovascular effects have been observed after exposure to air pollutants ( 100 ). Changes occurred in blood cells after long-term exposure may affect cardiac functionality. Coronary arteriosclerosis was reported following long-term exposure to traffic emissions ( 101 ), while short-term exposure is related to hypertension, stroke, myocardial infracts, and heart insufficiency. Ventricle hypertrophy is reported to occur in humans after long-time exposure to nitrogen oxide (NO 2 ) ( 102 , 103 ).

Neurological effects have been observed in adults and children after extended-term exposure to air pollutants.

Psychological complications, autism, retinopathy, fetal growth, and low birth weight seem to be related to long-term air pollution ( 83 ). The etiologic agent of the neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer's and Parkinson's) is not yet known, although it is believed that extended exposure to air pollution seems to be a factor. Specifically, pesticides and metals are cited as etiological factors, together with diet. The mechanisms in the development of neurodegenerative disease include oxidative stress, protein aggregation, inflammation, and mitochondrial impairment in neurons ( 104 ) ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1 . Impact of air pollutants on the brain.

Brain inflammation was observed in dogs living in a highly polluted area in Mexico for a long period ( 105 ). In human adults, markers of systemic inflammation (IL-6 and fibrinogen) were found to be increased as an immediate response to PNC on the IL-6 level, possibly leading to the production of acute-phase proteins ( 106 ). The progression of atherosclerosis and oxidative stress seem to be the mechanisms involved in the neurological disturbances caused by long-term air pollution. Inflammation comes secondary to the oxidative stress and seems to be involved in the impairment of developmental maturation, affecting multiple organs ( 105 , 107 ). Similarly, other factors seem to be involved in the developmental maturation, which define the vulnerability to long-term air pollution. These include birthweight, maternal smoking, genetic background and socioeconomic environment, as well as education level.

However, diet, starting from breast-feeding, is another determinant factor. Diet is the main source of antioxidants, which play a key role in our protection against air pollutants ( 108 ). Antioxidants are free radical scavengers and limit the interaction of free radicals in the brain ( 108 ). Similarly, genetic background may result in a differential susceptibility toward the oxidative stress pathway ( 60 ). For example, antioxidant supplementation with vitamins C and E appears to modulate the effect of ozone in asthmatic children homozygous for the GSTM1 null allele ( 61 ). Inflammatory cytokines released in the periphery (e.g., respiratory epithelia) upregulate the innate immune Toll-like receptor 2. Such activation and the subsequent events leading to neurodegeneration have recently been observed in lung lavage in mice exposed to ambient Los Angeles (CA, USA) particulate matter ( 61 ). In children, neurodevelopmental morbidities were observed after lead exposure. These children developed aggressive and delinquent behavior, reduced intelligence, learning difficulties, and hyperactivity ( 109 ). No level of lead exposure seems to be “safe,” and the scientific community has asked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to reduce the current screening guideline of 10 μg/dl ( 109 ).

It is important to state that impact on the immune system, causing dysfunction and neuroinflammation ( 104 ), is related to poor air quality. Yet, increases in serum levels of immunoglobulins (IgA, IgM) and the complement component C3 are observed ( 106 ). Another issue is that antigen presentation is affected by air pollutants, as there is an upregulation of costimulatory molecules such as CD80 and CD86 on macrophages ( 110 ).

As is known, skin is our shield against ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and other pollutants, as it is the most exterior layer of our body. Traffic-related pollutants, such as PAHs, VOCs, oxides, and PM, may cause pigmented spots on our skin ( 111 ). On the one hand, as already stated, when pollutants penetrate through the skin or are inhaled, damage to the organs is observed, as some of these pollutants are mutagenic and carcinogenic, and, specifically, they affect the liver and lung. On the other hand, air pollutants (and those in the troposphere) reduce the adverse effects of ultraviolet radiation UVR in polluted urban areas ( 111 ). Air pollutants absorbed by the human skin may contribute to skin aging, psoriasis, acne, urticaria, eczema, and atopic dermatitis ( 111 ), usually caused by exposure to oxides and photochemical smoke ( 111 ). Exposure to PM and cigarette smoking act as skin-aging agents, causing spots, dyschromia, and wrinkles. Lastly, pollutants have been associated with skin cancer ( 111 ).

Higher morbidity is reported to fetuses and children when exposed to the above dangers. Impairment in fetal growth, low birth weight, and autism have been reported ( 112 ).

Another exterior organ that may be affected is the eye. Contamination usually comes from suspended pollutants and may result in asymptomatic eye outcomes, irritation ( 112 ), retinopathy, or dry eye syndrome ( 113 , 114 ).

Environmental Impact of Air Pollution

Air pollution is harming not only human health but also the environment ( 115 ) in which we live. The most important environmental effects are as follows.

Acid rain is wet (rain, fog, snow) or dry (particulates and gas) precipitation containing toxic amounts of nitric and sulfuric acids. They are able to acidify the water and soil environments, damage trees and plantations, and even damage buildings and outdoor sculptures, constructions, and statues.

Haze is produced when fine particles are dispersed in the air and reduce the transparency of the atmosphere. It is caused by gas emissions in the air coming from industrial facilities, power plants, automobiles, and trucks.

Ozone , as discussed previously, occurs both at ground level and in the upper level (stratosphere) of the Earth's atmosphere. Stratospheric ozone is protecting us from the Sun's harmful ultraviolet (UV) rays. In contrast, ground-level ozone is harmful to human health and is a pollutant. Unfortunately, stratospheric ozone is gradually damaged by ozone-depleting substances (i.e., chemicals, pesticides, and aerosols). If this protecting stratospheric ozone layer is thinned, then UV radiation can reach our Earth, with harmful effects for human life (skin cancer) ( 116 ) and crops ( 117 ). In plants, ozone penetrates through the stomata, inducing them to close, which blocks CO 2 transfer and induces a reduction in photosynthesis ( 118 ).

Global climate change is an important issue that concerns mankind. As is known, the “greenhouse effect” keeps the Earth's temperature stable. Unhappily, anthropogenic activities have destroyed this protecting temperature effect by producing large amounts of greenhouse gases, and global warming is mounting, with harmful effects on human health, animals, forests, wildlife, agriculture, and the water environment. A report states that global warming is adding to the health risks of poor people ( 119 ).

People living in poorly constructed buildings in warm-climate countries are at high risk for heat-related health problems as temperatures mount ( 119 ).

Wildlife is burdened by toxic pollutants coming from the air, soil, or the water ecosystem and, in this way, animals can develop health problems when exposed to high levels of pollutants. Reproductive failure and birth effects have been reported.

Eutrophication is occurring when elevated concentrations of nutrients (especially nitrogen) stimulate the blooming of aquatic algae, which can cause a disequilibration in the diversity of fish and their deaths.

Without a doubt, there is a critical concentration of pollution that an ecosystem can tolerate without being destroyed, which is associated with the ecosystem's capacity to neutralize acidity. The Canada Acid Rain Program established this load at 20 kg/ha/yr ( 120 ).

Hence, air pollution has deleterious effects on both soil and water ( 121 ). Concerning PM as an air pollutant, its impact on crop yield and food productivity has been reported. Its impact on watery bodies is associated with the survival of living organisms and fishes and their productivity potential ( 121 ).

An impairment in photosynthetic rhythm and metabolism is observed in plants exposed to the effects of ozone ( 121 ).

Sulfur and nitrogen oxides are involved in the formation of acid rain and are harmful to plants and marine organisms.

Last but not least, as mentioned above, the toxicity associated with lead and other metals is the main threat to our ecosystems (air, water, and soil) and living creatures ( 121 ).

In 2018, during the first WHO Global Conference on Air Pollution and Health, the WHO's General Director, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, called air pollution a “silent public health emergency” and “the new tobacco” ( 122 ).

Undoubtedly, children are particularly vulnerable to air pollution, especially during their development. Air pollution has adverse effects on our lives in many different respects.

Diseases associated with air pollution have not only an important economic impact but also a societal impact due to absences from productive work and school.

Despite the difficulty of eradicating the problem of anthropogenic environmental pollution, a successful solution could be envisaged as a tight collaboration of authorities, bodies, and doctors to regularize the situation. Governments should spread sufficient information and educate people and should involve professionals in these issues so as to control the emergence of the problem successfully.

Technologies to reduce air pollution at the source must be established and should be used in all industries and power plants. The Kyoto Protocol of 1997 set as a major target the reduction of GHG emissions to below 5% by 2012 ( 123 ). This was followed by the Copenhagen summit, 2009 ( 124 ), and then the Durban summit of 2011 ( 125 ), where it was decided to keep to the same line of action. The Kyoto protocol and the subsequent ones were ratified by many countries. Among the pioneers who adopted this important protocol for the world's environmental and climate “health” was China ( 3 ). As is known, China is a fast-developing economy and its GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is expected to be very high by 2050, which is defined as the year of dissolution of the protocol for the decrease in gas emissions.

A more recent international agreement of crucial importance for climate change is the Paris Agreement of 2015, issued by the UNFCCC (United Nations Climate Change Committee). This latest agreement was ratified by a plethora of UN (United Nations) countries as well as the countries of the European Union ( 126 ). In this vein, parties should promote actions and measures to enhance numerous aspects around the subject. Boosting education, training, public awareness, and public participation are some of the relevant actions for maximizing the opportunities to achieve the targets and goals on the crucial matter of climate change and environmental pollution ( 126 ). Without any doubt, technological improvements makes our world easier and it seems difficult to reduce the harmful impact caused by gas emissions, we could limit its use by seeking reliable approaches.

Synopsizing, a global prevention policy should be designed in order to combat anthropogenic air pollution as a complement to the correct handling of the adverse health effects associated with air pollution. Sustainable development practices should be applied, together with information coming from research in order to handle the problem effectively.

At this point, international cooperation in terms of research, development, administration policy, monitoring, and politics is vital for effective pollution control. Legislation concerning air pollution must be aligned and updated, and policy makers should propose the design of a powerful tool of environmental and health protection. As a result, the main proposal of this essay is that we should focus on fostering local structures to promote experience and practice and extrapolate these to the international level through developing effective policies for sustainable management of ecosystems.

Author Contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.

Conflict of Interest

IM is employed by the company Delphis S.A.

The remaining authors declare that the present review paper was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

1. WHO. Air Pollution . WHO. Available online at: http://www.who.int/airpollution/en/ (accessed October 5, 2019).

Google Scholar

2. Moores FC. Climate change and air pollution: exploring the synergies and potential for mitigation in industrializing countries. Sustainability . (2009) 1:43–54. doi: 10.3390/su1010043

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. USGCRP (2009). Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States. In: Karl TR, Melillo JM, Peterson TC, editors. Climate Change Impacts by Sectors: Ecosystems . New York, NY: United States Global Change Research Program. Cambridge University Press.

4. Marlon JR, Bloodhart B, Ballew MT, Rolfe-Redding J, Roser-Renouf C, Leiserowitz A, et al. (2019). How hope and doubt affect climate change mobilization. Front. Commun. 4:20. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2019.00020

5. Eze IC, Schaffner E, Fischer E, Schikowski T, Adam M, Imboden M, et al. Long- term air pollution exposure and diabetes in a population-based Swiss cohort. Environ Int . (2014) 70:95–105. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2014.05.014

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Kelishadi R, Poursafa P. Air pollution and non-respiratory health hazards for children. Arch Med Sci . (2010) 6:483–95. doi: 10.5114/aoms.2010.14458

7. Manucci PM, Franchini M. Health effects of ambient air pollution in developing countries. Int J Environ Res Public Health . (2017) 14:1048. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14091048

8. Burden of Disease from Ambient and Household Air Pollution . Available online: http://who.int/phe/health_topics/outdoorair/databases/en/ (accessed August 15, 2017).

9. Hashim D, Boffetta P. Occupational and environmental exposures and cancers in developing countries. Ann Glob Health . (2014) 80:393–411. doi: 10.1016/j.aogh.2014.10.002

10. Guo Y, Zeng H, Zheng R, Li S, Pereira G, Liu Q, et al. The burden of lung cancer mortality attributable to fine particles in China. Total Environ Sci . (2017) 579:1460–6. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.11.147

11. Hou Q, An XQ, Wang Y, Guo JP. An evaluation of resident exposure to respirable particulate matter and health economic loss in Beijing during Beijing 2008 Olympic Games. Sci Total Environ . (2010) 408:4026–32. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.12.030

12. Kan H, Chen R, Tong S. Ambient air pollution, climate change, and population health in China. Environ Int . (2012) 42:10–9. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2011.03.003

13. Burroughs Peña MS, Rollins A. Environmental exposures and cardiovascular disease: a challenge for health and development in low- and middle-income countries. Cardiol Clin . (2017) 35:71–86. doi: 10.1016/j.ccl.2016.09.001

14. Kankaria A, Nongkynrih B, Gupta S. Indoor air pollution in india: implications on health and its control. Indian J Comm Med . 39:203–7. doi: 10.4103/0970-0218.143019

15. Parajuli I, Lee H, Shrestha KR. Indoor air quality and ventilation assessment of rural mountainous households of Nepal. Int J Sust Built Env . (2016) 5:301–11. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsbe.2016.08.003

16. Saud T, Gautam R, Mandal TK, Gadi R, Singh DP, Sharma SK. Emission estimates of organic and elemental carbon from household biomass fuel used over the Indo-Gangetic Plain (IGP), India. Atmos Environ . (2012) 61:212–20. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.07.030

17. Singh DP, Gadi R, Mandal TK, Saud T, Saxena M, Sharma SK. Emissions estimates of PAH from biomass fuels used in rural sector of Indo-Gangetic Plains of India. Atmos Environ . (2013) 68:120–6. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.11.042

18. Dherani M, Pope D, Mascarenhas M, Smith KR, Weber M BN. Indoor air pollution from unprocessed solid fuel use and pneumonia risk in children aged under five years: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Bull World Health Organ . (2008) 86:390–4. doi: 10.2471/BLT.07.044529

19. Kassomenos P, Kelessis A, Petrakakis M, Zoumakis N, Christides T, Paschalidou AK. Air Quality assessment in a heavily-polluted urban Mediterranean environment through Air Quality indices. Ecol Indic . (2012) 18:259–68. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.11.021

20. Dockery DW, Pope CA, Xu X, Spengler JD, Ware JH, Fay ME, et al. An association between air pollution and mortality in six U.S. cities. N Engl J Med . (1993) 329:1753–9. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199312093292401

21. Schwela DH, Köth-Jahr I. Leitfaden für die Aufstellung von Luftreinhalteplänen [Guidelines for the Implementation of Clean Air Implementation Plans]. Landesumweltamt des Landes Nordrhein Westfalen. State Environmental Service of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia (1994).

22. Newlands M. Environmental Activism, Environmental Politics, and Representation: The Framing of the British Environmental Activist Movement . Ph.D. thesis. University of East London, United Kingdom (2015).

23. NEPIS (National Service Center for Environmental Publications) US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2017). Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/air-pollution-current-and-future-challenges (accessed August 15, 2017).

24. NRC (National Research Council). Available online at: https://www.nap.edu/read/10728/chapter/1,2014 (accessed September 17, 2019).

25. Bull A. Traffic Congestion: The Problem and How to Deal With It . Santiago: Nationes Unidas, Cepal (2003).

26. Spiegel J, Maystre LY. Environmental Pollution Control, Part VII - The Environment, Chapter 55, Encyclopedia of Occupational Health and Safety . Available online at: http://www.ilocis.org/documents/chpt55e.htm (accessed September 17, 2019).

27. European Community Reports. Assessment of the Effectiveness of European Air Quality Policies and Measures: Case Study 2; Comparison of the EU and US Air Quality Standards and Planning Requirements. (2004). Available online at: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/cafe/activities/pdf/case_study2.pdf (accessed September 22, 2019).

28. Gibson R, Ward S. Parties in the digital age; a review. J Represent Democracy . (2009) 45:87–100. doi: 10.1080/00344890802710888

29. Kaun A, Uldam J. Digital activism: after the hype. New Media Soc. (2017) 20:2099–106. doi: 10.1177/14614448177319

30. Sivitanides M, Shah V. The era of digital activism. In: 2011 Conference for Information Systems Applied Research(CONISAR) Proceedings Wilmington North Carolina, USA . Available online at: https://www.arifyildirim.com/ilt510/marcos.sivitanides.vivek.shah.pdf (accessed September 22, 2019).

31. Möller L, Schuetzle D, Autrup H. Future research needs associated with the assessment of potential human health risks from exposure to toxic ambient air pollutants. Environ Health Perspect . (1994) 102(Suppl. 4):193–210. doi: 10.1289/ehp.94102s4193

32. Jacobson MZ, Jacobson PMZ. Atmospheric Pollution: History, Science, and Regulation. Cambridge University Press (2002). p. 206. doi: 10.1256/wea.243.02

33. Stover RH. Flooding of soil for disease control. In: Mulder D, editor. Chapter 3. Developments in Agricultural and Managed Forest Ecology . Elsevier (1979). p. 19–28. Available online at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444416926500094 doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-41692-6.50009-4 (accessed July 1, 2019).

34. Maipa V, Alamanos Y, Bezirtzoglou E. Seasonal fluctuation of bacterial indicators in coastal waters. Microb Ecol Health Dis . (2001) 13:143–6. doi: 10.1080/089106001750462687

35. Bezirtzoglou E, Dimitriou D, Panagiou A. Occurrence of Clostridium perfringens in river water by using a new procedure. Anaerobe . (1996) 2:169–73. doi: 10.1006/anae.1996.0022

36. Kjellstrom T, Lodh M, McMichael T, Ranmuthugala G, Shrestha R, Kingsland S. Air and Water Pollution: Burden and Strategies for Control. DCP, Chapter 43. 817–32 p. Available online at: https://www.dcp-3.org/sites/default/files/dcp2/DCP43.pdf (accessed September 17, 2017).

37. Pathak RK, Wang T, Ho KF, Lee SC. Characteristics of summertime PM2.5 organic and elemental carbon in four major Chinese cities: implications of high acidity for water- soluble organic carbon (WSOC). Atmos Environ . (2011) 45:318–25. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.10.021

38. Bonavigo L, Zucchetti M, Mankolli H. Water radioactive pollution and related environmental aspects. J Int Env Appl Sci . (2009) 4:357–63

39. World Health Organization (WHO). Preventing Disease Through Healthy Environments: Towards an Estimate of the Environmental Burden of Disease . 1106 p. Available online at: https://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/publications/preventingdisease.pdf (accessed September 22, 2019).

40. Stansfeld SA. Noise effects on health in the context of air pollution exposure. Int J Environ Res Public Health . (2015) 12:12735–60. doi: 10.3390/ijerph121012735

41. Ethical Unicorn. Everything You Need To Know About Aerosols & Air Pollution. (2019). Available online at: https://ethicalunicorn.com/2019/04/29/everything-you-need-to-know-about-aerosols-air-pollution/ (accessed October 4, 2019).

42. Colbeck I, Lazaridis M. Aerosols and environmental pollution. Sci Nat . (2009) 97:117–31. doi: 10.1007/s00114-009-0594-x

43. Incecik S, Gertler A, Kassomenos P. Aerosols and air quality. Sci Total Env . (2014) 355, 488–9. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.04.012

44. D'Amato G, Pawankar R, Vitale C, Maurizia L. Climate change and air pollution: effects on respiratory allergy. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res . (2016) 8:391–5. doi: 10.4168/aair.2016.8.5.391

45. Bezirtzoglou C, Dekas K, Charvalos E. Climate changes, environment and infection: facts, scenarios and growing awareness from the public health community within Europe. Anaerobe . (2011) 17:337–40. doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2011.05.016

46. Castelli F, Sulis G. Migration and infectious diseases. Clin Microbiol Infect . (2017) 23:283–9. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2017.03.012

47. Watson JT, Gayer M, Connolly MA. Epidemics after natural disasters. Emerg Infect Dis . (2007) 13:1–5. doi: 10.3201/eid1301.060779

48. Fenn B. Malnutrition in Humanitarian Emergencies . Available online at: https://www.who.int/diseasecontrol_emergencies/publications/idhe_2009_london_malnutrition_fenn.pdf . (accessed August 15, 2017).

49. Lindh E, Argentini C, Remoli ME, Fortuna C, Faggioni G, Benedetti E, et al. The Italian 2017 outbreak Chikungunya virus belongs to an emerging Aedes albopictus –adapted virus cluster introduced from the Indian subcontinent. Open Forum Infect Dis. (2019) 6:ofy321. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofy321

50. Calba C, Guerbois-Galla M, Franke F, Jeannin C, Auzet-Caillaud M, Grard G, Pigaglio L, Decoppet A, et al. Preliminary report of an autochthonous chikungunya outbreak in France, July to September 2017. Eur Surveill . (2017) 22:17-00647. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.39.17-00647

51. Menne B, Murray V. Floods in the WHO European Region: Health Effects and Their Prevention . Copenhagen: WHO; Weltgesundheits organisation, Regionalbüro für Europa (2013). Available online at: http://www.euro.who.int/data/assets/pdf_file/0020/189020/e96853.pdf (accessed 15 August 2017).

52. Schneider SH. The greenhouse effect: science and policy. Science . (1989) 243:771–81. doi: 10.1126/science.243.4892.771

53. Wilson WE, Suh HH. Fine particles and coarse particles: concentration relationships relevant to epidemiologic studies. J Air Waste Manag Assoc . (1997) 47:1238–49. doi: 10.1080/10473289.1997.10464074

54. US EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) (2018). Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/particulate-matter-pm-basics (accessed September 22, 2018).

55. Cheung K, Daher N, Kam W, Shafer MM, Ning Z, Schauer JJ, et al. Spatial and temporal variation of chemical composition and mass closure of ambient coarse particulate matter (PM10–2.5) in the Los Angeles area. Atmos Environ . (2011) 45:2651–62. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.066

56. Zhang L, Yang Y, Li Y, Qian ZM, Xiao W, Wang X, et al. Short-term and long-term effects of PM2.5 on acute nasopharyngitis in 10 communities of Guangdong, China. Sci Total Env. (2019) 688:136–42. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.470.

57. Kloog I, Ridgway B, Koutrakis P, Coull BA, Schwartz JD. Long- and short-term exposure to PM2.5 and mortality using novel exposure models, Epidemiology . (2013) 24:555–61. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e318294beaa

58. New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. Current and Forecasted Air Quality in New Hampshire . Environmental Fact Sheet (2019). Available online at: https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/commissioner/pip/factsheets/ard/documents/ard-16.pdf (accessed September 22, 2019).

59. Kappos AD, Bruckmann P, Eikmann T, Englert N, Heinrich U, Höppe P, et al. Health effects of particles in ambient air. Int J Hyg Environ Health . (2004) 207:399–407. doi: 10.1078/1438-4639-00306

60. Boschi N (Ed.). Defining an educational framework for indoor air sciences education. In: Education and Training in Indoor Air Sciences . Luxembourg: Springer Science & Business Media (2012). 245 p.

61. Heal MR, Kumar P, Harrison RM. Particles, air quality, policy and health. Chem Soc Rev . (2012) 41:6606–30. doi: 10.1039/c2cs35076a

62. Bezirtzoglou E, Alexopoulos A. Ozone history and ecosystems: a goliath from impacts to advance industrial benefits and interests, to environmental and therapeutical strategies. In: Ozone Depletion, Chemistry and Impacts. (2009). p. 135–45.

63. Villányi V, Turk B, Franc B, Csintalan Z. Ozone Pollution and its Bioindication. In: Villányi V, editor. Air Pollution . London: Intech Open (2010). doi: 10.5772/10047

64. Massachusetts Department of Public Health. Massachusetts State Health Assessment . Boston, MA (2017). Available online at: https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2017/11/03/2017%20MA%20SHA%20final%20compressed.pdf (accessed October 30, 2017).

65. Lorenzini G, Saitanis C. Ozone: A Novel Plant “Pathogen.” In: Sanitá di Toppi L, Pawlik-Skowrońska B, editors. Abiotic Stresses in Plant Springer Link (2003). p. 205–29. doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-0255-3_8

66. Fares S, Vargas R, Detto M, Goldstein AH, Karlik J, Paoletti E, et al. Tropospheric ozone reduces carbon assimilation in trees: estimates from analysis of continuous flux measurements. Glob Change Biol . (2013) 19:2427–43. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12222

67. Harmens H, Mills G, Hayes F, Jones L, Norris D, Fuhrer J. Air Pollution and Vegetation . ICP Vegetation Annual Report 2006/2007. (2012)

68. Emberson LD, Pleijel H, Ainsworth EA, den Berg M, Ren W, Osborne S, et al. Ozone effects on crops and consideration in crop models. Eur J Agron . (2018) 100:19–34. doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2018.06.002

69. Alexopoulos A, Plessas S, Ceciu S, Lazar V, Mantzourani I, Voidarou C, et al. Evaluation of ozone efficacy on the reduction of microbial population of fresh cut lettuce ( Lactuca sativa ) and green bell pepper ( Capsicum annuum ). Food Control . (2013) 30:491–6. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.09.018

70. Alexopoulos A, Plessas S, Kourkoutas Y, Stefanis C, Vavias S, Voidarou C, et al. Experimental effect of ozone upon the microbial flora of commercially produced dairy fermented products. Int J Food Microbiol . (2017) 246:5–11. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2017.01.018

71. Maggio A, Fagnano M. Ozone damages to mediterranean crops: physiological responses. Ital J Agron . (2008) 13–20. doi: 10.4081/ija.2008.13

72. McCarthy JT, Pelle E, Dong K, Brahmbhatt K, Yarosh D, Pernodet N. Effects of ozone in normal human epidermal keratinocytes. Exp Dermatol . (2013) 22:360–1. doi: 10.1111/exd.12125

73. WHO. Health Risks of Ozone From Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution . Available online at: http://www.euro.who.int/data/assets/pdf_file/0005/78647/E91843.pdf (accessed August 15, 2019).

74. Thiele JJ, Traber MG, Tsang K, Cross CE, Packer L. In vivo exposure to ozone depletes vitamins C and E and induces lipid peroxidation in epidermal layers of murine skin. Free Radic Biol Med. (1997) 23:365–91. doi: 10.1016/S0891-5849(96)00617-X

75. Hatch GE, Slade R, Harris LP, McDonnell WF, Devlin RB, Koren HS, et al. Ozone dose and effect in humans and rats. A comparison using oxygen- 18 labeling and bronchoalveolar lavage. Am J Respir Crit Care Med . (1994) 150:676–83. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.150.3.8087337

76. Lippmann M. Health effects of ozone. A critical review. JAPCA . (1989) 39:672–95. doi: 10.1080/08940630.1989.10466554

77. Gryparis A, Forsberg B, Katsouyanni K, Analitis A, Touloumi G, Schwartz J, et al. Acute effects of ozone on mortality from the “air pollution and health: a European approach” project. Am J Respir Crit Care Med . (2004) 170:1080–7. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200403-333OC

78. Soon W, Baliunas SL, Robinson AB, Robinson ZW. Environmental effects of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide. Climate Res . (1999) 13:149–64 doi: 10.1260/0958305991499694

79. Richmont-Bryant J, Owen RC, Graham S, Snyder M, McDow S, Oakes M, et al. Estimation of on-road NO2 concentrations, NO2/NOX ratios, and related roadway gradients from near-road monitoring data. Air Qual Atm Health . (2017) 10:611–25. doi: 10.1007/s11869-016-0455-7

80. Hesterberg TW, Bunn WB, McClellan RO, Hamade AK, Long CM, Valberg PA. Critical review of the human data on short-term nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) exposures: evidence for NO2 no-effect levels. Crit Rev Toxicol . (2009) 39:743–81. doi: 10.3109/10408440903294945

81. Chen T-M, Gokhale J, Shofer S, Kuschner WG. Outdoor air pollution: nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and carbon monoxide health effects. Am J Med Sci . (2007) 333:249–56. doi: 10.1097/MAJ.0b013e31803b900f

82. US EPA. Table of Historical SO 2 NAAQS, Sulfur US EPA . Available online at: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/so2/s_so2_history.html (accessed October 5, 2019).

83. WHO Regional Office of Europe (2000). Available online at: https://euro.who.int/_data/assets/pdf_file/0020/123086/AQG2ndEd_7_4Sulfuroxide.pdf

84. Pruss-Ustun A, Fewrell L, Landrigan PJ, Ayuso-Mateos JL. Lead exposure. Comparative Quantification of Health Risks . World Health Organization. p. 1495–1542. Available online at: https://www.who.int/publications/cra/chapters/volume2/1495-1542.pdf?ua=1

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

85. Goyer RA. Transplacental transport of lead. Environ Health Perspect . (1990) 89:101–5. doi: 10.1289/ehp.9089101

86. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIH). Lead and Your Health . (2013). 1–4 p. Available online at: https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/materials/lead_and_your_health_508.pdf (accessed September 17, 2019).

87. Farhat A, Mohammadzadeh A, Balali-Mood M, Aghajanpoor-Pasha M, Ravanshad Y. Correlation of blood lead level in mothers and exclusively breastfed infants: a study on infants aged less than six months. Asia Pac J Med Toxicol . (2013) 2:150–2.

88. Assi MA, Hezmee MNM, Haron AW, Sabri MYM, Rajion MA. The detrimental effects of lead on human and animal health. Vet World . (2016) 9:660–71. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2016.660-671

89. Abdel-Shafy HI, Mansour MSM. A review on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: source, environmental impact, effect on human health and remediation. Egypt J Pet . (2016) 25:107–23. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpe.2015.03.011

90. Kumar A, Singh BP, Punia M, Singh D, Kumar K, Jain VK. Assessment of indoor air concentrations of VOCs and their associated health risks in the library of Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int . (2014) 21:2240–8. doi: 10.1007/s11356-013-2150-7

91. Molhave L, Clausen G, Berglund B, Ceaurriz J, Kettrup A, Lindvall T, et al. Total Volatile Organic Compounds (TVOC) in Indoor Air Quality Investigations. Indoor Air . 7:225–240. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0668.1997.00002.x

92. Gibb T. Indoor Air Quality May be Hazardous to Your Health . MSU Extension. Available online at: https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/indoor_air_quality_may_be_hazardous_to_your_health (accessed October 5, 2019).

93. Ebersviller S, Lichtveld K, Sexton KG, Zavala J, Lin Y-H, Jaspers I, et al. Gaseous VOCs rapidly modify particulate matter and its biological effects – Part 1: simple VOCs and model PM. Atmos Chem Phys Discuss . (2012) 12:5065–105. doi: 10.5194/acpd-12-5065-2012

94. WHO (World Health Organization). Dioxins and Their Effects on Human Health. Available online at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dioxins-and-their-effects-on-human-health (accessed October 5, 2019).

95. EEA (European Environmental Agency). Air Quality Standards to the European Union and WHO . Available online at: https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/data-and-maps/figures/air-quality-standards-under-the

96. Nakano T, Otsuki T. [Environmental air pollutants and the risk of cancer]. (Japanese). Gan To Kagaku Ryoho . (2013) 40:1441–5.

97. Kurt OK, Zhang J, Pinkerton KE. Pulmonary health effects of air pollution. Curr Opin Pulm Med . (2016) 22:138–43. doi: 10.1097/MCP.0000000000000248

98. Guarnieri M, Balmes JR. Outdoor air pollution and asthma. Lancet . (2014) 383:1581–92. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60617-6

99. Jiang X-Q, Mei X-D, Feng D. Air pollution and chronic airway diseases: what should people know and do? J Thorac Dis . (2016) 8:E31–40.

100. Bourdrel T, Bind M-A, Béjot Y, Morel O, Argacha J-F. Cardiovascular effects of air pollution. Arch Cardiovasc Dis . (2017) 110:634–42. doi: 10.1016/j.acvd.2017.05.003

101. Hoffmann B, Moebus S, Möhlenkamp S, Stang A, Lehmann N, Dragano N, et al. Residential exposure to traffic is associated with coronary atherosclerosis. Circulation . (2007) 116:489–496. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.693622

102. Katholi RE, Couri DM. Left ventricular hypertrophy: major risk factor in patients with hypertension: update and practical clinical applications. Int J Hypertens . (2011) 2011:495349. doi: 10.4061/2011/495349

103. Leary PJ, Kaufman JD, Barr RG, Bluemke DA, Curl CL, Hough CL, et al. Traffic- related air pollution and the right ventricle. the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med . (2014) 189:1093–100. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201312-2298OC

104. Genc S, Zadeoglulari Z, Fuss SH, Genc K. The adverse effects of air pollution on the nervous system. J Toxicol . (2012) 2012:782462. doi: 10.1155/2012/782462

105. Calderon-Garciduenas L, Azzarelli B, Acuna H, et al. Air pollution and brain damage. Toxicol Pathol. (2002) 30:373–89. doi: 10.1080/01926230252929954

106. Rückerl R, Greven S, Ljungman P, Aalto P, Antoniades C, Bellander T, et al. Air pollution and inflammation (interleukin-6, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen) in myocardial infarction survivors. Environ Health Perspect . (2007) 115:1072–80. doi: 10.1289/ehp.10021

107. Peters A, Veronesi B, Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Gehr P, Chen LC, Geiser M, et al. Translocation and potential neurological effects of fine and ultrafine particles a critical update. Part Fibre Toxicol . (2006) 3:13–8. doi: 10.1186/1743-8977-3-13

108. Kelly FJ. Dietary antioxidants and environmental stress. Proc Nutr Soc . (2004) 63:579–85. doi: 10.1079/PNS2004388

109. Bellinger DC. Very low lead exposures and children's neurodevelopment. Curr Opin Pediatr . (2008) 20:172–7. doi: 10.1097/MOP.0b013e3282f4f97b

110. Balbo P, Silvestri M, Rossi GA, Crimi E, Burastero SE. Differential role of CD80 and CD86 on alveolar macrophages in the presentation of allergen to T lymphocytes in asthma. Clin Exp Allergy J Br Soc Allergy Clin Immunol . (2001) 31:625–36. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2222.2001.01068.x

111. Drakaki E, Dessinioti C, Antoniou C. Air pollution and the skin. Front Environ Sci Eng China . (2014) 15:2–8. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2014.00011

112. Weisskopf MG, Kioumourtzoglou M-A, Roberts AL. Air pollution and autism spectrum disorders: causal or confounded? Curr Environ Health Rep . (2015) 2:430–9. doi: 10.1007/s40572-015-0073-9

113. Mo Z, Fu Q, Lyu D, Zhang L, Qin Z, Tang Q, et al. Impacts of air pollution on dry eye disease among residents in Hangzhou, China: a case-crossover study. Environ Pollut . (2019) 246:183–9. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.11.109

114. Klopfer J. Effects of environmental air pollution on the eye. J Am Optom Assoc . (1989) 60:773–8.

115. Ashfaq A, Sharma P. Environmental effects of air pollution and application of engineered methods to combat the problem. J Indust Pollut Control . (2012) 29.

116. Madronich S, de Gruijl F. Skin cancer and UV radiation. Nature . (1993) 366:23–9. doi: 10.1038/366023a0

117. Teramura A. Effects of UV-B radiation on the growth and yield of crop plants. Physiol Plant . (2006) 58:415–27. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.1983.tb04203.x

118. Singh E, Tiwari S, Agrawal M. Effects of elevated ozone on photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of two soybean varieties: a case study to assess impacts of one component of predicted global climate change. Plant Biol Stuttg Ger . (2009) 11(Suppl. 1):101–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1438-8677.2009.00263.x

119. Manderson L. How global Warming is Adding to the Health Risks of Poor People . The Conversation. University of the Witwatersrand. Available online at: http://theconversation.com/how-global-warming-is-adding-to-the-health-risks-of-poor-people-109520 (accessed October 5, 2019).

120. Ministers of Energy and Environment. Federal/Provincial/Territorial Ministers of Energy and Environment (Canada), editor. The Canada-Wide Acid Rain Strategy for Post-2000 . Halifax: The Ministers (1999). 11 p.

121. Zuhara S, Isaifan R. The impact of criteria air pollutants on soil and water: a review. (2018) 278–84. doi: 10.30799/jespr.133.18040205

122. WHO. First WHO Global Conference on Air Pollution and Health. (2018). Available online at: https://www.who.int/airpollution/events/conference/en/ (accessed October 6, 2019).

123. What is the Kyoto Protocol? UNFCCC . Available online at: https://unfccc.int/kyoto__protocol (accessed October 6, 2019).

124. CopenhagenClimate Change Conference (UNFCCC) . Available online at: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/conferences/past-conferences/copenhagen-climate-change-conference-december-2009/copenhagen-climate-change-conference-december-2009 (accessed October 6, 2019).

125. Durban Climate Change Conference,. UNFCCC (2011). Available online at: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/conferences/past-conferences/copenhagen-climate-change-conference-december-2009/copenhagen-climate-change-conference-december-2009 (accessed October 6, 2019).

126. Paris Climate Change Agreement,. (2016). Available online at: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement

Keywords: air pollution, environment, health, public health, gas emission, policy

Citation: Manisalidis I, Stavropoulou E, Stavropoulos A and Bezirtzoglou E (2020) Environmental and Health Impacts of Air Pollution: A Review. Front. Public Health 8:14. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00014

Received: 17 October 2019; Accepted: 17 January 2020; Published: 20 February 2020.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2020 Manisalidis, Stavropoulou, Stavropoulos and Bezirtzoglou. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Ioannis Manisalidis, giannismanisal@gmail.com ; Elisavet Stavropoulou, elisabeth.stavropoulou@gmail.com

† These authors have contributed equally to this work

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

News from the Columbia Climate School

The Role of Individual Responsibility in the Transition to Environmental Sustainability

Steve Cohen

We New Yorkers live in a city that is on a gradual transition toward environmental sustainability, but we are a long way from the place we need to end up. A circular economy where there is no waste and where all material outputs become inputs is well beyond our technological and organizational capacity today. But that does not mean we shouldn’t think about how to get from here to there. Much of the work in building environmental sustainability requires the development of systems that enable us to live our lives as we wish while damaging the planet as little as possible. Large-scale institutions are needed to manage sewage treatment and drinking water, to develop renewable energy and build a modern energy grid. Government policy is needed to ensure the conservation of forests, oceans, and biodiversity. Pandemic avoidance requires global, national and local systems of public health. Climate change mitigation and adaptation also require collective action. What then can individuals do?

As individuals, we make choices about our own activities and inevitably, they involve choices about resource consumption. I see little value in criticizing people who fly on airplanes to travel to global climate conferences. (I assume you do remember airplanes and conferences, don’t you?) But I see great value in considering the importance of your attendance at the conference and asking if the trip is an indulgence or if you will have an important opportunity to learn and teach. This year has taught us how to attend events virtually. There is little question that live presence at an event enables a type of communication that can’t be achieved virtually. Many times, you will judge that the financial and environmental cost of the trip is far outweighed by the benefits. Those are the times you should travel. My argument here is that it is the thought process, the analysis of environmental costs and benefits, that is at the heart of an individual’s responsibility for environmental sustainability. Individuals are responsible for thinking about their impact on the environment and, when possible, minimize the damage they do to the planet.

Everyone needs to turn on the lights at night, start the shower in the morning, turn on the air conditioning and possibly drive somewhere on Mother’s Day. I would never argue that you should give up these forms of consumption. Instead, I believe we should all pay attention to the resources we use and the impact it has. We are responsible for that thought process and the related analysis of how we, as individuals, might accomplish the same ends with less environmentally damaging means.

Some say that the fixation on individual responsibility is a distraction from the more important task of compelling government and major institutions to implement systemic change. This perspective was forcefully argued in 2019 in The Guardian by Professor Anders Levermann of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. According to Professor Levermann:

“Personal sacrifice alone cannot be the solution to tackling the climate crisis. There’s no other area in which the individual is held so responsible for what’s going wrong. And it’s true: people drive too much, eat too much meat, and fly too often. But reaching zero emissions requires very fundamental changes. Individual sacrifice alone will not bring us to zero. It can be achieved only by real structural change; by a new industrial revolution.   Looking for solutions to the climate crisis in individual responsibilities and actions risks obstructing this. It suggests that all we have to do is pull ourselves together over the next 30 years and save energy, walk, skip holidays abroad, and simply ‘do without.’ But these demands for individual action paralyse people, thereby preventing the large-scale change we so urgently need.”

Perhaps, but I do not see it that way. I consider individual responsibility and the thought process and value shift that stimulates individual action as the foundation of the social learning process required for effective collective action. In other words, individual change and collective system-level change are interconnected. The fact is that on a planet of nearly 8 billion people, it is too late for many of us to get back to the land and live as one with nature. There’s too many of us and not enough nature. There is an absolute limit to our ability as individuals to reduce our impact on the planet. Therefore, system-level change is absolutely needed. But system change requires individuals to understand the need for change along with a well-understood definition of the problem. The cognitive dissonance of identifying a problem but never acting on it is difficult to live with. If you see a poor child on the street begging for food, you can provide that child with food and money while continuing to support public policy that addresses the child poverty issue at the systems level. In fact, the emotional impact of that child’s face may well provide the drive that leads you to fight harder for the policy that would prevent that child from needing to beg. We learn by example, and vivid experiences and cases can lead to transformative systemic change.

While I consider individual and collective responsibility connected, without collective systems and infrastructure supporting environmental sustainability, there are distinct limits to what individual action can achieve. That is why I see no value in shaming individuals for consuming fossil fuels, eating meat, or buying a child a Mylar birthday balloon. I believe an attitude of moral superiority is particularly destructive in any effort to build the political support needed for systemic change.

As my mentor, the late Professor Lester Milbrath, often argued, the only way to save the planet is through social learning that would enable us to “learn our way to a sustainable society.” He made this argument in his pathbreaking work: Envisioning a Sustainable Society: Learning Our Way Out . In Milbrath’s view, the key was to understand environmental perceptions and values and to build on those values and perceptions to change both individual behavior and the institutions their politics generated. To Milbrath, the human effort to dominate nature had worked too well, and a new approach was needed. As he observed in Envisioning a Sustainable Society :

“Learning how to reason together about values is crucial to saving our species. As a society we have to learn better how to learn, I call it social learning; it is the dynamic for change that could lead us to a new kind of society that will not destroy itself from its own excess.”

My view is that one method to pursue social learning is learning by doing — in other words by encouraging the individual behaviors we might each take to reduce our environmental impact. Those behaviors remind us to think about the planet’s wellbeing along with our own. They reinforce and remind us and as they become habit, they impact our values and our shared understanding of how the world works.

There is, therefore, no tradeoff between individual and collective responsibility for protecting the environment unless we insist on creating one. Additionally, in a world of extreme levels of income inequality, wealthy people who have given up eating meat have the resources to consume alternative sources of nourishment. They do not occupy the moral high ground criticizing an impoverished parent proudly serving meat to their hungry child. In our complex world, we should mistrust simple answers and instead work hard to understand the varied cultures, values and perceptions that can contribute to the transition to an environmentally sustainable global economy. The path to environmental sustainability is long and winding and will require decades of listening and learning from each other.

Related Posts

Congestion Pricing is Nearly Here

From Fission to Fusion: A Sustainability Student’s Quest for a Greener Future

Environmental Sustainability and Consumption

Celebrate over 50 years of Earth Day with us all month long! Visit our Earth Day website for ideas, resources, and inspiration.

Steve, I appreciate your perspective on individual responsibility. I am developing a similar position and submitted an “OpEd” piece to Times about a month ago but alas it didn’t get published. I would like to share and develop the conversation with you so please reach out.

What are the responsibilities of individuals, governments and the international community in helping people have access to water?

While this highly educated society continues the GDP rat race and decimating all other patterns that create balance in the world we live in, here’s a little story of obvious stupidity for fun and profit. In 1975 my wife and I after several years of college chose to listen to scientists’ warnings about continued expansionism economically. We simplified our lives and did without things like electricity, fancy new vehicles and useless bling. We did without as a plausible direction for a template of living lightly and securing a viable future for more than just humans. We endured countless slurs ( tree huggers, eco-terrorists, hippies,) and were subjected to verbal and realistic abuse . Now at 72 and 68 we are wondering where the hell were the rest of you? Read the book “Small is Beautiful ” to see the wrongheaded direction your politicians and some clergy and certainly all greedy vulture capitalist have led the general public. I have no patience for obvious stupidity .Yeah, we were WOKE long before most people and feel no compulsion to be apologetic as all of you are to blame if you help continue the narrative of GDP unlimited growth and the population explosion. nats remark

“perhaps, but i do not see it that way” sorry but that kinda just means your guile is weak and you’re extremely credulous and succeptable to propeganda, dunno what to tell ya bud but this perspective is a total nothingburger. Of Course we must needs rely on some great measure of personal choice here, but if my choices are: Waste, Waste, Out of my Budget well i dont REALLY have a choice then Do I? which means that for the majority of americans there is no ethical choice list they can follow to fix the problem, only by compelling legislation can those choices be made available to them.

Get the Columbia Climate School Newsletter →

• CBSE Class 10th
• CBSE Class 12th
• UP Board 10th
• UP Board 12th
• Bihar Board 10th
• Bihar Board 12th
• Top Schools in India
• Top Schools in Delhi
• Top Schools in Mumbai
• Top Schools in Chennai
• Top Schools in Hyderabad
• Top Schools in Kolkata
• Top Schools in Pune
• Top Schools in Bangalore

Products & Resources

• JEE Main Knockout April
• Free Sample Papers
• Free Ebooks
• NCERT Notes
• NCERT Syllabus
• NCERT Books
• RD Sharma Solutions
• Navodaya Vidyalaya Admission 2024-25
• NCERT Solutions
• NCERT Solutions for Class 12
• NCERT Solutions for Class 11
• NCERT solutions for Class 10
• NCERT solutions for Class 9
• NCERT solutions for Class 8
• NCERT Solutions for Class 7
• JEE Main 2024
• MHT CET 2024
• JEE Advanced 2024
• BITSAT 2024
• View All Engineering Exams
• Colleges Accepting B.Tech Applications
• Top Engineering Colleges in India
• Engineering Colleges in India
• Engineering Colleges in Tamil Nadu
• Engineering Colleges Accepting JEE Main
• Top IITs in India
• Top NITs in India
• Top IIITs in India
• JEE Main College Predictor
• JEE Main Rank Predictor
• MHT CET College Predictor
• AP EAMCET College Predictor
• GATE College Predictor
• KCET College Predictor
• JEE Advanced College Predictor
• View All College Predictors
• JEE Main Question Paper
• JEE Main Cutoff
• JEE Main Answer Key
• SRMJEEE Result
• Download E-Books and Sample Papers
• Compare Colleges
• B.Tech College Applications
• JEE Advanced Registration
• MAH MBA CET Exam
• View All Management Exams

Colleges & Courses

• MBA College Admissions
• MBA Colleges in India
• Top IIMs Colleges in India
• Top Online MBA Colleges in India
• MBA Colleges Accepting XAT Score
• BBA Colleges in India
• XAT College Predictor 2024
• SNAP College Predictor
• NMAT College Predictor
• MAT College Predictor 2024
• CMAT College Predictor 2024
• CAT Percentile Predictor 2023
• CAT 2023 College Predictor
• CMAT 2024 Registration
• TS ICET 2024 Registration
• CMAT Exam Date 2024
• MAH MBA CET Cutoff 2024
• Download Helpful Ebooks
• List of Popular Branches
• QnA - Get answers to your doubts
• IIM Fees Structure
• AIIMS Nursing
• Top Medical Colleges in India
• Top Medical Colleges in India accepting NEET Score
• Medical Colleges accepting NEET
• List of Medical Colleges in India
• List of AIIMS Colleges In India
• Medical Colleges in Maharashtra
• Medical Colleges in India Accepting NEET PG
• NEET College Predictor
• NEET PG College Predictor
• NEET MDS College Predictor
• DNB CET College Predictor
• DNB PDCET College Predictor
• NEET Application Form 2024
• NEET PG Application Form 2024
• NEET Cut off
• NEET Online Preparation
• Download Helpful E-books
• LSAT India 2024
• Colleges Accepting Admissions
• Top Law Colleges in India
• Law College Accepting CLAT Score
• List of Law Colleges in India
• Top Law Colleges in Delhi
• Top Law Collages in Indore
• Top Law Colleges in Chandigarh
• Top Law Collages in Lucknow

Predictors & E-Books

• CLAT College Predictor
• MHCET Law ( 5 Year L.L.B) College Predictor
• AILET College Predictor
• Sample Papers
• Compare Law Collages
• Careers360 Youtube Channel
• CLAT Syllabus 2025
• CLAT Previous Year Question Paper
• AIBE 18 Result 2023
• NID DAT Exam
• Pearl Academy Exam

Predictors & Articles

• NIFT College Predictor
• UCEED College Predictor
• NID DAT College Predictor
• NID DAT Syllabus 2025
• NID DAT 2025
• Design Colleges in India
• Fashion Design Colleges in India
• Top Interior Design Colleges in India
• Top Graphic Designing Colleges in India
• Fashion Design Colleges in Delhi
• Fashion Design Colleges in Mumbai
• Fashion Design Colleges in Bangalore
• Top Interior Design Colleges in Bangalore
• NIFT Result 2024
• NIFT Fees Structure
• NIFT Syllabus 2025
• Free Design E-books
• List of Branches
• Careers360 Youtube channel
• IPU CET BJMC
• JMI Mass Communication Entrance Exam
• IIMC Entrance Exam
• Media & Journalism colleges in Delhi
• Media & Journalism colleges in Bangalore
• Media & Journalism colleges in Mumbai
• List of Media & Journalism Colleges in India
• CA Intermediate
• CA Foundation
• CS Executive
• CS Professional
• Difference between CA and CS
• Difference between CA and CMA
• CA Full form
• CMA Full form
• CS Full form
• CA Salary In India

Top Courses & Careers

• Bachelor of Commerce (B.Com)
• Master of Commerce (M.Com)
• Company Secretary
• Cost Accountant
• Charted Accountant
• Credit Manager
• Financial Advisor
• Top Commerce Colleges in India
• Top Government Commerce Colleges in India
• Top Private Commerce Colleges in India
• Top M.Com Colleges in Mumbai
• Top B.Com Colleges in India
• IT Colleges in Tamil Nadu
• IT Colleges in Uttar Pradesh
• MCA Colleges in India
• BCA Colleges in India

Quick Links

• Information Technology Courses
• Programming Courses
• Web Development Courses
• Data Analytics Courses
• Big Data Analytics Courses
• RUHS Pharmacy Admission Test
• Top Pharmacy Colleges in India
• Pharmacy Colleges in Pune
• Pharmacy Colleges in Mumbai
• Colleges Accepting GPAT Score
• Pharmacy Colleges in Lucknow
• List of Pharmacy Colleges in Nagpur
• GPAT Result
• GPAT 2024 Admit Card
• GPAT Question Papers
• NCHMCT JEE 2024
• Mah BHMCT CET
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Delhi
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Hyderabad
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Mumbai
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Tamil Nadu
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Maharashtra
• B.Sc Hotel Management
• Hotel Management
• Diploma in Hotel Management and Catering Technology

Diploma Colleges

• Top Diploma Colleges in Maharashtra
• UPSC IAS 2024
• SSC CGL 2024
• IBPS RRB 2024
• Previous Year Sample Papers
• Free Competition E-books
• Sarkari Result
• QnA- Get your doubts answered
• UPSC Previous Year Sample Papers
• CTET Previous Year Sample Papers
• SBI Clerk Previous Year Sample Papers
• NDA Previous Year Sample Papers

Upcoming Events

• NDA Application Form 2024
• UPSC IAS Application Form 2024
• CDS Application Form 2024
• CTET Admit card 2024
• HP TET Result 2023
• SSC GD Constable Admit Card 2024
• UPTET Notification 2024
• SBI Clerk Result 2024

Other Exams

• SSC CHSL 2024
• UP PCS 2024
• UGC NET 2024
• RRB NTPC 2024
• IBPS PO 2024
• IBPS Clerk 2024
• IBPS SO 2024
• Top University in USA
• Top University in Canada
• Top University in Ireland
• Top Universities in UK
• Top Universities in Australia
• Best MBA Colleges in Abroad
• Business Management Studies Colleges

Top Countries

• Study in USA
• Study in UK
• Study in Canada
• Study in Australia
• Study in Ireland
• Study in Germany
• Study in China
• Study in Europe

Student Visas

• Student Visa Canada
• Student Visa UK
• Student Visa USA
• Student Visa Australia
• Student Visa Germany
• Student Visa New Zealand
• Student Visa Ireland
• CUET PG 2024
• IGNOU B.Ed Admission 2024
• DU Admission 2024
• UP B.Ed JEE 2024
• LPU NEST 2024
• IIT JAM 2024
• IGNOU Online Admission 2024
• Universities in India
• Top Universities in India 2024
• Top Colleges in India
• Top Universities in Uttar Pradesh 2024
• Top Universities in Bihar
• Top Universities in Madhya Pradesh 2024
• Top Universities in Tamil Nadu 2024
• Central Universities in India
• CUET Exam City Intimation Slip 2024
• IGNOU Date Sheet
• CUET Mock Test 2024
• CUET Admit card 2024
• CUET PG Syllabus 2024
• CUET Participating Universities 2024
• CUET Previous Year Question Paper
• CUET Syllabus 2024 for Science Students
• E-Books and Sample Papers
• CUET Exam Pattern 2024
• CUET Exam Date 2024
• CUET Syllabus 2024
• IGNOU Exam Form 2024
• IGNOU Result
• CUET Courses List 2024

Engineering Preparation

• Knockout JEE Main 2024
• Test Series JEE Main 2024
• JEE Main 2024 Rank Booster

Medical Preparation

• Knockout NEET 2024
• Test Series NEET 2024
• Rank Booster NEET 2024

Online Courses

• JEE Main One Month Course
• NEET One Month Course
• IBSAT Free Mock Tests
• IIT JEE Foundation Course
• Knockout BITSAT 2024
• Career Guidance Tool

Top Streams

• IT & Software Certification Courses
• Engineering and Architecture Certification Courses
• Programming And Development Certification Courses
• Business and Management Certification Courses
• Marketing Certification Courses
• Health and Fitness Certification Courses
• Design Certification Courses

Specializations

• Digital Marketing Certification Courses
• Cyber Security Certification Courses
• Artificial Intelligence Certification Courses
• Business Analytics Certification Courses
• Data Science Certification Courses
• Cloud Computing Certification Courses
• Machine Learning Certification Courses
• View All Certification Courses
• UG Degree Courses
• PG Degree Courses
• Short Term Courses
• Free Courses
• Online Degrees and Diplomas
• Compare Courses

Top Providers

• Coursera Courses
• Udemy Courses
• Edx Courses
• Swayam Courses
• upGrad Courses
• Simplilearn Courses
• Great Learning Courses

Essay on Climate Change

Climate Change Essay - The globe is growing increasingly sensitive to climate change. It is currently a serious worldwide concern. The term "Climate Change" describes changes to the earth's climate. It explains the atmospheric changes that have occurred across time, spanning from decades to millions of years. Here are some sample essays on climate change.

100 Words Essay on Climate Change

200 words essay on climate change, 500 words essay on climate change.

The climatic conditions on Earth are changing due to climate change. Several internal and external variables, such as solar radiation, variations in the Earth's orbit, volcanic eruptions, plate tectonics, etc., are to blame for this.

There are strategies for climate change reduction. If not implemented, the weather might get worse, there might be water scarcity, there could be lower agricultural output, and it might affect people's ability to make a living. In order to breathe clean air and drink pure water, you must concentrate on limiting human activity. These are the simple measures that may be taken to safeguard the environment and its resources.

The climate of the Earth has changed significantly over time. While some of these changes were brought on by natural events like volcanic eruptions, floods, forest fires, etc., many of the changes were brought on by human activity. The burning of fossil fuels, domesticating livestock, and other human activities produce a significant quantity of greenhouse gases. This results in an increase of greenhouse effect and global warming which are the major causes for climate change.

Reasons of Climate Change

Some of the reasons of climate change are:

Deforestation

Excessive use of fossil fuels

Water and soil pollution

Plastic and other non biodegradable waste

Wildlife and nature extinction

Consequences of Climate Change

All kinds of life on earth will be affected by climate change if it continues to change at the same pace. The earth's temperature will increase, the monsoon patterns will shift, the sea level will rise, and there will be more frequent storms, volcano eruptions, and other natural calamities. The earth's biological and ecological equilibrium will be disturbed. Humans won't be able to access clean water or air to breathe when the environment becomes contaminated. The end of life on this earth is imminent. To reduce the issue of climate change, we need to bring social awareness along with strict measures to protect and preserve the natural environment.

A shift in the world's climatic pattern is referred to as climate change. Over the centuries, the climate pattern of our planet has undergone modifications. The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has significantly grown.

When Did Climate Change Begin

It is possible to see signs of climate change as early as the beginning of the industrial revolution. The pace at which the manufacturers produced things on a large scale required a significant amount of raw materials. Since the raw materials being transformed into finished products now have such huge potential for profit, these business models have spread quickly over the world. Hazardous substances and chemicals build up in the environment as a result of company emissions and waste disposal.

Although climate change is a natural occurrence, it is evident that human activity is turning into the primary cause of the current climate change situation. The major cause is the growing population. Natural resources are utilised more and more as a result of the population's fast growth placing a heavy burden on the available resources. Over time, as more and more products and services are created, pollution will eventually increase.

Causes of Climate Change

There are a number of factors that have contributed towards weather change in the past and continue to do so. Let us look at a few:

Solar Radiation |The climate of earth is determined by how quickly the sun's energy is absorbed and distributed throughout space. This energy is transmitted throughout the world by the winds, ocean currents etc which affects the climatic conditions of the world. Changes in solar intensity have an effect on the world's climate.

Deforestation | The atmosphere's carbon dioxide is stored by trees. As a result of their destruction, carbon dioxide builds up more quickly since there are no trees to absorb it. Additionally, trees release the carbon they stored when we burn them.

Agriculture | Many kinds of greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere by growing crops and raising livestock. Animals, for instance, create methane, a greenhouse gas that is 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide. The nitrous oxide used in fertilisers is roughly 300 times more strong than carbon dioxide.

How to Prevent Climate Change

We need to look out for drastic steps to stop climate change since it is affecting the resources and life on our planet. We can stop climate change if the right solutions are put in place. Here are some strategies for reducing climate change:

Raising public awareness of climate change

Prohibiting tree-cutting and deforestation.

Ensure the surroundings are clean.

Refrain from using chemical fertilisers.

Water and other natural resource waste should be reduced.

Protect the animals and plants.

Purchase energy-efficient goods and equipment.

Increase the number of trees in the neighbourhood and its surroundings.

Follow the law and safeguard the environment's resources.

Reduce the amount of energy you use.

During the last few decades especially, climate change has grown to be of concern. Global concern has been raised over changes in the Earth's climatic pattern. The causes of climate change are numerous, as well as the effects of it and it is our responsibility as inhabitants of this planet to look after its well being and leave it in a better condition for future generations.

Applications for Admissions are open.

JEE Main Important Physics formulas

As per latest 2024 syllabus. Physics formulas, equations, & laws of class 11 & 12th chapters

UPES School of Liberal Studies

Ranked #52 Among Universities in India by NIRF | Up to 30% Merit-based Scholarships | Lifetime placement assistance | Last Date to Apply - 30th April

Aakash iACST Scholarship Test 2024

Get up to 90% scholarship on NEET, JEE & Foundation courses

JEE Main Important Chemistry formulas

As per latest 2024 syllabus. Chemistry formulas, equations, & laws of class 11 & 12th chapters

PACE IIT & Medical, Financial District, Hyd

Enrol in PACE IIT & Medical, Financial District, Hyd for JEE/NEET preparation

ALLEN JEE Exam Prep

Start your JEE preparation with ALLEN

Download Careers360 App's

Regular exam updates, QnA, Predictors, College Applications & E-books now on your Mobile

Certifications

We Appeared in

• Mission & Vision
• UC Berkeley experience
• Join Our Mailing List
• Upcoming Programs
• Past Programs
• Custom Programs
• Participant Testimonials

Search form

Climate change and air pollution in china.

by  Wei Guo   (ELP 2016) | Master's Student, National School of Development, China

China’s economy continues to grow at a rate of more than 7% annually, as it has for more than two decades. Like any country now or in history experiencing an economy boom driven by manufacturing industry, China’s economic growth has an environmental dark side. China now boasts five of the ten most polluted cities in the world, and on PM2.5 side, even the tenth worst city in China is five times polluted more than the first in US.

Unfortunately, after more than 15 years of this rapid growth without public awareness of environment problems, it was not until several extreme air pollution events occured since 2013 that Chinese public and authorities started to think about actual or potential deterioration of environment due to economic activities. I started to do research on environmental economics in 2012, which was a dull subject then, but now there has been an explosion of interest in the environment. Ironically, extreme air pollution is driving new visions of sustainability and new formats of interaction between political authorities and the people. The following picture is a typical air pollution disaster in Beijing, China, however, this is not an extreme case in Beijing’s winter. Every winter in the past three years, Beijing residents have suffered visible air pollution at least this severe or even more severe than this.

In the past few days with fantastic and impressive ELP lectures, what impressed but also humbled me most, is China’s public ignorance to climate change around us. Air pollution and carbon dioxide are different things in China. For example, Chinese people start to care about clean coal, but “clean” here means low sulfur. One Chinese clean energy target is to increase natural gas to 10% of the power mix, but policy makers ignore its environmental effect on global warming. The Chinese government has been under pressure internally to take action on air pollution to bring improvements in air quality, but this only brings a limited glimmer of hope in climate change. Even if data tells us that China’s overall mean annual temperature has significantly increased over the past few decades, from China’s past experience, it’s sad to admit that, in lack of severe meteorological disaster events in big cities, Chinese public awareness of climate change is unlikely to rise remarkably. In fact, in a survey conducted by China Center for Climate Change Communication (jointly established by the Research Center for Journalism and Social Development of Renmin University and Oxfam Hong Kong) in 2012, 93 percent of respondents say they know at least a little about climate change, but only 11 percent say they know a lot. Not knowing that he is ignorant, is double ignorance.

Luckily or unluckily, in the future, the Earth's warming will lead to more frequent emergence of extreme weather and climate event, and China will not be immune. The Chinese public and authorities will attach better importance to climate change and make this challenge a priority. This is a challenge and a chance for environmental scholars, for leaders, and for the world as well.

(1) https://www.statista.com/chart/3161/air-pollution-levels-in-perspective/ (2) http://chinachristiandaily.com/2016-01-27/society/china-air-pollution--80--of-cities-in-breach-of-national-standards_464.html (3) Tang G, Ding Y, Wang S, et al. Comparative analysis of China surface air temperature series for the past 100 years[J]. Advances in Climate Change Research, 2010, 1(1): 11-19.

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• AI Essentials for Business
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

4 Effects of Globalization on the Environment

• 15 Apr 2021

Globalization —defined in the online course Global Business as the increased flow of goods, services, capital, people, and ideas across international boundaries—has brought many changes in its wake.

While globalization can positively and negatively impact society, its effect on the environment is primarily negative. Here’s a breakdown of how globalization impacts society and the environment and what business leaders can do to reduce these negative consequences.

How Does Globalization Affect Society?

The world has become more connected than ever before through the increase in technological advancements and economic integrations. Advanced economies are formed as domestic businesses transform into international ones and further contribute to the spread of technology around the world.

There are several benefits of globalization , such as increased international trade and cooperation and less international aggression. Social globalization —the sharing of ideas and information between countries—has led to innovation in the medical, technological, and environmental preservation industries.

Additionally, globalization has improved the quality of life in several developing nations. This includes implementing efficient transportation systems and ensuring accessibility to services such as education and healthcare.

However, globalization can also have negative effects on society, such as increased income inequality and substandard working conditions in developing countries that produce goods for wealthier nations. Income inequality is directly related to globalization as it further increases the gap between more advanced and developing areas of a nation. As a result, it can also increase the risk of societal violence.

Along with its societal effects, globalization has a lasting impact on the environment—and typically not a positive one.

Access your free e-book today.

What Are the Effects of Globalization on the Environment?

1. Increased Transport of Goods

One of the primary results of globalization is that it opens businesses up to new markets in which they can sell goods and source labor, raw materials, and components.

Both of these realities mean finished products travel farther now than ever before—potentially halfway around the globe. In the past, products were more likely to be produced, sold, and consumed locally. This increased transport of goods can impact the environment in several ways, including:

• Increased emissions: The farther a product travels, the more fuel is consumed, and a greater level of greenhouse gas emissions is produced. According to a report by the International Transport Forum , CO2 emissions from transport will increase 16 percent by 2050. These emissions contribute to pollution, climate change , and ocean acidification around the world and have been shown to significantly impact biodiversity.
• Habitat destruction: Transportation—especially when land-based—requires infrastructure like roads and bridges. The development of such infrastructure can lead to issues including habitat loss and pollution. The more ships that travel by sea, the greater the chances for major oil spills or leaks that damage the delicate marine environment.
• Invasive species: Every shipping container and vessel presents an opportunity for a living organism—from plants to animals to fungus—to hitch a ride to a new location where it can become invasive and grow without checks and balances that might be present in its natural environment.

2. Economic Specialization

One often-overlooked side effect of globalization is that it allows nations and geographical regions to focus on their economic strengths while relying on trading partners for goods they don’t produce themselves. This economic specialization often boosts productivity and efficiency.

Unfortunately, overspecialization can threaten forest health and lead to serious environmental issues, often in the form of habitat loss, deforestation, or natural resource overuse. A few examples include:

• Illegal deforestation in Brazil due to an increase in the country’s cattle ranching operations, which requires significant land for grazing
• Overfishing in coastal areas that include Southeast Asia, which has significantly contributed to reduced fish populations and oceanic pollution
• Overdependence on cash crops, such as coffee, cacao, and various fruits, which has contributed to habitat loss, especially in tropical climates

It’s worth considering that globalization has allowed some nations to specialize in producing various energy commodities, such as oil, natural gas, and timber. Nations that depend on energy sales to fund a large portion of their national budgets, along with those that note “energy security” as a priority, are more likely to take intervening actions in the market in the form of subsidies or laws that make transitioning to renewable energy more difficult.

The main byproduct of these energy sources comes in the form of greenhouse gas emissions, which significantly contribute to global warming and climate change.

3. Decreased Biodiversity

Increased greenhouse gas emissions, ocean acidification, deforestation (and other forms of habitat loss or destruction), climate change, and the introduction of invasive species all work to reduce biodiversity around the globe.

According to the World Wildlife Fund’s recent Living Planet Report , the population sizes of all organisms—including mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, and reptiles—have decreased 68 percent since 1970. Latin America and Africa—two rapidly developing regions important to global trade—have seen disproportionate levels of biodiversity loss, especially among environmentally sensitive fish, reptiles, and amphibians.

While this decrease in biodiversity has many causes, it’s widely believed that the issues listed above have contributed in part.

4. Increased Awareness

While many of globalization’s environmental effects have been negative, its increase has heightened environmental awareness worldwide.

Greater connectivity and higher rates of international travel have made it easier than ever for individuals to see the effects of deforestation, habitat loss, and climate change on the environment. This, in turn, has contributed to new laws, regulations, and processes that limit negative effects.

Globalization as a Threat and an Opportunity

Globalization has allowed society to enjoy many benefits, including increased global cooperation, reduced risk of global conflict, and lower prices for goods and commodities. Unfortunately, it’s also led to serious negative effects on the environment.

Since it isn’t feasible for globalization to end or reverse, it’s likely the situation will worsen until nations, governing bodies, and other organizations are compelled to implement laws and regulations that limit negative effects.

Businesses and industries that operate globally have an incentive to take whatever voluntary actions they can to reduce the potential for negative consequences. Doing so can not only provide an organization greater control over its initiatives, but also a powerful marketing and communication tool .

Some ways businesses address climate change include:

• Transitioning to renewable energy sources
• Choosing greener infrastructures or equipment
• Reducing energy consumption
• Creating credible climate transition plans
• Raising awareness among employees

In addition, investing in renewable energy and packaging, embracing responsible land-use management, and shifting goods production to move closer to the end customer are all viable options that businesses can and should consider. The challenge lies in balancing a desire to embrace corporate social responsibility with the need to turn a profit and run a successful business.

Are you interested in breaking into a global market? Sharpen your knowledge of the international business world with our four-week Global Business course. In addition, explore our Business and Climate Change course to help your organization adapt to and embrace business risks and opportunities created by climate change, as well as our other online courses related to business in society .

This post was updated on February 28, 2024. It was originally published on April 15, 2021.

About the Author

Nearly 2 in 5 Americans breathe unhealthy air. Why it’s getting worse.

More than 131 million americans were living in places with unhealthy air between 2020 and 2022.

A rising number of Americans — nearly 2 in 5 — has been living with unhealthy levels of air pollution, while the United States experienced a record number of days between 2020 and 2022 with very unhealthy or hazardous air, according to a new report.

More than 90 million people are living in places where the air quality is worse than a new U.S. standard, the American Lung Association reported Wednesday in its annual State of the Air assessment , which detailed a significant increase based on the stricter national particle pollution standard.

The total includes 72 million people who would not have been counted under the looser federal standard — reflecting the dramatic effect of the Environmental Protection Agency’s new limit , which was announced this year.

Climate change — fueling wildfires, drought and dust — is not only worsening air quality, but also making pollution increasingly challenging to combat, experts said, setting up a new reality for public health and canceling out years of gains made through the Clean Air Act.

“Not only the number of people and places affected are worsening, but the severity of the pollution itself is also worsening,” said Katherine Pruitt, report author and senior director of nationwide clean air policy for the American Lung Association.

While wildfires and other conditions continued driving the decline of air quality in Western states, the change in the federal standard also revealed historically industrialized spots in the Midwest and East that need cleaner air, according to the report.

Overall, 131 million Americans live in areas with unhealthy ozone or particle pollution — an increase of nearly 12 million compared with the years between 2019 and 2021. Covering 2020 to 2022, the report also showed that the pandemic shutdown didn’t create net improvements in air quality.

Poor air increases the risk of health ailments, lung damage and cardiovascular problems; exacerbates existing conditions; and causes premature deaths. Communities of color are disproportionately affected by these impacts — of the 30 counties the American Lung Association said had failing grades on all three of its air pollution measurements, 63 percent of residents were people of color.

The report tracks daily and yearly exposure to particle pollution, which is caused by things like fires, stoves, coal-fired power plants and diesel engines, and ground-level ozone pollution, or smog, which comes from pollutants emitted in the burning of fossil fuels and the use of cars, refineries, factories and so on.

“Everyone deserves to breathe clean air,” said Marvin Brown IV, an attorney for Earthjustice. “We’re talking about your own individual health; we’re talking about the health of your family.”

Stricter standards for ‘unhealthy’ air

The shift in federal standard offers an “overdue recognition” of the health risk faced in many areas of the country, the report said.

“We think those people have probably been breathing unhealthy air for a while,” Pruitt said, “but this stronger standard now allows us to more accurately convey the risk to people’s health.”

It will take until 2032 for U.S. counties to meet the new standard, the EPA has said . Fully implemented, the standard would save 6.6 million more total years of life than the previous standard, largely in the West and Midwest, the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago has estimated.

Still, it isn’t as stringent as the standard recommended by the World Health Organization, said Susan Anenberg, director of George Washington University’s Climate Health Institute, noting that it doesn’t denote a “healthy” level of pollution.

“You should consider them more like speed limits, where there is still a risk below the speed limit,” she said. “Just because the standard is set at that level does not mean there are no health effects below that level.”

Meanwhile, climate change will continue presenting challenges to regulation, experts said. Reversing the factors that are causing more fire, drought and dust is far more challenging than, for instance, putting regulations on tailpipe emissions.

“It’s harder to wring more emission reductions out of the combustion processes that we’re accustomed to regulating,” Anenberg said, “and it’s more difficult to foresee how we’re going to be able to protect air quality and public health in the future.”

What’s driving higher pollution

For six years straight, the number of people living in counties that experienced unhealthy spikes in particle pollution has increased, reaching 65 million in the time period of the report.

Seven of the 25 cities with the worst daily pollution saw their highest-ever number of unhealthy days, and the Las Vegas; Portland, Ore.; and Seattle metro areas had such bad declines in air quality that they moved into the top 25 most-polluted cities.

Those types of spikes are largely occurring due to extreme heat, drought and wildfires, the report said. Fires, for instance, increased the number of days with air quality rated “very unhealthy” or “hazardous,” the two highest categories, which are colored purple and maroon on the air quality index.

On an annual basis, cities in the West topped the list of the 25 most polluted, with the central California areas of Bakersfield, Visalia and Fresno remaining at the top. East of the Rockies, however, other historically polluted metro areas maintained spots on the list: Indianapolis, Detroit, Houston and Pittsburgh, among others.

Since the Clean Air Act was enacted in 1970, it has added an average of 1.4 years to the American life expectancy, said Christa Hasenkopf, director of the clean air program of the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago. But even a couple of weeks of smoky air from wildfires each year can affect that.

“It’ll chip away at those 1.4 more years of your life,” Hasenkopf said. “That’s the ballpark number we’ve gained and what we could stand to lose.”

Improving ozone

While the report found particle pollution was worse over the three-year period, an improvement in ozone pollution continued, attributed to policy changes under the Clean Air Act. Three in 10 Americans live in counties with ozone levels high enough to earn them a failing grade, but that total was nearly 2.5 million fewer people than in the previous year’s report, according to the ALA.

Another marker of improvement: This year’s report saw a record low of 71 days with a “very unhealthy” air quality ranking for ozone anywhere in the country — in 2001, at its recorded peak, the ALA reported 1,563 “very unhealthy” ozone days.

“The transition of the economy away from coal-fired power plants, the dirtiest fossil fuel, and towards clean renewable sources of energy has unquestionably had an impact,” the report said.

Still, ozone pollution in many individual counties was found to have worsened over the report’s three-year period, and most places with the worst pollution are Western cities, showing that climate change is also “undercutting the progress we would have made” on ozone, the report said.

The U.S. areas with the cleanest air, measuring for both particle and ozone pollution, were Bangor, Maine; Honolulu; Wilmington, N.C.; Lincoln, Neb., and the Johnson City metro area in Tennessee and Virginia.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Coal and new gas power plants will have to meet climate pollution targets

The Conemaugh Generating Station in New Florence, Pa., is among the nation's coal-fired power plants that face tough new regulations to limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions. Gene J. Puskar/AP hide caption

The Conemaugh Generating Station in New Florence, Pa., is among the nation's coal-fired power plants that face tough new regulations to limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions.

The Environmental Protection Agency finalized rules on Thursday to limit the pollution from power plants that drives climate change.

Power plants are the second biggest source of planet-heating greenhouse gasses behind transportation, according to the EPA . Under the regulations, existing coal and new natural gas-fired power plants that run more than 40% of the time would have to eliminate 90% of their carbon dioxide emissions, the main driver of global warming. (Some power plants don't run continuously and are brought online when electricity demand is high.)

Existing coal power plants would have to meet that standard by 2032 if they plan to operate after 2039. The EPA is delaying a similar rule for existing natural gas-fired power plants, likely until after the November election, say environmentalists .

Talks for a plastic pollution treaty are stalling. Could the U.S. be doing more?

"EPA is finalizing four separate rules that reduce pollution from fossil fuel-fired power plants, protect communities from pollution and improve public health," said Michael Regan, EPA administrator, in a call with reporters.

In addition to the climate regulation, the agency issued rules to limit water pollution from coal plants, strengthen regulations on coal ash and limit mercury and other toxins from burning coal for electricity.

Environmentalists and industry react

The EPA labeled carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses a danger to public health and welfare 15 years ago . But legal challenges from fossil fuel interests and their allies delayed the finalization of rules to limit climate-warming gasses from the power sector.

Environmental groups generally welcomed the final rules.

"This is a big deal. This ends the age of unlimited carbon emissions from power plants," says Manish Bapna, president and chief executive of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Bapna predicts the new power plant rules will also "drive up investment, innovation, and good jobs in the clean energy economy of the future" and give industry the certainty it "needs to meet growing demand in the cleanest, cheapest, most reliable way possible."

But within that utility industry, there's less optimism and more warnings about the reliability of the U.S. power grid.

"The path outlined by the EPA today is unlawful, unrealistic and unachievable," wrote Jim Matheson, CEO of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association in a statement. The group's members get 63% of their electricity from burning fossil fuels .

Matheson argues the rules overstep EPA's authority, rely on technologies that are not ready to deploy and don't give existing coal and new gas power plants enough time to comply.

Environmental groups say that despite the industry's concerns, experience shows that the power sector is good at meeting new targets and maintaining a reliable grid.

"Every time EPA tightens pollution standards for various industry sectors, but definitely the power sector industry says the sky is going to fall and this is too expensive and we're not going to be able to keep the lights on," says Gudrun Thompson, senior attorney at Southern Environmental Law Center. "And then it just doesn't end up happening."

Land of the free, home of the inefficient: appliance standards as culture war target

The EPA included temporary exemptions in the new rule so that in an emergency, power plant operators can produce electricity for the grid without having to comply with the regulations.

Some of the EPA's justification for the rules rely on projections about how fast new technologies to reduce pollution develop, notably carbon capture and storage (CCS) on power plant smokestacks. CCS captures carbon dioxide to keep it out of the atmosphere and stores it, usually underground. That technology isn't fully proven , and it comes with controversies, such as building more pipelines through communities.

Still Ceres, a nonprofit group focused on market-based solutions to environmental problems, analyzed the EPA's nearly 50-year record of making such projections and found the agency has "a strong track record." The report finds new regulations end up driving innovation and cost-cutting.

The costs and benefits

The EPA's new rules aim to get the country closer to the Biden administration's climate goal of eliminating the country's greenhouse gasses by 2050. Other recent initiatives include rules that will require more cars to be electric, tighter energy efficiency standards for appliances and switching buildings from gas to electric .

If these power plant rules survive an expected legal challenge, they'll create extra costs for utilities and plant owners to install pollution controls. But the EPA finds those costs would largely be offset by government financial incentives and because technology tends to get cheaper over time.

And the projected climate and public health benefits far outweigh costs, the EPA says. The agency estimates the U.S. will save $370 billion over the next two decades. That includes up to 1.38 billion metric tons of avoided carbon pollution through 2047 – the equivalent to the annual emissions of 328 million gasoline cars.

Reducing climate pollution also eliminates other air pollution, such as particulate matter, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. The EPA estimates that in 2035 that will prevent 1,200 premature deaths, 360,000 cases of asthma attacks, avoid 48,000 school absences and 57,000 lost workdays.

Climate rules shaped by court battles

The legal basis for these new rules started with the Supreme Court's landmark 2007 Massachusetts v. EPA decision. It concluded that the EPA is required to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.

Getting off fossil fuels is hard, but this city is doing it — building by building

In 2014 the Obama administration proposed its "Clean Power Plan" aimed at cutting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants 32%, from 2005 levels, by 2030. That plan faced legal challenges and never went into effect. Still the country met that goal well before 2030, as coal-fired power plants were replaced by natural gas plants that emit less climate pollution.

In 2019 former President Trump replaced the Obama-era Clean Power Plan with his much weaker Affordable Clean Energy rule. But then he lost the 2020 election to President Biden, who came into office with the most ambitious plan to address climate change of any major party candidate in U.S. history.

The Biden administration set a goal of eliminating climate pollution from the power sector by 2035. Scientists say that's what's needed to limit warming to 1.5 Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-industrial levels and avoid the worst effects of climate change. Global average temperatures have already risen about 1.2 degrees Celsius.

In 2022, the Supreme Court weighed in again and restricted the EPA's options for regulating power plant emissions. Justices said that without a specific law, the agency cannot force the entire power generation industry to move away from fossil fuels toward less-polluting energy sources.

So, instead, the EPA has created regulations governing individual power plants. The agency and environmental groups believe that will allow the rules to survive scrutiny from a court dominated by conservative justices.

But even if the rules survive a court challenge, a future administration could change it again. That means these regulations likely will be an issue in this year's presidential election campaign.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

I’m a Young Conservative, and I Want My Party to Lead the Fight Against Climate Change

By Benji Backer

Mr. Backer is the founder and executive chairman of the American Conservation Coalition.

Conservatives were once America’s environmental champions. Not that long ago, Republican presidents were carrying out the Clean Air and Water Acts, creating the Environmental Protection Agency, expanding the National Park System and even initiating the country’s most authoritative report on climate change, the National Climate Assessment.

But times have changed.

Many of today’s Republican leaders stoke fear and anger by mocking the most divisive climate activists while claiming that every environmental solution is a radical one. If they’re not doing that, Republicans can often be found on the sidelines and disengaged from the issue completely.

Instead of continuing the environmental legacy they were once known for, they have ceded the fight against climate change to Democrats, putting themselves on the wrong side of history. Not a single Republican voted in 2022 for the Inflation Reduction Act, a bill that is funneling hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funds to red states and blue states alike for climate mitigation and resilience projects. And it has cost them: A recent working paper from the University of Colorado, Boulder, found that opinion on climate change was one of the strongest predictors of whom independents voted for in 2020, probably giving President Biden enough of an edge to tip the election in his favor. In other words, Donald Trump’s denial of climate change probably cost him the White House.

The Democratic Party has also alienated voters with calls for an immediate transition from fossil fuels and with the Green New Deal’s top-down, one-size-fits-all approach. For someone like me who grew up surrounded by farmland, the Democratic messaging on climate has felt elitist, condescending and out of touch with a large portion of America’s needs. When Gov. Gavin Newsom of California essentially forces people in his state to purchase electric vehicles by ordering that new gasoline-powered cars be banned within 15 years or Mr. Biden suggests that coal workers “ learn how to program, ” it can feel as though people’s day-to-day realities are completely cast aside.

The fact of the matter is this: We cannot address climate change or solve any other environmental issue without the buy-in and leadership of conservative America. And there are clear opportunities for climate action that conservatives can champion without sacrificing core values, from sustainable agriculture to nuclear energy and the onshoring of clean energy production.

In my visits to communities from Texas oil country to the South Side of Chicago to cattle ranches in Wyoming, I’ve seen how it’s possible to bridge the divide. Conservatives might have disengaged from the issues over the past several decades, but voters often tell me they’re ready to jump back into the conversation. After all, as farmers, ranchers, foresters or just people who enjoy hunting and fishing, many conservatives have a stake in the health of their environment.

What they’re eager for are solutions that work for them.

In Orangeville, Utah, I recently met with coal workers looking for new ways to utilize coal instead of burning it. This small community, surrounded by one of Utah’s beautiful mountain ranges, expressed genuine pride in exploring options to improve its local air quality and the global climate. People also knew their example could help other coal-reliant communities dealing with the same economic hardships. Showing voters these kinds of examples is far more effective than telling them to “learn to program.”

Liberals often point out that the Republican Party’s ties to the fossil fuel industry have prevented a shift toward climate action, and while it’s true the industry has a history of obstructing climate policy and supporting many Republican elected officials, it’s a bit more complicated than that. Conservative politicians tell me they just don’t want their constituents to have their oil and gas jobs ripped from them. But now that many fossil fuel companies are pursuing climate action faster than the Republican Party, it’s clear there may be a way to keep those jobs while reducing emissions.

I’m hopeful that the party can do more to lead on these issues. Over the past seven years, I’ve met with over 100 Republican federal lawmakers who want to fight climate change. Many still refrain from saying it out loud (fearing their base will turn against them), but some have begun to speak out publicly. The Conservative Climate Caucus is now one of the largest in the House, with nearly 100 members. Republicans also helped pass the Growing Climate Solutions Act , a 2021 law that incentivizes farmers, ranchers and foresters to reduce their emissions with tax credits through the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

As a member of Gen Z, I believe it’s time for my generation to mobilize around climate solutions that bring both sides to the table — and demand our leaders do the same. Liberals must stop denigrating and abandoning key communities they need to solve the problem, and conservatives must stop denying the problem and take ownership of climate solutions. If the Republican Party wants to expand its coalition, it will need to recruit young voters with a far more pragmatic message.

This environmental movement will look slightly different from what the Democrats have built. We firmly believe fossil fuels must be part of our transition to cleaner energy sources for years to come. So our movement will aim to improve the environmental impact of all energy sources, not just wind and solar. We’ll also focus on ecosystem restoration and other conservation measures that lower emissions. And we’ll call on policymakers to prioritize permitting reform, reducing government overreach and making it easier to build clean energy projects in the United States more quickly.

We share the effects of climate change and environmental degradation equally across political parties. But until conservatives join in this conversation, much of the country’s ideas, needs and contributions will be missing from the dialogue.

Benji Backer is the founder and executive chairman of the American Conservation Coalition and the author of “The Conservative Environmentalist.”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .